- TXT
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
Tip
?
Calendar No. 696
108th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 108-342
======================================================================
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL,
2005
_______
September 15, 2004.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Shelby, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2806]
The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the
bill (H.R. 0000) making appropriations for the Department of
Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, reports the same to
the Senate with an amendment and recommends that the bill as
amended do pass. deg.
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2806)
making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation and
the Treasury; the Executive Office of the President; and
certain independent agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, reports favorably
thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2005
Amount of bill as reported to Senate.................... $44,052,003,000
Amount of budget estimates, 2005........................ 43,783,352,000
Fiscal year 2004 enacted................................ 46,146,853,000
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Total Obligational Authority Provided--General Funds and Trust
Funds.......................................................... 4
Program, Project, and Activity................................... 4
Reprogramming Guidelines......................................... 4
Congressional Budget Justifications.............................. 5
TEA21 Authorizations Expiration.................................. 6
Title I--Department of Transportation:
Office of the Secretary...................................... 8
Federal Aviation Administration.............................. 20
Federal Highway Administration............................... 53
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.................. 65
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration............... 74
Federal Railroad Administration.............................. 88
Federal Transit Administration............................... 94
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.................. 109
Maritime Administration...................................... 109
Research and Special Programs Administration................. 113
Office of Inspector General.................................. 120
Surface Transportation Board................................. 121
Title II--Department of the Treasury:
Departmental Offices......................................... 124
Financial Crime Enforcement Network.......................... 136
Financial Management Service................................. 139
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau..................... 140
Bureau of the Public Debt.................................... 141
United States Mint........................................... 142
Bureau of Engraving and Printing............................. 143
Internal Revenue Service..................................... 144
Title III--Executive Office of the President and Funds
Appropriated to the President:
White House Office........................................... 159
Executive Residence at the White House....................... 159
Council of Economic Advisers................................. 160
Office of Policy Development................................. 160
National Security Council.................................... 161
Homeland Security Council....................................
Office of Administration..................................... 161
Office of Management and Budget.............................. 162
Office of National Drug Control Policy....................... 164
Funds Appropriated to the President.......................... 166
Unanticipated Needs.......................................... 172
Special Assistance to the President.......................... 172
Offical Residence of the Vice President...................... 172
Title IV--Independent Agencies:
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board... 174
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled................................................... 174
Election Assistance Commission............................... 175
Federal Election Commission.................................. 176
Federal Labor Relations Authority............................ 176
Federal Maritime Commission.................................. 177
General Services Administration.............................. 177
Merit Systems Protection Board............................... 187
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National
Environmental Policy Foundation............................ 188
National Archives and Records Administration................. 189
National Historical Publications and Records Commission...... 190
National Transportation Safety Board......................... 191
Office of Government Ethics.................................. 192
Office of Personnel Management............................... 192
Office of Special Counsel.................................... 196
United States Postal Service................................. 197
United States Tax Court...................................... 199
White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance. 199
Statement Concerning General Provisions.......................... 200
Title V--General Provisions This Act............................. 201
Title VI--General Provisions, Departments, Agencies, and
Corporations................................................... 203
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of
the Sen-
ate............................................................ 206
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 207
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 208
Budgetary Impact Statement....................................... 209
Comparative Statement............................................ 210
TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY PROVIDED--GENERAL FUNDS AND TRUST FUNDS
The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new
budget (obligational) authority for the Department of
Transportation, Treasury Department, the United States Postal
Service, the Executive Office of the President, and certain
independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2005.
The Committee considered budget estimates for new budget
authority for fiscal year 2005 in the aggregate amount of
$43,783,352,000. Compared to that amount, the accompanying bill
recommends new budget authority totaling $44,052,003,000. In
addition to new budget authority for fiscal year 2005, large
amounts of contract authority are provided by law, the
obligation limits for which are contained in the annual
appropriations bill. The principal items in this category are
the trust funded programs for Federal-aid highways, for mass
transit, and for airport development grants. For fiscal year
2005, estimated obligation limitations and exempt obligations
total $46,902,908,000.
PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
During fiscal year 2005, 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 appropriations acts (including joint resolutions
providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or
accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory
statements of the committee of conference. This definition
shall apply to all programs for which new budget (obligational)
authority is provided, as well as to discretionary grants and
discretionary grant allocations made through either bill or
report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made
pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for
facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration,
shall be applied equally to each budget item that is listed
under said 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.
REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES
The Committee includes a provision (sec. 511) establishing
the authority by which funding available to the agencies funded
by this Act may be reprogrammed for other purposes. The
provision specifically requires the advanced approval of the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal
to reprogram funds that: (1) creates a new program; (2)
eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA]; (3) increases
funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds have been denied
or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to redirect funds
that were directed in such reports for a specific activity to a
different purpose; (5) augments an existing PPA in excess of
$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; (6) reduces an
existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or
(7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different
from the congressional budget justifications or the table at
the end of the Committee report, whichever is more detailed.
The Committee has included a new requirement that each
agency shall submit a report to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of
this Act to establish the baseline for application of
reprogramming and transfer authorities provided in this Act.
Specifically, each agency should provide a table for each
appropriation with columns displaying the budget request;
adjustments made by Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if
appropriate; and the fiscal year enacted level. The table shall
delineate the appropriation both by object class and by PPA.
The report must also identify items of special congressional
interest.
The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit
reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a
thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a
detailed justification of increases and reductions and the
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget
request for the following fiscal year. Except in emergency
situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later
than June 30.
The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs
and activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The
Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should
be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or
a situation that could not have been anticipated when
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year.
Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency
submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees
on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses from
the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the
Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before
proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider
the request to reprogram funds unapproved.
The Committee would also like to clarify that this section
applies to Working Capital Funds and Forfeiture Funds and that
no funds may be obligated from such funds to augment programs,
projects or activities for which appropriations have been
specifically rejected by the Congress, or to increase funds or
personnel for any program, project, or activity above the
amounts appropriated by this Act.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS
For fiscal year 2005, the Office of Management and Budget
[OMB] directed each agency to prepare a performance budget. The
Committee is committed to supporting the Administration as it
seeks to implement the requirements of the Government
Performance and Results Act [Results Act]. The Committee has
found the presentation of linking budgetary resources to
specific performance targets to be a valuable tool for
reviewing and evaluating agency priorities relative to
financial proposals and continues to support the linkage of
costs to performance in agency programs. The Committee,
however, is troubled that the agencies funded under this Act
have chosen to accommodate an increasing amount of performance
information in budget justifications by eliminating fundamental
programmatic budget data that is critical to the work of the
Committee. This trend has made it increasingly difficult for
the Committee to perform its necessary oversight work in
reviewing agency budget proposals.
Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the
agency, but instead are the primary tool used by the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource
requirements and proposals of agencies. The Committee is aware
that the format and presentation of budget materials is largely
left to the agency within presentation objectives set forth by
OMB. In fact, OMB Circular A-11, Part 6 specifically states
that the ``agency should consult with your congressional
committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your plans
to modify the format of agency budget documents.'' The
Committee is disappointed that none of the agencies funded
under this Act heeded that direction and only a small number of
agencies even offered to brief the Committee regarding the new
format for justification materials in advance of the submission
of their fiscal year 2005 budget requests.
While the Committee values the inclusion of performance
data and presentations, it is important to ensure that, in the
implementation of the Results Act, vital budget information
that the Committee needs is not lost. Therefore, the Committee
directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2006
budget request by agencies funded under this Act must contain
the customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements
to support the appropriations requests at the level of detail
contained in the funding table included at the end of the
Report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed
discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the
agency's financial plan from prior year enactment, and detailed
data building the request for the new year for transfers and
annualization of prior year programs. At a minimum, each agency
must also provide adequate justification for funding and
staffing changes for each individual office and materials that
compare programs, projects, and activities that are proposed
for fiscal year 2006 to the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
The Committee is aware that the analytical materials
required for review by the Committee are unique to each Agency
in this Act. Therefore, the Committee expects that the each
agency will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for the
budget justification materials to support of the fiscal year
2006 budget request.
TEA21 AUTHORIZATIONS EXPIRATION
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century [TEA21]
provides authorizations for most Federal highway, transit and
highway safety programs, and most of those authorizations
provide contract authority. The role of the appropriations
process with respect to contract authority programs generally
is to set obligation limitations so that overall Federal
spending stays within legislated targets and to appropriate
liquidating cash to cover the outlays associated with
obligations that have been made.
TEA21 authorized these Federal surface transportation
programs through fiscal year 2003, and since then, Congress has
enacted several short-term extensions to the programs and
provided the necessary amount of contract authority. The
Congress must reauthorize these programs in order to create new
contract authority for fiscal year 2004 and later years. Both
the Senate and House have passed reauthorization legislation.
Until such legislation is enacted, there will not be new
contract authority to fund such surface transportation programs
as the Federal-aid highways, transit discretionary grants, or
highway safety grants, although any unobligated balances from
prior years will carry over and be available for obligation.
In developing the fiscal year 2005 appropriations
recommendations for the Federal surface transportation programs
authorized by TEA21, the Committee has generally assumed
continuation of the program structure and funding levels in
current law as if authorized through the end of fiscal year
2005.
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for establishment
of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation [OST]. The
Office of the Secretary is comprised of the Secretary and the
Deputy Secretary immediate and support offices; the Office of
the Under Secretary for Transportation Policy, including the
offices of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and
International Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for
Transportation Policy and Intermodalism; three Assistant
Secretarial offices for Budget and Programs, Governmental
Affairs, and Administration; and the Offices of Small and
Disadvantaged Business Utilization, Intelligence and Security,
Chief Information Officer, the General Counsel and Public
Affairs. The Office of the Secretary also includes the
Department's Office of Civil Rights and the Department's
Working Capital Fund.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $80,426,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 102,689,000
Committee recommendation................................ 86,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $477,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $2,136,000 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation finances the costs of policy development
and central supervisory and coordinating functions necessary
for the overall planning and direction of the Department. It
covers the immediate secretarial offices and the offices of the
assistant secretaries, general counsel and other support
offices.
The Committee recommends a total of $86,000,000 for the
Office of the Secretary of Transportation including $60,000 for
reception and representation expenses. The recommendation
provides in excess of a 6 percent increase over the fiscal year
2004 enacted level. The budget request proposes a consolidated
appropriation for the various offices comprising the Office of
the Secretary. The Committee does not approve the request and
has continued to provide individual appropriations for each
office. Furthermore, the Committee recommendation continues to
fund the immediate Office of the Secretary, the immediate
Office of the Deputy Secretary, and the Executive Secretariat
instead of the consolidated immediate Office of Secretary and
Deputy Secretary, as requested.
The accompanying bill authorizes the Secretary to transfer
up to 5 percent of the funds from any office of the Office of
the Secretary to another. The Committee directs the Assistant
Secretary for budget and programs to submit a quarterly report
detailing all transfers pursuant to this authority. Also, the
Committee continues language that permits up to $2,500,000 of
fees to be credited to the Office of the Secretary for salaries
and expenses.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-------------------------------- Committee
2004 enacted recommendation
\1\ 2005 estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary.......... .............. 5,308 ..............
Immediate Office of the Secretary............................... 2,197 .............. 2,400
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary........................ 696 .............. 725
Office of the General Counsel................................... 15,312 16,920 15,700
Office of the Under Secretary for Transportation Policy......... 12,239 12,918 12,627
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs....... 8,486 8,889 8,600
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs...... 2,286 2,587 2,500
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration............ 24,467 32,935 24,364
Assistant to the Secretary and Director of Public Affairs....... 1,904 2,034 1,968
Office of the Executive Secretariat............................. 1,438 .............. 1,484
Board of Contract Appeals....................................... 696 801 750
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.......... 1,261 1,295 1,290
Office of Intelligence and Security............................. 1,988 2,260 2,200
Office of the Chief Information Officer......................... 7,456 16,742 11,392
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 80,426 102,689 86,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reductions of $477,000 pursuant to section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of
$2,136,000 pursuant to section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
The Secretary of Transportation provides leadership and has
the primary responsibility to provide overall planning,
direction, and control of the Department.
The Committee recommends $2,400,000 for fiscal year 2005
for the Immediate Office of the Secretary, $338,000 less than
the budget request and $203,000 greater than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level. This recommendation provides in excess of a
10 percent increase for this office.
IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
The Deputy Secretary has the primary responsibility of
assisting the Secretary in the overall planning and direction
of the Department.
The Committee has recommended a total of $725,000 for the
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary, $345,000 less than
the budget request and $29,000 greater than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
The Office of the General Counsel provides legal services
to the Office of the Secretary including the conduct of
aviation regulatory proceedings and aviation consumer
activities and coordinates and reviews the legal work in the
chief counsels' offices of the operating administrations. The
General Counsel is the chief legal officer of the Department of
Transportation and the final authority within the Department on
all legal questions.
The Committee recommends $15,700,000 for expenses of the
Office of the General Counsel for fiscal year 2005, $1,220,000
less than the budget request and $388,000 greater than the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION FOR POLICY
The Under Secretary for Policy is the chief policy officer
of the Department and is responsible to the Secretary for the
analysis, development, and review of policies and plans for
domestic and international transportation matters. The Office
administers the economic regulatory functions regarding the
airline industry and is responsible for international aviation
programs, the essential air service program, airline fitness
licensing, acquisitions, international route awards,
computerized reservation systems, and special investigations
such as airline delays.
For fiscal year 2005, the Committee recommendation includes
$12,627,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Policy,
$219,000 less than the budget request and $388,000 greater than
the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS
The Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is the
principal staff advisor to the Secretary on the development,
review, presentation, and execution of the Department's budget
resource requirements, and on the evaluation and oversight of
the Department's programs. The primary responsibilities of this
office are to ensure the effective preparation and presentation
of sound and adequate budget estimates for the Department, to
ensure the consistency of the Department's budget execution
with the action and advice of the Congress and the Office of
Management and Budget, to evaluate the program proposals for
consistency with the Secretary's stated objectives, and to
advise the Secretary of program and legislative changes
necessary to improve program effectiveness.
The Committee recommends a total of $8,600,000 for the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs,
$289,000 less than the budget request and $533,000 over the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee is disappointed
with the level of detail being provided in the budget
justification and supporting documentation and hopes that the
fiscal year 2006 presentation will provide a more detailed
program justification.
Overdue Congressional Reports.--The Committee continues to
direct the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs to
report at the beginning of each fiscal quarter on the status of
all outstanding reports and reporting requirements, including
how delinquent congressionally mandated or requested reports
are and an estimated date for delivery.
Characterization of Budget Requests.--The Committee notes
the proliferation of the use of the word ``mandatory'' to
describe certain requested discretionary increases in the
fiscal year 2005 budget justifications of the Department and
its modal administrations. The Committee would encourage the
Department to limit the use of the word ``mandatory'' in
official budget presentation documents to the identification of
mandatory spending as recognized by Congress and the Office of
Management and Budget and as defined in budget acts.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
The Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs advises
the Secretary on all congressional and intergovernmental
activities and on all departmental legislative initiatives and
other relationships with Members of Congress. The Assistant
Secretary promotes effective communication with other Federal
agencies and regional Department officials, and with State and
local governments and national organizations for development of
departmental programs; and ensures that consumer preferences,
awareness, and needs are brought into the decision-making
process.
The Committee recommends a total of $2,500,000 for the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs,
$87,000 less than the budget request and $214,000 over the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION
The Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible
for establishing policies and procedures, setting guidelines,
working with the Operating Administrations to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of the Department in human
resource management, security and administrative management,
real and personal property management, and acquisition and
grants management.
The Committee continues to be concerned about the rapid
growth in this account. Considering the tight fiscal restraints
that the Committee is operating under, it is hard to understand
how the budget of this office continues to explode while at the
same time its missions and responsibilities have diminished.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Inspector General to
review the spending priorities, budget justifications and
mission of this office for the last three fiscal years to
determine if the resources requested are commensurate with
mission responsibilities. The Committee recommends $24,364,000
for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration,
$8,571,000 below the budget request and $103,000 below the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
The Director of Public Affairs is the principal advisor to
the Secretary and other senior Departmental officials and news
media on public affairs questions. The Office issues news
releases, articles, fact sheets, briefing materials,
publications, and audiovisual materials. It also provides
information to the Secretary on opinions and reactions of the
public and news media on transportation programs and issues. It
arranges news conferences and provides speeches, talking
points, and byline articles for the Secretary and other senior
departmental officials, and arranges the Secretary's
scheduling. The Committee recommends $1,968,000 for the Office
of Public Affairs, $66,000 less than the budget request and
$64,000 greater than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
The Executive Secretariat assists the Secretary and the
Deputy Secretary in carrying out their management functions and
responsibilities by controlling and coordinating internal and
external written materials.
The Committee recommends $1,484,000 for the Executive
Secretariat, $16,000 less than the budget request and $49,000
over the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS
The primary responsibility of the Board of Contract Appeals
is to provide an independent forum for the trial and
adjudication of all claims by, or against, a contractor
relating to a contract of any element of the Department, as
mandated by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. 601.
The Committee has provided $750,000 for the Board of
Contract Appeals Board, $51,000 less than the budget request
and $54,000 greater than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION
The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
has primary responsibility for providing policy direction for
small and disadvantaged business participation in the
Department's procurement and grant programs, and effective
execution of the functions and duties under sections 8 and 15
of the Small Business Act, as amended. The Committee recommends
$1,295,000, equal to the budget request.
OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY
The Office of Intelligence and Security keeps the Secretary
and his advisors informed on intelligence and security issues
pertaining to transportation. The Office also ensures that
transportation policy and programs support the national
objectives of general welfare, economic growth and stability,
and the security of the United States.
The Committee recommends $2,200,000 for the Office of
Intelligence and Security for fiscal year 2005. This amount is
$60,000 less than the budget request and $212,000 greater than
the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
The Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO] serves
as the principal adviser to the Secretary on matters involving
information resources and information systems management.
The budget request assumes a funding level that is almost
80 percent more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The
Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,392,000,
$5,350,000 less than the budget request and $3,936,000 greater
than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. This amount represents
an increase of over 50 percent over the fiscal year 2004
enacted level. The Committee is working within an extremely
tight allocation level and would like to continue to work with
the CIO to ensure that this office has the resources necessary
to ensure that the Departments information technology
infrastructure runs effectively and safely.
Budget Justification.--The Committee is concerned about the
lack of budget justification materials that document all
funding utilized by the OCIO. The Committee directs that the
Department shall provide in the fiscal year 2006 budget
submission a detailed justification of all funds that are
utilized and managed by this office regardless of the source.
E-Payroll.--The Committee has learned from the Office of
the Inspector General that the Department lacks a detailed
action plan as it relates to the E-payroll project. This
project has experienced, at a minimum, a 1 year delay and a
cost overrun of $2,000,000 in fiscal year 2004 that may
increase to as much as $10,000,000. The Committee directs the
OCIO working with the Assistant Secretary for Administration to
submit a plan to the House and Senate Committee on
Appropriations within 90 days of enactment that addresses the
weaknesses identified by the Inspector General as they relate
to E-payroll. The plan at a minimum shall include: (1) the
original cost; (2) the original scope of the project; (3) any
deviation from the original scope; (4) all cost increases over
the original cost; (5) the estimated cost of completion; and
(6) specific steps taken to improve project oversight and
accountability.
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\ \2\............................ $8,518,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 8,700,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,700,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $51,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Does not reflect reduction of $153,000 pursuant to Division F,
section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the
Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity
matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for
the operating administrations, investigating claims that small
businesses were denied certification or improperly certified as
disadvantaged business enterprises, and overseeing the
Department's conduct of its civil rights responsibilities and
making final determinations on civil rights complaints. In
addition, the Civil Rights Office is responsible for enforcing
laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in federally
operated and federally assisted transportation programs. The
Committee has provided a funding level of $8,700,000 for the
Office of Civil Rights, the full amount requested.
COMPENSATION FOR AIR CARRIERS
(RESCISSION)
Rescissions, 2004.......................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ -$235,000,000
The Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act
provided $5,000,000,000 to compensate air carriers for direct
losses incurred during the Federal ground stop of civil
aviation after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and
for incremental losses incurred between September 11 and
December 31, 2001. There is currently a balance of
approximately $270,000,000 in the program.
The bill includes a rescission of $235,000,000 from
balances available in this account. The Committee is aware that
a number of issues considered by the Court of Appeals were
found to be not ripe for resolution at this point in time.
Therefore, the Committee has retained sufficient resources in
the event of future claims.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $20,741,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 10,800,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $123,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $314,000 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of the Secretary performs those research
activities and studies which can more effectively or
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This
research effort supports the planning, research and development
activities needed to assist the Secretary in the formulation of
national transportation policies. The program is carried out
primarily through contracts with other Federal agencies,
educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and
private firms. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for
transportation planning, research, and development, $5,741,000
less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level and $4,200,000
more than the President's budget request. The Committee directs
funding to be allocated to the following projects that are
listed below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circumpolar Infrastructure Task Force of the Arctic $450,000
Council and Northern Forum, AK.........................
DOT privacy assessment.................................. 750,000
Inland waters freight mobility study, AL................ 750,000
SDSU instrument training capital initiative, SD......... 200,000
UI NIATT transportation infrastructure research and 300,000
technology transfer, ID................................
Transportation, infrastructure, and logistics research.. 750,000
University of Nebraska--Kearney agricultural 500,000
transportation pilot project, NE.......................
Western Washington University Transportation and Border 1,000,000
Research Institute, WA.................................
Yellow Bend Port feasibility study, AR.................. 300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
Limitation, 2004 \1\.................................... $116,715,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\............................... 151,054,000
Committee recommendation................................ 151,054,000
\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $17,816,000 pursuant to Division F,
section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Proposed without limitation.
The Working Capital Fund [WCF] provides common
administrative services to the Department's operating
administrations and other Federal entities. The services are
centrally performed in the interest of economy and efficiency
and are funded through negotiated agreements with Department
operating administrations and other Federal customers, and are
billed on a fee-for-service basis to the maximum extent
possible.
The budget request proposes to remove the obligation
limitation on the Working Capital Fund on services to the
operating administrations of the Department. The Committee
believes that the discipline of an annual limitation is
necessary to keep assessments and services of the Working
Capital Fund in line with costs. The accompanying bill provides
a limitation of $151,054,000 on activities financed through the
Working Capital Fund. As in past years, the limitation shall
apply only to the Department and not to other entities. The
Committee directs that services shall be provided on a
competitive basis to the maximum extent possible.
MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $895,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 900,000
Committee recommendation................................ 900,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $5,000 pursuant to Division F, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Minority Business Resource Center of the Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization provides
assistance in obtaining short-term working capital for
disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The
program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime
interest rates for transportation-related projects.
In fiscal year 2001, the short-term lending program was
converted from a direct loan program to a guaranteed loan
program. In fiscal year 2005, the program will continue to
focus on providing working capital to disadvantaged, minority,
and women-owned businesses in order to strengthen their
competitive and productive capabilities. Since fiscal year
1993, the short-term lending program has been a separate line
item appropriation, which segregated such activities in
response to changes made by the Federal Credit Reform Act of
1990. The limitation on guaranteed loans under the Minority
Business Resource Center is at the administration's requested
level of $18,367,000.
Of the funds appropriated, $500,000 covers subsidy costs
and $400,000 is for administrative expenses to carry out the
Guaranteed Loan Program.
MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $2,982,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $18,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Does not reflect reduction of $24,000 pursuant to Division F,
section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides contractual support to assist
small, women-owned, Native American, and other disadvantaged
business firms in securing contracts and subcontracts arising
out of projects that involve Federal spending. It also provides
support to historically black and Hispanic colleges. Separate
funding is requested by the administration since this program
provides grants and contract assistance that serves Department-
wide goals and not just OST purposes.
Minority Business Contractor List.--The Committee directs
the Office of Minority Business Outreach to compile a master
list of qualified minority business contractors that shall be
posted on the Departments web page no later than May 2, 2005.
NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
Appropriations, 2004....................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... $160,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
This appropriation finances the cost to outfit and rent a
new Department of Transportation headquarters building. The
proposed concept would consolidate all of the department's
headquarters operating administration functions (except FAA),
from various locations in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area
into leased buildings within the central employment area of the
District of Columbia.
While the proposed headquarters building would consolidate
most of the Department of Transportation in one location, it
comes at a huge price. Under this proposal, the Federal
Government would pay in excess of $1,250,000,000 over the next
15 years to customize and lease space in this building. This
lease option would cost the Federal Government approximately
$513,000,000 more than the projected costs of constructing a
new Federal building.
In fiscal year 2004, the Department of Transportation was
appropriated $42,000,000 under GSA's Federal Buildings Fund.
GSA later reprogrammed an additional $3,000,000 toward the new
headquarters building. The Committee is aware of the strict
timing issues associated with the construction and development
of the new headquarters building as well as the need for better
office space.
The Committee denies the funding for the new building
without prejudice. The Committee notes, however, that of the
funds appropriated in fiscal year 2004, approximately
$28,000,000 remains unobligated as of June 30, 2004. Therefore,
the Committee directs the Department to use the unobligated
fiscal year 2004 funds to extend the Department's current lease
at the Nassif building. In addition, with the remaining funds--
approximately $9,000,000--the Department is encouraged to
evaluate the existing space at the Nassif building for
modifications to better suit the long-term needs of the
Department and to continue to work with the GSA to evaluate
costs and options to meet the Department's future space
requirements.
PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations \2\ Mandatory \3\ Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\.................................... $51,693,000 $50,000,000 $101,693,000
Budget estimate, 2005....................................... .................. 50,000,000 50,000,000
Committee recommendation.................................... 52,000,000 50,000,000 102,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $307,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Payments to Air Carriers (Airport and Airway Trust Fund).
\3\ From overflight fees.
The Essential Air Service [EAS] and Rural Airport
Improvement Program provides funds directly to commuter/
regional airlines to provide air service to small communities
that otherwise would not receive air service and for rural
airport improvement as provided by the 1996 Federal Aviation
Reauthorization Act.
The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 authorizes
user fees for flights that fly over, but do not land in, the
United States. The first $50,000,000 of each year's fees were
to go directly to carry out the Essential Air Service Program
and, to the extent not used for essential air service, to
improve rural airport safety. If $50,000,000 in fees is not
available, then the funds must be made available from
appropriations otherwise made available to the FAA
Administrator.
For fiscal year 2005, the administration has proposed a
$50,000,000 EAS program, of which $36,000,000 is to be funded
from overflight fees credited to the Airport and Airway Trust
Fund and $14,000,000 is to be derived from overflight fees
previously collected and transferred to the Payments to Air
Carriers account. The administration is also proposing major
revisions to the program that would repeal the statutory
entitlement that certain communities have to receiving at least
a minimum level of scheduled air service. Specifically, the
Department has proposed to continue to subsidize air service to
the extent of 90 percent of the total subsidy required for the
most isolated communities. Communities that are within certain
distances of major airports would qualify for surface
transportation subsidy. Communities within: (1) 100 highway
miles of a large or medium hub airport; (2) 75 highway miles of
a small hub; or (3) 50 highway miles of a non-hub airport with
jet service would qualify for a surface transportation subsidy
and would be required to contribute at least 50 percent of the
subsidy. At all other subsidized communities, the
administration would offer an array of options, including
paying for 75 percent of the cost of the traditional EAS-type
scheduled service. In addition, the administration would work
with the communities and State departments of transportation to
procure charter service, single-engine, single-pilot service,
regionalized service or ground transportation in cases where
these alternative services would be more responsive to
communities' needs.
The Committee recommendation provides a total of
$102,000,000 for the Essential Air Service, which is comprised
of an appropriation of $52,000,000 and $50,000,000 from
mandatory funding. This level of funding, along with available
carryover balances in the program from previous appropriations,
is sufficient to continue subsidies for all current points
receiving the service. The Committee has not included the
requested general provision to restructure the EAS program.
The following table reflects the points currently receiving
service and the annual rates as of February 1, 2004 in the
continental United States and Hawaii.
FISCAL YEAR 2005 SUBSIDIZED ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE COMMUNITIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Est. Miles to Avg. Daily
Nearest Hub Enplnmnts at Ann. Sbsdy Subsidy per Total Psgrs
States/Communities (S, M, or L) EAS Point (YE 9/ Rates at 3/1/ Passenger (YE 9/30/03)
\1\ 30/03) 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA:
Muscle Shoals.............. 60 16.6 $1,284,408 $123.50 10,400
ARIZONA:
Kingman.................... 103 7.4 747,401 161 4,643
Page....................... 280 12.4 1,552,631 200 7,760
Prescott................... 102 12.8 747,401 93 8,000
Show Low................... 168 5.7 692,423 194 3,569
ARKANSAS:
El Dorado.................. 108 7.5 898,283 192 4,679
Harrison................... 77 8.7 989,018 181 5,463
Hot Springs................ 53 10.5 989,018 151 6,571
Jonesboro.................. 79 5.9 898,283 245 3,669
CALIFORNIA:
Crescent City.............. 362 34.9 333,717 15 21,825
Merced..................... 114 24.2 844,479 56 15,142
COLORADO:
Alamosa.................... 162 11.6 1,114,753 154 7,235
Cortez..................... 258 21.1 896,007 68 13,189
Pueblo..................... 43 6.0 883,016 236 3,748
GEORGIA:
Athens..................... 72 21.7 \2\ 1,000,000 74 13,565
HAWAII:
Hana....................... 32 10.3 945,029 147 6,440
Kalaupapa.................. .............. 4.3 483,982 180 2,694
Kamuela.................... 39 8.9 745,773 134 5,549
ILLINOIS:
Decatur.................... 120 40.3 917,077 36 25,205
Marion..................... 122 34.0 1,253,076 59 21,303
Quincy..................... 108 26.4 1,109,530 67 16,512
IOWA:
Burlington................. 96 24.1 999,412 66 15,064
Fort Dodge................. 94 22.7 1,088,354 76 14,241
Mason City................. 128 43.7 1,088,354 40 27,382
KANSAS:
Dodge City................. 149 6.8 1,224,838 286 4,277
Garden City................ 201 19.6 1,224,838 100 12,287
Great Bend................. 120 1.3 547,941 659 831
Hays....................... 180 16.8 1,301,876 124 10,495
Liberal.................... 153 7.9 684,578 138 4,944
Manhattan.................. 120 22.0 360,803 26 13,801
Salina..................... 93 6.1 360,803 95 3,812
KENTUCKY:
Owensboro.................. 105 18.4 1,032,673 90 11,513
MAINE:
Augusta.................... 68 10.3 1,069,228 166 6,438
Bar Harbor................. 157 32.4 1,069,228 53 20,260
Presque Isle............... 276 45.1 1,166,135 41 28,214
Rockland................... 80 18.3 1,069,228 93 11,468
MICHIGAN:
Escanaba................... 114 26.7 \2\ 300,000 18 16,739
Ironwood................... 218 6.1 479,879 126 3,797
Iron Mountain.............. 101 17.5 478,693 44 10,930
Manistee................... 180 4.7 485,545 164 2,954
MINNESOTA:
Hibbing.................... 178 27.9 1,048,612 60 17,440
Thief River Falls.......... 302 12.8 707,017 88 8,035
MISSISSIPPI:
Laurel/Hattiesburg......... 90 33.9 1,056,991 50 21,218
MISSOURI:
Cape Girardeau............. 123 23.6 990,694 67 14,761
Ft. Leonard Wood........... 130 18.1 885,918 78 11,317
Kirksville................. 137 6.9 968,249 223 4,348
MONTANA:
Glasgow.................... 280 6.8 823,591 195 4,230
Glendive................... 223 3.1 823,591 428 1,925
Havre...................... 248 3.8 823,591 344 2,391
Lewistown.................. 125 2.7 823,591 484 1,702
Miles City................. 146 3.5 823,591 378 2,178
Sidney..................... 273 6.2 823,591 212 3,877
West Yellowstone........... 315 127.6 418,488 5 79,860
Wolf Point................. 293 4.7 823,591 277 2,971
NEBRASKA:
Alliance................... 256 3.3 542,413 265 2,050
Chadron.................... 311 3.7 542,413 233 2,333
Grand Island............... 140 13.6 \2\ 1,000,000 117 8,515
Kearney.................... 181 16.5 1,019,014 99 10,309
McCook..................... 271 5.3 1,398,330 419 3,337
Norfolk.................... 109 3.9 751,373 309 2,429
North Platte............... 277 18.3 751,373 66 11,432
Scottsbluff................ 109 24.1 \2\ 1,000,000 66 15,102
NEVADA:
Ely........................ 237 2.6 698,078 434 1,608
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
Lebanon.................... 75 78.1 1,084,930 22 48,912
NEW MEXICO:
Alamogordo................. 91 3.5 849,235 388 2,186
Carlsbad................... 141 8.8 560,070 101 5,533
Clovis..................... 103 6.0 1,118,197 299 3,744
Hobbs...................... 90 2.6 560,318 347 1,615
Silver City................ 133 5.4 935,667 279 3,358
NEW YORK:
Massena.................... 143 7.7 429,337 89 4,830
Ogdensburg................. 123 6.3 429,337 110 3,920
Plattsburgh................ 78 4.1 721,198 284 2,539
Saranac Lake............... 126 6.9 721,198 166 4,341
Watertown.................. 65 9.9 429,337 69 6,199
NORTH DAKOTA:
Devils Lake................ 405 5.5 869,635 254 3,427
Dickinson.................. 319 10.8 1,540,089 229 6,736
Jamestown.................. 332 6.0 869,635 231 3,766
OKLAHOMA:
Enid....................... 84 7.3 977,302 213 4,588
Ponca City................. 81 5.9 977,302 266 3,668
PENNSYLVANIA:
Altoona.................... 108 23.0 546,159 38 14,394
Johnstown.................. 82 32.7 301,417 15 20,464
Oil City/Franklin.......... 86 10.3 874,067 135 6,453
PUERTO RICO:
Ponce...................... 77 9.4 552,388 94 5,856
SOUTH DAKOTA:
Brookings.................. 206 2.1 955,726 713 1,340
Huron...................... 279 4.2 955,726 360 2,657
Pierre..................... 397 17.3 318,861 29 10,841
Watertown.................. 207 41.0 1,871,825 73 25,687
TENNESSEE:
Jackson.................... 85 15.2 1,156,325 122 9,493
TEXAS:
Brownwood.................. 145 6.1 964,677 253 3,807
Victoria................... 108 65.2 464,869 11 40,831
UTAH:
Cedar City................. 178 27.5 770,285 45 17,221
Moab....................... 240 5.5 674,804 195 3,452
Vernal..................... 174 6.5 595,436 146 4,079
VERMONT:
Rutland.................... 118 6.3 804,102 203 3,967
VIRGINIA:
Staunton................... 133 22.0 615,578 45 13,769
WASHINGTON:
Moses Lake................. 108 16.5 1,344,557 131 10,299
WEST VIRGINIA:
Beckley.................... 181 7.2 1,033,847 230 4,486
Bluefield.................. 145 5.0 1,033,847 329 3,144
Greenbrier................. 172 8.0 683,212 136 5,008
WYOMING:
Laramie.................... 144 27.1 366,473 22 16,963
Riverton................... 310 31.5 \2\ 1,000,000 51 19,725
Rock Springs............... 184 27.3 141,240 8 17,078
Worland.................... 164 8.0 353,345 71 4,985
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hub classifications are subject to change annually based on the overall enplanement levels at the hubs and
at all airports Nationwide.
\2\ Estimate.
Federal Aviation Administration
The Federal Aviation Administration is responsible for the
safe movement of civil aviation and the evolution of a national
system of airports. The Federal Government's regulatory role in
civil aviation began with the creation of an Aeronautics Branch
within the Department of Commerce pursuant to the Air Commerce
Act of 1926. This Act instructed the agency to foster air
commerce; designate and establish airways; establish, operate,
and maintain aids to navigation; arrange for research and
development to improve such aids; issue airworthiness
certificates for aircraft and major aircraft components; and
investigate civil aviation accidents. In the Civil Aeronautics
Act of 1938, these activities were transferred to a new,
independent agency named the Civil Aeronautics Authority.
Congress streamlined regulatory oversight in 1957 with the
creation of two separate agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency
and the Civil Aeronautics Board. When the Department of
Transportation [DOT] began its operations in 1967, the Federal
Aviation Agency was renamed the Federal Aviation Administration
[FAA] and became one of several modal administrations within
DOT. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out with
enactment of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and ceased
to exist in 1984. Responsibility for the investigation of civil
aviation accidents was given to the National Transportation
Safety Board in 1967. FAA's mission expanded in 1995 with the
transfer of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation from
the Office of the Secretary, and decreased in December 2001
with the transfer of civil aviation security activities to the
new Transportation Security Administration.
The total recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal
year 2005 amounts to $13,913,427,000, which is $35,429,000 more
than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The following table
summarizes the Committee's recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Fiscal year
Program 2004 enacted 2005 budget Committee
\1\ estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations \2\............................................... $7,486,493,000 $7,849,000,000 $7,784,000,000
General fund appropriation............................... 3,013,043,000 1,847,000,000 2,526,990,000
Trust fund appropriation \3\............................. 4,473,450,000 6,002,000,000 4,959,503,000
Facilities and equipment \4\................................. 2,892,831,000 2,500,000,000 2,500,000,000
Research, engineering and development........................ 118,734,000 117,000,000 129,427,000
Grants-in-Aid for airports \5\............................... 3,379,940,000 3,500,000,000 3,500,000,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total available budget resources....................... 13,877,998,000 13,966,000,000 13,913,427,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $82,366,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Does not reflect reduction of $7,286,000 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-517.
\3\ Includes $2,000,000 for the Bureau of Transportation Statistics in fiscal year 2005.
\4\ Does not reflect fiscal year 2003 rescission of $30,000,000 of unobligated balances pursuant of Public Law
108-199.
\5\ Does not include appropriation of $1,988,200 for Ft. Worth Alliance Airport pursuant to Division H, section
167 of Public Law 108-199.
OPERATIONS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $7,486,493,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 7,849,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 7,784,000,000
\1\Reflects reduction of $44,432,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $7,286,000 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides funds for the operation,
maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air
traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers
administrative and managerial costs for the FAA's regulatory,
international, commercial space, medical, engineering and
development programs, as well as policy oversight and agency
management functions. The operations appropriation includes the
following major activities: (1) the air traffic organization
which operates, on a 24-hour daily basis, the national air
traffic system, including the establishment and maintenance of
a national system of aids to navigation, the development and
distribution of aeronautical charts and the administration of
acquisition, and research and development programs; (2)
regulation and certification activities including establishment
and surveillance of civil air regulations to assure safety and
development of standards, rules and regulations governing the
physical fitness of airmen as well as the administration of an
aviation medical research program; (3) the office of commercial
space transportation; (4) headquarters, administration and
other staff and support offices.
The Committee recommends $7,784,000,000 for FAA operations,
an increase of $297,507,000 above the level provided for fiscal
year 2004 and $65,000,000 below the President's budget request.
The Committee notes that the recommended rate of increase for
this appropriation is approximately 4 percent, which is three
times the government-wide average budgetary increase of 1.5
percent.
The bill derives $4,959,503,000 of the total appropriation
from the airport and airway trust fund. The level is consistent
with the requirements of current law and is $1,042,497,000 less
than the budget estimate. The balance of the appropriation will
be drawn from the general fund of the Treasury.
As in past years, FAA is directed to report immediately to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in the event
resources are insufficient to operate a safe and effective air
traffic control system.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
----------------------------------- Committee
2005 budget recommendations
2004 enacted \1\ estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Traffic Organization [ATO]............................. \2\ (6,217,137) 6,522,109 (6,492,102)
Air Traffic Services....................................... 6,001,263 ............... 6,267,870
Regulation and Certification............................... 871,148 905,194 905,194
Research and Acquisitions.................................. 215,874 ............... 224,239
Commercial Space Transportation............................ 11,674 11,941 11,674
Regions and Center Coordination............................ 86,049 ............... 88,479
Human Resources............................................ 74,955 ............... 78,660
Financial Services......................................... 48,719 ............... 53,624
Staff Offices.............................................. \3\ 140,120 409,756 150,739
Information Services/CIO................................... 29,405 ............... 36,254
Undistributed reduction.................................... ................ ............... -32,733
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL OPS............................................ 7,479,207 7,849,000 7,784,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $44,432,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199, but does not
reflect reduction of $7,286,000 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ The fiscal year 2005 request proposes to combine Air Traffic Services and Research and Acquisitions in Air
Traffic Organization.
\3\ The fiscal year 2005 request proposes Financial Services, Human Resource Management, Regions and Centers
Operations, and Information Services be combined with other Staff Offices.
Air Traffic Services.--The Committee recommends
$6,267,870,000 for the operation and maintenance of the
national air traffic control and flight service system. The
recommended level is $266,607,000 more than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level. The Committee is confident that although
constrained, the recommended funding level is sufficient to
continue safe and efficient management of the National Airspace
System [NAS]. The recommendation gives the Administrator great
flexibility to manage the reduction below the budget request.
Controller Hiring Initiative.--Attrition in air traffic
controller workforce is expected to rise sharply in upcoming
years as controllers hired after the 1981 controllers' strike
become eligible for retirement. The FAA currently estimates
that nearly 7,100 controllers or nearly half its workforce
could leave the Agency between fiscal years 2004 and 2012.
The Committee is aware that the number of controllers that
will need to be hired depends on many factors, including future
air traffic levels, new technologies, and initiatives that FAA
undertakes to make its processes for hiring, placing, and
training new controllers more efficient and cost effective.
Nevertheless, the Committee believes it is prudent to begin
hiring and training controllers in anticipation of an increased
number of retiring controllers. The Committee recommends
$10,000,000 to hire and train additional air traffic
controllers.
Contract Tower Program.--The Committee continues to support
the contract tower program and the cost-sharing program as a
cost-effective way to enhance air traffic safety at smaller
airports. For the past 22 years, the contract tower program has
enhanced aviation safety by providing essential air traffic
services at smaller airports that in many cases would not
otherwise have a tower. The program consistently has received
high marks for customer service from aviation users, and has
been an incentive to aid small airports with retaining and
developing commercial air service and corporate aviation.
Currently, 223 smaller airports participate in the program,
representing 45 percent of all control towers in the United
States. Federal contract towers handle approximately 25 percent
of control tower aircraft operations for about 10 percent of
FAA's budget to operate all control towers in the national
airspace system.
The safety and efficiency record of the program for the
past two decades has been validated numerous times by the DOT
Office of Inspector General [OIG] and FAA safety audits, as
well as by the National Transportation Safety Board. The OIG
also has verified the significant cost-effectiveness of the
program. All Federal contract controllers are FAA certified air
traffic controllers who meet the identical training and
operating standards as other FAA controllers. Contract tower
controllers operate together with FAA-staffed facilities
throughout the country as part of a unified national air
traffic control system. The FAA exercises management and
oversight over all aspects of the program, including operating
procedures, staffing plans, certification of contract
controllers, security and facility evaluations. Without a
Federal program that provides financial assistance, sets safety
and training standards, certifies operations and monitors all
aspects of contract tower facilities, many of these towers
would have to close.
The Committee recommends $86,000,000 to fund the existing
contract tower program, the remaining eligible non-Federal
towers not currently operated by FAA, and non-towered airports
eligible for the program. Of the funds provided for the
contract tower program, $500,000 is to deploy computer-based
interactive training systems for controllers at FAA contract
towers. In designing the system, the FAA should utilize
existing interactive computer-based training and testing
systems in use at airports. In addition to these resources, the
Committee has provided $7,000,000 for the contract tower cost-
sharing program.
ATO Resource Tool.--The FAA must deploy and use the ATO
resource tool [ART], its labor distribution system, to have the
accurate cost and workforce data that is necessary to
effectively manage the expected surge in controller attrition.
According to the DOT Inspector General, ART could have provided
credible workforce data for addressing concerns about
controller staffing, related overtime expenditures, and
determining how many controllers are needed and where. However,
the Committee understands that deployment has now been on hold
for almost 2 years while FAA and the controllers' union
continue negotiations over its full implementation. Considering
the expected surge in controller retirements over the next
several years, the Committee strongly urges the Agency and
union to resolve their differences as quickly as possible so
that all parties have objective data to determine how many
controllers are needed and where. The Committee also expects
ART to provide information on the time controllers spend
controlling aircraft and conducting other duties in order to
utilize the controller workforce more productively.
Airway Facility Training.--The Committee believes that
basic core skills training and certification for the Airway
Facilities [AF] technical workforce is necessary for the safe
operation of the NAS and for the viability of the FAA's
modernization program. In response to the growing demands of
NAS modernization, the FAA recognized the need to establish a
core set of information technology skills for the AF technical
workforce. The Committee is aware that an analysis of AF
technical workforce responsibilities was accomplished in order
to identify the core skills required for the performance of
their respective positions and that the FAA agreed to revise
training with a focus on timely and efficient delivery to
accommodate NAS modernization. Unfortunately, despite this
agreement to provide at least 20 percent of the workforce with
these skills each year, less than 40 percent of the current AF
workforce has received the training. The Committee strongly
encourages the agency to do whatever is necessary to provide
the AF technical workforce with necessary core skills training
and certification, and to evaluate shifting the technical
training focus to a decentralized model in fiscal year 2005.
Medallion Program.--The Committee recommends $3,000,000 to
continue the Medallion program, the same as the fiscal year
2004 level. Strengthening the Medallion program is a key safety
initiative in the FAA's current strategic plan.
Alien Species Action Plan [ASAP].--The Committee provides
$3,000,000 out of available funds to continue the
implementation of the Alien Species Action Plan which was
adopted by the FAA as part of its August 26, 1998, Record of
Decision approving certain improvements at Kahului Airport on
the Island of Maui. These funds will be used to complete
capital projects that were started in fiscal year 2002 and
continue the operational requirements imposed by the ASAP.
National Airspace Redesign.--Of the funds provided,
$4,000,000 shall be for the NY/NJ Airspace Redesign effort and
shall not be reprogrammed by the FAA for other activities,
including airspace redesign activities outside the NY/NJ metro
area. As the FAA moves forward with its redesign program in the
New York/New Jersey and Philadelphia area, the Committee
encourages the FAA, where appropriate, to consider air noise
impacts as part of the redesign effort.
Non-Precision GPS Approaches.--The Committee recommendation
encourages to continue work associated with increasing the
number of non-precision GPS instrument approaches developed and
published for airports that are not Part 139 certificated.
Accounting Operations.--The Committee is aware that the FAA
has proposed to consolidate accounting operations in eight
offices across the country at the Finance Center at Oklahoma
City. The goals of improving financial information and
implementing standardized accounting practices through process
improvement can be achieved without relocation. The Committee
directs the FAA not to proceed with this consolidation.
BILL LANGUAGE
Second Career Training Program.--The Committee has included
bill language which was included in the President's budget
request which prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the
second career training program. This prohibition has been
carried in annual appropriations Acts for a number of years.
Sunday Premium Pay.--The bill retains a provision, first
included in the fiscal year 1995 appropriations Act, which
prohibits FAA from paying Sunday premium pay, except in those
cases where the individual actually worked on a Sunday. This
provision is identical to that which was in effect for fiscal
years 1995-2004. It was requested by the administration for
fiscal year 2005.
Manned Auxiliary Flight Service Stations.--The Committee
has retained bill language that was requested by the
administration to prohibit the use of funds for operating a
manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous
United States. There is no funding provided in the Operations
account for such stations in fiscal year 2005.
Aeronautical Charting and Cartography.--The bill prohibits
funds in this Act from being used to conduct aeronautical
charting and cartography [AC&C;] activities through the working
capital fund [WCF]. Public Law 106-181 authorized the transfer
of these activities from the Department of Commerce to the FAA.
FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $2,862,831,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 2,500,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,500,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $47,169,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect rescission of $30,000,000 of
unobligated balances pursuant to Public Law 108-199.
The Facilities and Equipment [F&E;] appropriation provides
funding for modernizing and improving air traffic control and
airway facilities, equipment, and systems. The appropriation
also finances major capital investments required by other
agency programs, experimental research and development
facilities, and other improvements to enhance the safety and
capacity of the airspace system. The program aims to keep pace
with the increasing demands of aeronautical activity and remain
in accordance with the Federal Aviation Administration's
comprehensive 5-year capital investment plan [CIP].
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000,000
for the Facilities and Equipment of the Federal Aviation
Administration. The Committee recommendation is the same as the
budget estimate and is $362,831,000 less than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level. The bill provides that $2,071,300,000 is
available for obligation until September 30, 2007, and
$428,700,000 is available until September 30, 2005.
The Committee recommendations focus on reinforcing greater
accountability and mission goals, and strive for better or
alternative ways of improving and modernizing the system.
Furthermore, in reviewing the budget estimate for this account,
the Committee has placed priority on funding programs necessary
to upgrade current equipment for future capacity requirements
or programs that will enable the FAA to proceed with
initiatives to improve safety and initiatives to alleviate
congestion, reduce aircraft spacing, and increase the
efficiency of the NAS.
F&E; Management.--The Federal Aviation Administration's most
recent estimate projects expenditures of approximately
$43,523,000,000 on the air traffic control modernization effort
from 1981 through 2005. The estimate for the modernization of
the system has continued to evolve and escalate since 1981.
The Committee is concerned about the overhead and related
costs in this account. Data provided by FAA shows that
personnel and related expenses consume a greater share of the
F&E; appropriation each year. In fiscal year 1994, personnel
expenses accounted for about 9 percent but have grown to 13
percent of F&E; in fiscal year 2004. Under the budget estimate
for fiscal year 2005, the FAA requests growth for direct
personnel and related expenses to almost 18 percent of the F&E;
appropriation. As dramatic as this growth has been, data
accounting for only the direct personnel costs understate a
true assessment of the administrative overhead of these
activities. Most individual budget lines in this account also
assume funding in the range of 10 to 25 percent for program and
contract management. Further compounding this trend, the F&E;
account also provides resources for support contracts and
system engineering support, and technical support services
among other things. All of these costs ultimately translate
into less funds for specific air traffic modernization
projects.
Just as growth in personnel and related expenses reduce the
amount of funding that is available for procurement, cost
escalation and delays in a few large acquisition programs are
severely limiting the resources available for procuring and
installing other equipment that will modernize the NAS. For
example, funding for one new program, such as ERAM, and funding
for other programs like WAAS and STARS that have chronic
schedule delays and cost overruns threaten to take a
disproportionate share of funding for modernization.
The following table displays the aggregate amount of
funding projected for just these three programs as a percentage
of the total amount of F&E; funding each year for the next 5
fiscal years:
The FAA faces difficult funding decisions on a number of
fronts as a result of its inability to effectively manage
large-scale acquisitions. In fact, the FAA has not delivered
any major system within initial cost, schedule, or performance
goals due primarily to a complete failure to impose acquisition
management discipline. This is particularly perplexing
considering the Congress provided FAA two unprecedented and
powerful tools in 1996 by granting relief from Federal
personnel and procurement rules, both of which the Agency
believed were hindering its ability to modernize the National
Airspace System. FAA has not taken full advantage of this
flexibility. While contracts are awarded faster, there has been
little bottom line impact on cost and schedule problems with
major acquisitions remain the norm. For example, last year the
DOT Inspector General analyzed 20 major acquisitions and found
that 14 of these projects experienced cost overruns of over
$4,300,000,000, which is more than the annual appropriation for
modernizing the NAS.
Clearly, the FAA must take immediate steps to control
personnel cost growth and to impose budget and schedule
discipline on major acquisition programs. Our Nation's air
traffic control system has failed to keep up with the
increasing and changing demands, and the FAA will not be able
to meet future demands and needs without changing and improving
the ways we modernize the NAS. This challenge is unlikely to be
met without changing the FAA culture. Ultimately, changing the
FAA culture is a long term proposition, but the failure to do
so will harm the aviation industry, inconvenience the flying
public, and serve as an obstacle to national economic growth.
Budget Activities Format.--Beginning in fiscal year 2003,
the Federal Aviation Administration has formatted the budget
activities of the Facilities and Equipment budget request in
terms of strategic goals. If the purpose of that structure is
to display the link between budget and performance, then the
FAA has failed to meet that objective. Clearly, the budget
presentation for the past 3 fiscal years has served only to
obfuscate the significant programmatic and execution issues
facing the FAA and has not facilitated any meaningful program
benefits. One has only to review the agency's highest cost
programs to realize that the current topical groupings are not
relevant to budgetary, programmatic, or operational
considerations.
The Committee recommendation is presented in a format used
in prior appropriations reports to better assist the FAA in
managing the Facilities and Equipment capital program. The
Committee greatly prefers the following structure and believes
that it offers a better delineation between developmental
initiatives, procurement activities, infrastructure
requirements, and personnel costs. The Committee directs that
future requests for the Facilities and Equipment account
conform to this format.
The Committee's recommended distributions of the funds for
each of the projects funded by the appropriation:
FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
-------------------------------- Committee
2004 enacted 2005 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering Development, Test and Evaluation:
Advanced Technology Development & Prototyping............... $70,100,000 $37,300,000 $56,575,000
Safe Flight 21.............................................. 30,300,000 40,454,000 44,454,000
Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) Applications................... 10,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
Next Generation VHF Air/Ground Communications System 85,850,000 31,950,000 29,950,000
(NEXCOM)...................................................
Free Flight Phase 1......................................... 32,000,000 .............. ..............
Free Flight Phase 2......................................... 100,000,000 92,500,000 92,500,000
Louisville, KY technology demonstration..................... 8,000,000 .............. ..............
Local Area Augmentation System.............................. 34,400,000 .............. 10,000,000
GCNSS....................................................... 20,000,000 .............. 20,000,000
NAS Improvement of System Support Laboratory................ .............. 1,000,000 1,000,000
Technical Center Facilities................................. 13,000,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
Technical Center Building and Plant Support................. 3,500,000 4,300,000 4,300,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total Activity 1.......................................... 407,150,000 223,504,000 274,779,000
===============================================
Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment:
En Route Automation Program................................. 307,000,000 361,200,000 333,200,000
Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)...................... .............. 4,900,000 4,900,000
ATOMS Local Area/Wide Area Network.......................... 1,100,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Weather and Radar Processor (WARP).......................... 8,500,000 4,700,000 4,700,000
ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements.............. 28,000,000 35,000,000 28,000,000
Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS)................... 32,800,000 24,100,000 24,100,000
Air Traffic Management (ATM)................................ 37,500,000 57,000,000 38,000,000
Critical Telecommunication Support.......................... 1,500,000 1,300,000 1,300,000
Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure.................... 24,100,000 13,500,000 13,500,000
Volcano Monitoring.......................................... 4,000,000 .............. 4,000,000
ATCBI Replacement (ATCBI-6)................................. 20,000,000 15,100,000 15,100,000
ATC En Route Radar Facilities Improvements.................. 2,700,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
En Route Communications and Control Facilities Improvements. 1,203,390 1,020,800 1,020,800
Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS)................... .............. 14,100,000 14,100,000
Aviation Weather Services Improvements (CIWS)............... 22,200,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI)................. 51,200,000 71,150,000 71,150,000
Guam Center Radar Approach Control (CERAP)--Relocate........ 2,600,000 2,300,000 2,300,000
Oceanic Automation System................................... 67,000,000 50,850,000 42,000,000
ARTS/DBRITE Sustainment..................................... 25,000,000 .............. ..............
New York Integrated Control Complex......................... 5,000,000 .............. ..............
ARSR-4 Automated Technical Documentation.................... 3,000,000 .............. 3,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--En Route Programs............................... 644,403,390 664,220,800 608,370,800
===============================================
Airport Surface Detection Equipment--Model X (ASDE-X)....... .............. 51,300,000 51,300,000
Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR)....................... .............. 8,000,000 8,000,000
Terminal Automation Program................................. 122,100,000 21,700,000 21,700,000
Terminal ATC Facilties Replacement.......................... 158,245,000 95,100,000 126,100,000
ATC/TRACON Facilities Improvement........................... 42,000,000 55,175,800 55,175,800
Terminal Voice Switch Replacement/Enhanced TVS.............. 16,000,000 10,200,000 16,000,000
NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards Compliance.. 28,300,000 25,500,000 25,500,000
Houston Area Air Traffic System............................. 25,000,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
NAS Infrastructure Management System (NIMS)................. 20,000,000 16,000,000 10,000,000
ASR-9 SLEP.................................................. 23,000,000 20,700,000 20,700,000
Voice Recorder Replacement Program (VRRP)................... 3,300,000 5,100,000 5,100,000
Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11)............................. 75,000,000 107,100,000 100,100,000
DOD/FAA Facilities Transfer................................. 3,250,000 1,200,000 3,200,000
Precision Runway Monitors................................... 8,000,000 7,400,000 7,400,000
Terminal Radar Improvements................................. .............. 1,073,700 1,073,700
Terminal Communications--Improve............................ 112,000 1,129,400 1,129,400
Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS)..... 119,800,000 113,900,000 113,900,000
Terminal Applied Engineering................................ 4,000,000 .............. ..............
Terminal Interim Remote Tower Displays...................... 2,500,000 .............. ..............
Tower Datalink Services (TDLS).............................. 2,500,000 .............. ..............
IDS--Terminal Facilities.................................... 2,000,000 .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Terminal Programs............................... 655,107,000 552,578,900 578,378,900
===============================================
Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)................... 11,800,000 7,300,000 7,300,000
FSAS Operational and Supportability Implementation System 19,710,000 10,200,000 9,200,000
(OASIS)....................................................
Weather Message Switching Center Replacement................ 1,500,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Flight Service Facilities Improvement....................... 476,890 .............. ..............
Flight Service Station Switch Modernization................. 2,000,000 .............. ..............
Flight Service Station (FSS) Modernization.................. 5,800,000 1,300,000 1,300,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Flight Service Programs......................... 41,286,890 19,800,000 18,800,000
===============================================
VOR/DME..................................................... 8,600,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Instrument Landing System (ILS) Establishment............... 48,615,000 5,800,000 25,250,000
Wide Area Augmentation System............................... 100,000,000 100,030,000 65,090,000
Transponder Landing System (TLS)............................ 6,300,000 .............. 6,300,000
Low Level Windshear Alert System (LLWAS)--Upgrade........... 2,700,000 .............. ..............
Runway Visual Range......................................... 7,000,000 1,400,000 1,400,000
NDB Sustainment............................................. 1,100,000 .............. ..............
Navigation and Landing Aids--Improve........................ 5,929,420 4,408,700 4,408,700
Approach Lighting System Improvement Program (ALSIP)........ 48,975,000 5,000,000 19,700,000
VASI Replace With PAPI...................................... 5,900,000 .............. ..............
DME Sustainment............................................. 4,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Visual Navaids (PAPI/REIL).................................. 5,000,000 3,200,000 3,200,000
Loran-C..................................................... 22,500,000 .............. 10,000,000
Instrument Approach Procedures Automation................... 4,000,000 3,100,000 3,100,000
Navigation and Landing Aids Service Life Extension Pgm...... .............. 2,000,000 2,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Landing and Navigational Aids................... 270,619,420 127,938,700 143,448,700
===============================================
Alaskan NAS Interfacility Communications System (ANICS)..... 900,000 .............. ..............
Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Monitoring................ 5,600,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
FAA Buildings and Equipment................................. 11,200,000 11,027,600 11,027,600
Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support................... 45,000,000 45,000,000 40,000,000
Air Navigational Aids and ATC Facilities (Local Projects)... 2,200,000 2,300,000 2,300,000
Aircraft Related Equipment Program.......................... 12,580,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
Computer Aided Eng and Graphics (CAEG) Modernization........ 1,000,000 800,000 800,000
Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support............... 6,500,000 4,600,000 9,600,000
Programs being rebaselined (ITWS, STARS, WAAS).............. .............. .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Other ATC Facilities............................ 84,980,000 78,727,600 78,727,600
===============================================
Total Activity 2.......................................... 1,696,396,700 1,443,266,000 1,426,726,000
===============================================
Non-ATC Facilities and Equipment:
NAS Management Automation Program (NASMAP).................. 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Hazardous Materials Management.............................. 19,000,000 17,000,000 17,000,000
Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS)...................... 6,900,000 12,900,000 6,900,000
Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF)............. 5,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
Test Equipment--Maintenance Support for Replacement......... 4,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC)...... 1,900,000 1,600,000 1,600,000
NAS Recovery Communications (RCOM).......................... 9,400,000 10,000,000 10,000,000
Facility Security Risk Management........................... 30,000,000 40,000,000 40,000,000
Information Security........................................ 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Support Equipment............................... 85,400,000 99,500,000 93,500,000
===============================================
Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization............ 13,000,000 8,500,000 8,500,000
National Airspace System (NAS) Training Facilities.......... 4,200,000 .............. ..............
Distance Learning........................................... 1,400,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal--Training Equipment & Facilities................. 18,600,000 10,000,000 10,000,000
===============================================
Total Activity 3.......................................... 104,000,000 109,500,000 103,500,000
===============================================
Mission Support:
System Engineering and Development Support.................. 25,800,000 30,400,000 27,765,000
Safety Management System.................................... .............. 1,700,000 1,700,000
Program Support Leases...................................... 41,100,000 42,600,000 42,600,000
Logistics Support Services (LSS)............................ 7,900,000 7,900,000 7,900,000
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center--Leases................... 14,600,000 14,200,000 14,200,000
Transition Engineering Support.............................. 35,000,000 35,000,000 30,000,000
Frequency and Spectrum Engineering.......................... 1,930,000 3,600,000 2,000,000
PCS Moves................................................... 200,000 1,530,000 1,530,000
Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC).................. 42,562,100 43,300,000 38,300,000
Resource Tracking Program (RTP)............................. 3,600,000 1,500,000 1,000,000
Center for Advanced Aviation System Development............. 84,620,000 84,600,000 84,600,000
NAS Aeronautical Info Management Enterprise System.......... 10,300,000 13,700,000 13,700,000
DCAA Audits................................................. 3,000,000 .............. ..............
Operational Evolution Plan.................................. 1,000,000 .............. ..............
Research Aircraft Replacement............................... 10,000,000 .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Total Activity 4.......................................... 281,612,100 280,030,000 265,295,000
===============================================
Personnel and Related Expenses:
Personnel and Related Expenses.............................. 420,841,200 443,700,000 428,700,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total Activity 5.......................................... 420,841,200 443,700,000 428,700,000
===============================================
Total..................................................... 2,910,000,000 2,500,000,000 2,500,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.--The
Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping program
develops and validates technologies that support a range of
timely and critical initiatives within the Engineering,
Development, Test and Evaluation activity. The Committee
recommendation provides $56,575,000, to be distributed as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Runway incursion reduction program..................... $9,100,000
Aviation system capacity improvements.................. 6,500,000
Separation standards................................... 2,500,000
General aviation/vertical flight technology program.... 1,500,000
Operational concept validation......................... 3,000,000
NAS mission analysis and requirements development...... 2,000,000
Domestic RVSM.......................................... 2,200,000
Safer Skies............................................ 3,400,000
NAS safety assessment.................................. 1,000,000
Juneau airport wind system............................. 4,900,000
Airborne automated flight alert system................. 3,000,000
Runway obstruction warning system...................... 375,000
Airport technology..................................... 10,100,000
Airport cooperative research program................... 5,000,000
Data exchange project.................................. 2,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airborne Automated Flight Alert System.--The Committee has
included $3,000,000 to continue the demonstration of a
prototype rapid response capability to transmit flight data
from commercial type aircraft using data management and
communications equipment already installed on most modern
aircraft, through software modernization. The Committee views
this funding as a continuation of on-going AAFAS work.
Runway Obstruction Warning System.--The bill includes
$375,000 to continue the Runway Obstruction Warning System at
Gulfport-Biloxi Airport and to support interim monitoring and
certification of the system.
Airport Technology.--The Committee recommends $10,100,000
for airport technology. The Committee has provided $4,000,000
for the Airfield Pavements Research Program, the same level of
funding as the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The program is
designed to develop safer, more cost-effective, and durable
airfield pavements by improving design, construction,
rehabilitation and repair. This program examines both asphalt
and concrete airfield pavements.
Airport Cooperative Research Program.--The Committee
recommendation includes $5,000,000 to initiate the airport
cooperative research program which will carry out applied
research on problems that are shared by airports and are not
being adequately addressed by existing Federal research
programs. This research will help to improve aviation safety,
enhance security and reduce environmental impacts at airports
around the country.
Data Exchange Project.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000
for the data exchange project. The project will develop and
demonstrate an innovative, low-cost, broadband, non-satellite,
safety, security, and air traffic management communications
system for aircraft. Project will configure hardware and equip
at least three aircraft and one ground station to establish a
broadband communications data link network between aircraft and
ground.
Aviation Maintenance Technology.--The Committee encourages
the FAA to work with the appropriate parties to develop a trial
to demonstrate the safety and efficiency gains to be achieved
through the automation of maintenance repair procedure
information. The trial may include the identification of
metrics and their measurement; configuration and installation
of the automation system; and, data collection from the trial.
Safe Flight 21.--The Committee supports the Safe Flight 21
program and recommends $44,450,000, an increase of $4,000,000
above the budget estimate. Of the funds provided, $4,004,000 is
for the Ohio River Valley project and $37,000,000 is for the
Capstone program. The recommendation includes $7,000,000 for
weather cameras and the Committee urges the FAA to improve
weather information for highly traveled mountain passes,
including Rainey Pass, Merrill Pass, and Ptarmigan Pass.
Next Generation Very High Frequency Air/Ground
Communications System [NEXCOM].--The Committee recommends
$29,950,000 for Next Generation VHF Air/Ground Communications
System [NEXCOM], which is $2,000,000 less than the budget
request. The Committee is aware that FAA is deferring plans for
the more expensive and ambitious elements of the NEXCOM
program. It is now essentially a radio replacement program. FAA
has faced numerous challenges with this program, including
concerns about the agency's preferred technology, how much it
would cost airlines to equip with new radios, and whether or
not Agency efforts would be compatible with steps taken in
Europe. Notwithstanding FAA's decision to dismantle NEXCOM, the
program sought to address very real problems--an aging air-to-
ground communications infrastructure and pending frequency
depletion. Agency budgets and justifications are silent on
these important problems that will affect capacity initiatives
at some time in the future. Considering decisions about NEXCOM
and the abrupt deferral of Controller-Pilot Data Link
Communications, FAA is directed to report to the Committee on
how it will meet the communication needs of the National
Airspace System in the near-and long-term.
Global Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance System
[GCNSS].--The Committee provides $20,000,000 for the
continuation of the FAA's effort to develop network-centric NAS
operations through System Wide Information Management. The
Committee directs the FAA to utilize this funding to further
define and analyze initial network-centric air traffic
management operations and to demonstrate these concepts at one
or more FAA sites. Specifically, the demonstration may include
the following: flight deviation detection and assessment for
security alerting and safety and capacity enhancement;
rationalization and integration of NAS surveillance assets for
reducing operational and maintenance costs while the existing
levels of safety and security are fully maintained; dynamic
traffic rerouting and flow re-planning for minimizing NAS
disruptions caused by convective weather; and, trajectory-based
approach and departure operations for increased terminal area
and airport capacity and reduced flight delays.
Local Area Augmentation System [LAAS].--The Committee
recommendation provides $10,000,000 for the Local Area
Augmentation system. The Committee notes that this program has
evolved from a private vendor and airline effort to a private
vendor and FAA effort, and now is an FAA procurement program
for a category 1 system. Since FAA awarded the LAAS contract in
fiscal year 2003, the FAA has contemplated restructuring the
program to focus on category 2 and category 3 systems and the
fiscal year 2005 request to OMB reflected that shift. Due to
budgetary constraints and competing priorities, the budget
estimate did not include funding for LAAS, and during the last
several months, the FAA, the Congress, and the industry have
been struggling with how to capture the benefits promised by
LAAS technology in a constrained budgetary environment. After
consultations with the FAA, the Committee includes funding for
the LAAS procurement and believes that the most prudent means
to successfully integrating this capability into the NAS is
through an iterative approach starting with category 1 systems
utilizing associated cockpit guidance systems and evolving as
necessary to category 2 and category 3 systems. The Committee
believes that this approach holds promise for delivering a
cost-effective means of providing precision approaches to
accommodate the shift to point-to-point air carrier service.
The Committee appreciates the dialogue with the Department on
this issue and anticipates a continuation of that process.
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
En Route Automation Modernization Program.--The En Route
Automation Modernization Program [ERAM] is one of the most
expensive and complex acquisitions that FAA has ever
undertaken. The purpose of ERAM is to replace the Host computer
and its backup at FAA's 20 facilities that manage high altitude
traffic nationwide. ERAM is also expected to provide future
enhancements to Host computer capabilities to enhance the flow
of air traffic in the National Airspace System.
For well over 20 years, the Host computer system has been
the core, or central nervous system, of the Nation's air
traffic control [ATC] network. Host computers integrate flight
plan and radar data to provide air traffic controllers with
precise aircraft identification and position information. This
system and its associated back-up are aging and have limited
expansion capability.
The expense and complexity of ERAM is reflected in FAA's
overall program cost estimate of $2,100,000,000 and projected
completion date of 2010. The agency is currently spending more
than $10,000,000 per month on ERAM. The FAA budget request for
fiscal year 2005 would increase the monthly burn rate to more
than $20,000,000 per month. In 2007, FAA envisions spending
more than $30,000,000 per month or more than $1,000,000 per day
on ERAM.
The FAA has developed a phased approach to the ERAM
procurement and is 18 months into the effort. Thus far, FAA has
met early program milestones, although it should be noted that
work to date has focused on the Enhanced Back-up Surveillance
system [EBUS], the least complex element of ERAM. Nevertheless,
considerable work remains and continued oversight of this
important program is critical. In fact, about 80 percent of
each year's budget request will involve development efforts,
referred to as ``solution development'' in planning documents.
Even modest cost or schedule problems with ERAM will have a
cascading effect on other programs, particularly in today's
tight budgetary environment. At this stage, two key risks must
be aggressively managed:
1. Managing a Cost-Plus Contract.--By far, the largest cost
risk in the program lies in FAA's ability to control the cost
of the prime contract, which is a cost-reimbursable vehicle
that generates the bulk of the anticipated program cost. The
contract is currently valued at $971,000,000 for some of the
development and deployment associated with ERAM. One pending
adjustment to the ERAM contract, related to improvements to the
Display System Replacement, will likely increase that cost by
$200,000,000. Clearly, developmental initiatives with high
degrees of undefined elements carry a greater risk of cost
overruns and schedule delays--particularly when administered
through a cost plus contract.
2. Managing Complex Software Development.--The development
and deployment of ERAM involves creating and integrating
approximately 1.3 million lines of new and re-used computer
code. The first software version of ERAM (release 1) will
provide essentially the same capabilities that the Host
possesses today with its current complement of over 3 million
lines of code. Clearly, this is a challenging software
engineering task, particularly because the contractor will have
to integrate different programming languages and will rely on
three different entities to develop and integrate the software.
Later software versions of ERAM (releases 2.0 and 3.0) will
be challenging to develop, test, and implement because they are
expected to provide capabilities that do not exist today.
Requirements for the later elements of ERAM are not well
understood and serious questions exist about what it will take
in terms of time and money to deliver these additional
capabilities.
Last year, the Committee admonished FAA for providing
insufficient justification for ERAM given the size and
magnitude of the program. This is still the case today. The
Committee continues to be concerned about the lack of clarity
in the goals and elements of this program. The Committee
believes that an initiative of this size and importance to the
agency warrants a much more comprehensive justification and
repeated attempts by the Committee to find greater definition
of the procurement elements have been less than illuminating.
The more attention and scrutiny the Committee devotes to the
ERAM program, the more troubling this initiative appears. FAA
has not clearly articulated the level of development and risks
associated with the later stages of this procurement and the
agency's plans to mitigate those risks. As a result, it remains
unclear whether or not FAA is correctly positioned to manage
the program with respect to complex software development and
integration issues and what metrics can be used to gauge
progress.
The Committee Recommendation provides $333,200,000 for ERAM
for fiscal year 2005, a decrease of $28,000,000 from the budget
request and an increase of $26,000,000 over the fiscal year
2004 appropriated level. The Committee believes this reduction
can be easily accommodated with appropriate management of the
procurement--particularly when considering that the FAA assures
the Committee that program growth of $200,000,000 to
$300,000,000 can be accommodated as discussed above. In
addition, the Committee directs the FAA to divide the current
ERAM effort into separate and distinct programs with individual
budget line items and encourages the FAA to take advantage of
fixed priced contracting vehicles for the individual program
elements. At a minimum, the program could be divided into
programs and budget line items that specifically address Host
replacement from those that introduce new capabilities to the
current infrastructure.
ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements.--The
Committee recommendation provides $28,000,000, the same level
appropriated in fiscal year 2004.
Air Traffic Management [ATM].--The Committee provides
$38,000,000 for ATM, which is $500,000 more than the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2004.
Volcano Monitoring.--The Committee recommendation provides
$4,000,000 for this activity, the same as the fiscal year 2004
enacted level.
Aviation Weather Services Improvements.--The Committee
recommendation includes $5,000,000 to improve weather
information for highly traveled mountain passes, including
Rainey Pass, Merrill Pass, and Ptarmigan Pass.
Oceanic Automation System.--The Committee continues to be
concerned with the management of the effort to modernize the
management of the oceanic airspace. While no program of this
size has had the degree of congressional, Inspector General and
GAO attention as the OAS procurement has over the past 15
years, the FAA seems to continue to find new and innovative
ways to increase the cost of the procurement and the taxpayers'
exposure to future system and contract costs. The Committee
recommendation provides $42,000,000, and notes that the FAA can
accommodate this level by aggressively managing time and
materials contract line items for software maintenance and
support of FAA testing activities and by controlling testing,
engineering and program management support.
Automated Technical Support System.--The Committee includes
$3,000,000 for the ongoing development and testing of an
automated technical documentation pilot program utilizing
complex schematic diagrams with capabilities for response and
decision-support following a failure of short range radar
systems.
Wide Area Augmentation System.--The Committee continues to
have serious concerns about the resource drain the WAAS program
presents compared to the minimum benefits to aviation users
demonstrated to date. In May, the FAA rebaselined the WAAS
program for the fourth time in 10 years. With such little
acceptance of this program from aviation users as measured by
equipage rates, the Committee is concerned that this program
may never realize its projected benefits. The Committee
recommendation defers the $34,940,000 in funding requested for
the additional geo-stationary satellite.
Terminal Doppler Weather Radar [TDWR].--The Committee
recommendation is $3,000,000, a slight increase from the fiscal
year 2004 appropriated level.
Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities Replacement.--The
Committee recommendation includes $126,100,000 for new and
replacement air traffic control tower [ATCT] and ATCT/TRACON
consolidation projects, an increase of $31,000,000 above the
budget request. Funding shall be available for the following
projects in the corresponding amounts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago, IL............................................. $5,000,000
Cleveland, OH........................................... 7,025,000
Portland, OR (TRACON)................................... 1,000,000
Dayton, OH.............................................. 975,000
Orlando, FL (TRACON).................................... 2,010,625
Toledo, OH.............................................. 975,000
Abilene, TX............................................. 1,260,000
Pensacola, FL (TRACON).................................. 1,133,900
Washington, DC.......................................... 7,402,300
Huntsville, AL.......................................... 11,000,000
Houston, TX............................................. 25,000,000
Memphis, TN............................................. 10,200,000
Dallas, TX (Addison).................................... 1,349,375
Reno, NV................................................ 3,000,000
Seattle, WA (ATCT)...................................... 1,300,000
Fort Wayne, IN.......................................... 2,200,000
Deer Valley, AZ......................................... 2,000,000
Pt. Columbus, OH........................................ 700,000
Billings, MT............................................ 3,000,000
Savannah, GA............................................ 700,000
Roanoke, VA............................................. 700,000
Merrimack, NH (BCT)..................................... 834,000
Phoenix, AZ............................................. 1,334,800
Manchester, NH.......................................... 1,800,000
Chantilly, VA........................................... 5,500,000
Newport News, VA........................................ 2,000,000
Sacramento, CA.......................................... 2,000,000
Jefferson County, CO.................................... 1,000,000
Kona, HI................................................ 2,000,000
Lihue, HI............................................... 2,000,000
Boise, ID............................................... 6,000,000
Missoula, MT............................................ 4,000,000
Las Vegas, NV (ATCT).................................... 4,000,000
North Bend, OR.......................................... 2,000,000
Spokane, WA............................................. 3,000,000
Rogers, AR.............................................. 700,000
---------------
Total............................................. 126,100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airport Traffic Control Tower [ATCT]/TRACON Facilities
Improvement.--The Committee recommendation includes $55,175,800
for improvements to terminal facilities and equipment, which is
equal to the budget request. The Committee recommendation
includes funding for the projects listed below:
IMPROVE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairbanks, AK..................... Replace ceiling $92,100
tiles, lighting,
flooring.
King Salmon, AK................... HVAC, LPGB, ceiling 165,000
tiles, carpet,
paint.
Des Moines, IA.................... Upgrade ATCT siding 224,400
and replace roof.
Omaha, NE......................... HVAC Replace........ 665,150
Lincoln, NE....................... HVAC replace, 449,320
Interior refurbish.
Atlantic City, NJ................. Rehab mobile tower.. 30,000
Poughkeepsie, NY.................. Seismic survey...... 260,000
Lancaster, PA..................... Replace air handling 402,600
system.
Parkersburg, WV................... Install equipment 190,290
building.
New Haven, CT..................... Replace ESD carpet 97,900
in cab.
Boston TRACON..................... Replace carpet for 79,200
11 locations.
Norwood, MA....................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Denver TRACON..................... Correct functional 850,000
problems.
Great Falls, MT................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Ogden, UT......................... General refurbish... 6,360
Pocatello, ID..................... General refurbish... 250,015
Daytona Beach, FL................. Modernize ATCT cab.. 32,373
Fort Lauderdale, FL............... Modernize cab....... 306,400
Nashville, TN..................... General refurbish... 293,700
Raleigh-Durham, NC................ Mod ATCT Phase II... 872,300
Brownsville, TX................... Repair ATCT shaft 1,000,000
and Base building
engineering and
drafting.
Dallas Love, TX................... Modernize admin area 994,000
Phase II.
Dallas-Ft Worth, TX............... Mod Ops area Phase I 110,000
Kenai, AK......................... Upgrade/Modernize 1,140,945
ATCT.
Grand Island, NE.................. Replace foam 49,890
insulation on roof.
Des Moines, IA.................... Paint consoles, 38,500
remodel restrooms.
Kansas City, MO................... Resurface parking 127,450
lot.
Cedar Rapids, IA.................. Replace HVAC........ 632,500
Clarksburg, WV.................... Replace roof........ 618,200
Caldwell, NJ...................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Lancaster, PA..................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Philadelphia, PA.................. Seismic survey...... 260,000
Anoka, MN......................... Bldg 1840 warehouse 45,000
support.
Lawrence, MA...................... General 93,000
modernization.
Aspen, CO......................... Replace carpeting 383,885
humidifiers and
base building roof.
Great Falls, MT................... Facility 146,640
modernization.
Twin Falls, ID.................... Mod ATCT/Provide 180,000
Base building Phase
I.
Olympia, WA....................... Modernize ATCT...... 510,772
Paducah, KY....................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Daytona Beach, FL................. Expand Base Building 2,004,200
Phase II.
Mobile, AL........................ Expand Base Building 1,466,310
and FLS Phase II.
Raleigh-Durham, NC................ Replace HVAC........ 121,200
Sarasota, FL...................... Replace HVAC and Mod 828,300
facility Phase II.
Dallas-Ft Worth TRACON............ Mod Ops area Phase 902,330
II.
Dallas-Ft Worth, TX............... Mod Ops are Phase I. 110,000
Dallas-Ft Worth, TX............... Mod Ops area Phase I 110,000
Longview, TX...................... General refurbish 1,253,670
Phase II.
Tulsa, OK......................... Seismic survey...... 260,000
Camarillo, CA..................... Inservice upgrade to 603,064
tower cab.
Santa Ana, CA..................... Modernize ATCT...... 300,000
Southern CA TRACON................ Install ETG lab..... 1,200,000
ACE............................... Various............. 45,000
AEA............................... Various............. 117,000
AGL............................... Various............. 144,000
ANE............................... Various............. 45,000
Midland, TX....................... Expand Base Building 1,117,352
Phase II.
Oklahoma City, OK................. Seismic survey...... 260,000
Honolulu, HI...................... Breakroom for tower. 358,784
Scottsdale, AZ.................... Modernize ATCT...... 200,000
AAL............................... Various............. 27,000
ANM............................... Various............. 81,000
ASO............................... Various............. 171,000
ASW............................... Various............. 108,000
AWP............................... Various............. 162,000
---------------
Total....................... .................... 24,893,100
===============
Regional Projects
Kansas City, MO................... EFSTS............... 143,995
St. Louis, MO..................... Replace carpet and 40,990
linoleum.
Akron, OH......................... Procure and install 146,159
data display system.
Philadelphia, PA.................. Modernize ATCT cab.. 75,800
Pontiac, MI....................... Repair base building 80,000
Youngstown, OH.................... General refurbish... 108,000
Flint, MI......................... Replace elevator 35,100
control unit.
Minneapolis, MN................... Replace carpet admin/ 95,085
break room.
Seattle, WA....................... Add positions....... 209,107
Salem, OR......................... Construct modular 104,050
building.
Peachtree City, GA................ Establish local 274,073
control position.
Atlanta, GA....................... Establish ground 164,267
metering position.
Southwest......................... Various............. 200,000
Los Angeles, CA................... Provide covering for 104,150
parking.
Santa Maria, CA................... Replace roof-top 86,950
structure.
Sacramento, CA.................... Tower refurbish..... 123,000
Kearny Mesa, CA................... Replace air 74,500
conditioning system.
Chico, CA......................... Replace HVAC........ 93,425
Santa Barbara, CA................. Repair parking lot.. 20,400
Kansas City, MO................... Electronic drop tube 51,800
Lansing, MI....................... 7 SAIDS-IDS-4 166,359
stations.
Atlantic City, NJ................. Repair mobile tower. 30,000
Farmingdale, NY................... ACTA Improve........ 54,000
Marion, IL........................ Re-roof corners, 52,000
misc repairs.
Pontiac, MI....................... General refurbish... 250,000
Chicago, IL....................... Remove and replace 236,000
sealant on base
building and tower.
Burlington, VT.................... Replace base 104,171
building roof.
Portland, OR...................... Install ETVS, TEDs 105,450
and associated
equipment.
San Diego, CA..................... Replace water line.. 70,000
Atlanta, GA....................... Establish new ground 266,494
control position.
Atlanta, GA....................... Add TMC position.... 124,799
Mesa, AZ.......................... Provide covering for 45,000
parking.
Las Vegas, NV..................... Repaint interior, 148,700
replace floor and
lighting fixtures.
So Lake Tahoe, CA................. Repaint exterior.... 28,600
Deer Valley, AZ................... Replace HVAC........ 98,488
La Verne, CA...................... Upgrade air 74,500
conditioning system.
Long Beach, CA.................... Replace HVAC........ 90,388
---------------
Total....................... .................... 4,175,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terminal Voice Switch Replacement/Enhancement Terminal
Voice Switch.--The Committee recommendation provides
$16,000,000 for the TVSR/ETVS switch replacement program, an
increase of $5,800,000 from the budget request of $10,200,000
and the same amount as the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
NAS Infrastructure Management System [NIMS].--The Committee
recommendation provides $10,000,000 for the NIMS program
without prejudice due to budget constraints.
Airport Surveillance Radar [ASR-9].--The Committee
recommends the $20,700,000 for service life extension
modifications to the ASR-9 airport surveillance radar. The
Committee is aware that the ASR-9 is the principal airport
radar used at the Nation's busiest airports which serve 90
percent of enplaned passengers.
Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11).--The Committee recommends
a reduction of $7,000,000 from the requested level of
$107,100,000. The Committee recommendation fully funds the
request to procure and install 12 new radar systems. In
addition to funds for new production systems, the FAA is
requesting funding for site surveys, site designs, and spare
parts. The Committee notes that the number of site surveys and
site designs that have been completed significantly exceeds the
number of systems that have been procured. The Committee
believes the recommendation provides a sufficient level of
resources if the FAA defers site surveys for systems that will
not be installed for a number of years and limits spare parts
purchasing to a reasonable level that is needed to sustain the
current inventory. The Committee is aware of the need to
install a new ASR-11 at the Bismarck Airport in North Dakota
and is dismayed over the delay in the project moving forward.
The Committee directs the FAA to work with the Bismarck Airport
to come up with a suitable solution so as to ensure that there
is improved radar coverage in the near-term and that safety is
not impeded.
DOD/FAA Facilities Transfer.--The Committee recommendation
includes $3,200,000, which is essentially the same level of
funding that was appropriated in fiscal year 2004. Funding
provided above the budget increase is for necessary
improvements and continued operations of the airport radar
approach control at Lawton/Fort Sill Regional Airport in
Oklahoma.
FSAS Operational and Supportability Implementation System
[OASIS].--The Committee recommends a $9,200,000, a reduction of
$1,000,000. The recommendation is consistent with the amount
that the FAA has reprogrammed from this program to other
activities in previous fiscal years.
Instrument Landing System [ILS] Establishment.--The
Committee recommends $25,250,000 for establishment of
instrument landing systems, which includes $2,500,000 for
program management, engineering, testing, freight, and
technical support. The Committee directs the funding to be
distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alliance, NE...................... Acquire and Install $1,000,000
ILS.
Andalusia-Opp Airport, AL......... Acquire and Install 1,625,000
ILS with MALSR.
Carbon County, UT................. Acquire and Install 2,000,000
ILS.
Colorado Springs, CO.............. Acquire and Install 2,000,000
ILS.
Eugene, OR........................ Install CAT I ILS 1,250,000
with ALS, PAPI,
REIL.
Herbert Smart Downtown Regional, Acquire and Install 2,000,000
GA. ILS.
Kirksville Regional, MO........... Acquire and Install 975,000
ILS.
New York, NY (JFK)................ Installation of 1,300,000
MALSR.
O'Hare International, IL.......... CAT II/III ILS 2,000,000
installation.
St. Louis Lambert................. CAT III ILS for new 2,000,000
runway.
Sheboygan County, WI.............. Install ILS with 1,000,000
localizer, DME,
glidescope.
Tooele, UT........................ Install CAT I ILS 2,000,000
with MALSR.
Walterboro Municipal, SC.......... Acquire and Install 1,600,000
ILS.
Winston-Salem, NC................. Installation of ALSF- 2,000,000
2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transponder Landing Systems.--The Committee recommendation
provides $6,300,000 for acquisition and installation of
transponder landing systems [TLS], which is the same as the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee directs the FAA
to conduct surveys and cost-benefit analysis to site TLS at the
following locations: Chevak; Emmonak; Hooper Bay Airport;
Marshall; Scammon Bay; St. Michael; Selawik; Dillingham
Airport; Unalaska Airport; McGrath Airport; Sand Point Airport;
Unalalekeet; Fulton County Airport, IN; Danville, KY; Lawrence
Smith Memorial Airport, MO; Dawson Community Airport, MT;
Clinton County Airport, OH; Bandon State Airport, OR;
Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, TN; McGhee Tyson Airport, TN;
Deer Park Airport, WA.
Approach Lighting System Improvement Program [ALSIP].--The
recommendation includes $19,700,000 for procurement and
installation of frangible approach lighting equipment,
including ALSF-2 and MALSR lighting systems. The Committee
believes that using the latest lighting technology could
improve reliability and reduce maintenance costs. The Committee
encourages the FAA to complete a review of the specifications
for procurements under the ALSIP program. The Committee
encourages the FAA to consider the development of a certified
supplier list once the updated specification is completed.
Under the Committee recommendation, the funding is to be
distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kingston, NC...................... Install ALSF-2...... $2,500,000
Wilmington, DE.................... Install MALSR....... 2,500,000
Gulfport-Biloxi, MS............... Install TDZ and CL 1,100,000
lighting RW 14-32.
Alaska statewide rural airfield Acquire and Install 8,000,000
lighting program. airfield lighting.
North Las Vegas and Henderson REIL's.............. 500,000
Executive.
Monroe Regional, LA............... Airfield lighting... 2,200,000
Mobile Regional, AL............... Acquire and Install 1,000,000
MIRL for Runway 18/
36.
Adak, AK.......................... Upgrade instrument 1,900,000
approach lighting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee has provided funding to continue the ongoing
program to install runway and airfield lights at rural airports
throughout Alaska. The Committee directs that priority
consideration should be given to airports at Adak, Seldovia,
and Soldotna.
Medium-Intensity Approach Lighting System Replacement
[MALSR].--The Committee is aware of the large inventory of
MALSRs. The Committee encourages the FAA to consider using a
small business MALSR provider for 3 to 6 turn-key next
generation approach lighting systems which may reduce
acquisition and life cycle costs.
Loran C.--The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue
the program to modernize the Loran-C navigation system. The
Committee is aware that recapitalization of the loran
radionavigational system in the contiguous United States has
largely been completed, but notes that substantial work remains
in Alaska. The Committee urges the Administrator to advance
modernization of the Loran infrastructure in Alaska and directs
that funds be requested in the fiscal year 2006 budget
submission if additional resources are necessary to complete
this modernization program.
Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support.--The Committee
provides $40,000,000 without prejudice due to budget
constraints, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request.
Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support.--Of the
funds provided, the Committee directs $1,000,000 for
acquisition and installation of a fiber optic loop at Las
Vegas-McCarran International Airport and $4,000,000 to replace
the cable loop at Hartsfield International Airport.
Programs Being Rebaselined.--The budget estimate did not
allocate funding for ITWS, STARS, and WAAS and instead reserved
a lump sum amount until completion of a revised baseline for
each program. The Committee received revised requests for these
programs and has recommended funding for these programs in the
appropriate budget lines.
NON-AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
Aviation Safety Analysis System [ASAS].--The Committee
recommendation provides $6,900,000, sufficient resources to
maintain the present level of effort in the current constrained
budget environment.
MISSION SUPPORT
System Engineering and Development Support.--The Committee
recommends $27,765,000 for this area of technical and
management support. The Committee recommendation reduces the
increase above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level to $1,950,000
due to budget constraints.
Transition Engineering Support.--The Committee
recommendation provides $30,000,000 for transition engineering
support, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request and
requests an analysis of which programs receive support from
this line and an explanation of why such activities would not
be more accurately budgeted within the programs receiving the
support.
Frequency and Spectrum Engineering.--The Committee
recommends $2,000,000 for this program, the same level
appropriated in fiscal year 2004.
Technical Support Services Contract [TSSC].--The Committee
recommendation provides $38,300,000, a reduction of $5,000,000
from the requested amount due to budget constraints.
Resource Tracking Program [RTP].--The Committee provide
$1,000,000 for the resource tracking program due to higher
budgetary priorities.
PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES
Personnel and Related Expenses.--The Committee
recommendation provides $428,700,000.
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $118,734,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 117,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 129,427,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $705,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Research, Engineering and Development [RE&D;]
appropriation provides funding for long-term research,
engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic
control system by increasing its safety and capacity, as well
as reducing the environmental impacts of air traffic, as
authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the
Federal Aviation Act, as amended. The programs are designed to
meet the expected air traffic demands of the future and to
promote flight safety through improvements in facilities,
equipment, techniques, and procedures in order to ensure that
the system will safely and efficiently handle future volumes of
aircraft traffic.
The Committee recommendation includes $129,427,000 for the
FAA's research, engineering, and development activities. The
recommended level of funding is $12,427,000 more than budget
request and $10,692,690 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level.
A table showing the fiscal year 2004 enacted level, the
fiscal year 2005 budget estimate, and the Committee
recommendation follows:
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year--
-------------------------------- Committee
2004 enacted recommendation
\1\ 2005 estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve Aviation Safety:
Fire Research and Safety.................................... $9,667,622 $5,578,000 $6,578,000
Propulsion and Fuel Systems................................. 6,606,789 3,672,000 7,672,000
Advanced Materials/Structural Safety........................ 7,223,131 2,197,000 6,697,000
Atmospheric Hazards/Digital Systems Safety.................. 4,567,890 4,119,000 4,119,000
Aging Aircraft.............................................. 20,498,342 18,351,000 19,151,000
Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research........... 757,504 1,116,000 1,116,000
Flightdeck/Maint./System Integration Human Factors.......... 8,344,475 8,294,000 12,794,000
Aviation Safety Risk Analysis............................... 7,851,402 8,640,000 8,640,000
Air Traffic Control/Airway Facilities Human Factors......... 8,846,496 9,467,000 9,467,000
Aeromedical Research........................................ 8,829,596 6,660,000 6,660,000
Weather Research Safety..................................... 20,728,974 20,838,000 20,838,000
Improve Efficiency of Air Traffic Control System:
National Plan for Transformation of Air Service............. .............. 5,100,000 5,100,000
Wake Turbulence............................................. .............. 2,296,000 4,796,000
Weather Research Efficiency................................. 2,982,300 .............. ..............
Reduce Environmental Impact of Aviation: Environment and Energy. 7,927,947 16,008,000 11,890,000
Improve Efficiency of Mission Support:
System Planning and Resource Management..................... 497,050 1,275,000 520,000
Technical Laboratory Facility............................... 3,404,792 3,389,000 3,389,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total R,E&D...............................................; 118,734,310 117,000,000 129,427,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $705,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168(b) of Public Law 108-199.
IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY
Fire Research and Safety.--The Committee recommends
$6,578,000 for fire research and safety and includes $1,000,000
for continued comprehensive evaluation of advanced reticulated
polyurethane safety foam in commercial aircraft.
Propulsion and Fuel Systems.--The Committee recommendation
provides a total of $7,672,000 for propulsion and fuel systems
research to reduce commercial fatalities. The Committee
provides $3,000,000 to continue the study of the effects of
molecular markers designed for the purpose of detecting
adulteration or dilution of jet fuel for use in aviation
engines. This funding will support appropriate engine testing
by the FAA as well as a closed field trial. The Committee
directs the Department of Transportation [DOT] to report their
findings to the Congress not later than 18 months after the
date of enactment.
The recommended level of funding includes $1,000,000 for
further research into the performance and combustion
characteristics of aviation grade ethanol fuels at South Dakota
State University.
Advanced Materials/Structural Safety.--The Committee
recommends $6,697,000 for advanced materials/structural safety
research. With the additional funds provided, $4,000,000 is to
support and improve ongoing metallic and composite structures
research at the National Institute for Aviation Research and
$500,000 for advanced materials research at the University of
Washington.
Center of Excellence for General Aviation Research
[CGAR].--The Committee notes that the FAA has supported the
research efforts of the Center of Excellence for General
Aviation Research [CGAR] which is a consortium of the aviation
industry and five universities--Embry Riddle Aeronautical
University; the University of North Dakota; Wichita State
University; University of Alaska; and, Florida Agricultural and
Mechanical University. The Committee supports the continued
funding of the research of CGAR and directs that the FAA
provide no less than $1,500,000 to CGAR for its general
aviation research efforts.
Aging Aircraft.--The Committee recommendation includes a
total of $19,151,000 for the aging aircraft program to reduce
commercial aviation fatalities. The Committee has provided
resources to continue the collaborative efforts between the FAA
and several public and private organizations including the
Center for Aviation Systems Reliability [CASR], the
Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence [AACE] and the
Engine Titanium Consortium [ETC]. Within the appropriation, the
recommendation includes $2,000,000 for the Center for Aviation
Systems Reliability [CASR]; $1,000,000 for the Engine Titanium
Consortium [ETC]; $2,500,000 for the Aging Aircraft
Nondestructive Inspection Validation Center [AANC]; and,
$1,500,000 for the Center for Aviation Research and Aerospace
Technology [CARAT].
Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors.--
The Committee recommends $10,794,000 for flightdeck,
maintenance, and systems integration human factors, an increase
of $2,500,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee
recommendation includes $2,000,000 to continue development of
in-flight simulator training for commercial pilots and $500,000
to provide training and education in aircraft inspection,
maintenance and repair at NH Community Technical College-
Nashua.
Cabin Air Quality.--Within the funds provided for
aeromedical research, the Committee provides $3,000,000 to
continue studies related to cabin air quality as authorized in
Section 815 of the Vision 100--Century of Aviation
Authorization Act. The Committee directs that this research be
conducted through the recently established ``Center of
Excellence for Cabin Air Quality'' and shall, to the extent
that sufficient funds are available, include the following
areas: identification of chemical exposures during sporadic air
quality incidents; an animal study to assess the toxicity of
inhaling a neurotoxic component of aircraft engine oils and
hydraulic fluids; mechanical means of keeping flying insects
out of the passenger cabin of commercial aircraft; aircraft
catastrophic failure prevention research; in-flight
decontamination procedures; and advanced cleansing and
biological sensors.
Mobile Object Technology.--The Committee recommendation for
flightdeck, maintenance, and systems integration human factors
includes $3,000,000 to further develop and implement a mobile
object technology program to demonstrate the deployment of
software quickly and efficiently into the complex National
Airspace System and the System Wide Information Network [SWIM].
This demonstration should explore the mobile object
technology's ability to analyze remote monitoring and
maintenance capabilities and its potential integration into the
Surveillance Data Network [SDN].
IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM
National Plan for Air Transportation.--The Committee
recommends $5,100,000, as requested, for FAA's contribution to
the multi-agency Joint Planning and Development Office [JPDO].
This office represents the Departments of Defense, Commerce,
Transportation, and Homeland Security, in addition to the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the FAA, in
developing the next generation air transportation system. The
JPDO, and its charter, was established and charged in Public
Law 108-176.
Wake Turbulence.--The Committee recommendation includes
$5,296,000 for the wake turbulence program, which is $3,000,000
above the budget request. Funding provided above the budget
estimate is to enhance the capability of pulsed laser Doppler
radar [Lidar] to detect and track aircraft wakes.
REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF AVIATION
Environment and Energy.--The Committee recommends
$11,890,000 and provides an increase of 50 percent above the
level enacted for fiscal year 2004 instead of the proposed
increase of 64 percent.
IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF MISSION SUPPORT
System Planning & Resource Management.--The Committee
provides $520,000, which is slightly more than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level.
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $3,379,940,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 2,800,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,800,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $20,060,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199.
The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended,
authorizes a program of grants to fund airport planning and
development, noise compatibility planning and projects, the
military airport program, reliever airports, airport program
administration, and other authorized activities for public use
airports in all States and territories. The liquidation cash
appropriation provides for liquidation of obligations incurred
pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on
obligations for grants-in-aid for airport.
The Committee recommends $2,800,000,000 in liquidating cash
for grants-in-aid for airports, which is the same as the budget
request. This is consistent with the Committee's obligation
limitation on airport grants for fiscal year 2005 and for the
payment of obligations from previous fiscal years.
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Obligation limitation, 2004............................. $3,379,940,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 3,500,000,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................ 3,500,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $20,060,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect $1,988,000 direct
appropriation pursuant to Division H, section 167 of Public Law 108-199.
The total program level recommended for fiscal year 2005
for grants-in-aid to airports is $3,500,000,000, which is the
same as the budget request and $120,060,000 more than the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee recommendation is
intended to be sufficient to continue the important tasks of
enhancing airport and airway safety, ensuring that airport
standards continue to be met, maintaining existing airport
capacity, and developing additional capacity.
A table showing the distribution of these funds according
to current law compared to the fiscal year 2004 level and the
President's budget request follows:
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
2004 Enacted Fiscal Year Committee
\1\ 2005 Request Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obligation Limitation........................................ $3,379,940,000 $3,500,000,000 $3,500,000,000
Personnel and Related Expenses........................... 65,863,101 69,302,000 68,802,000
Small Community Air Service.............................. 19,882,000 ............... 20,000,000
--------------------------------------------------
Available for AIP Grants............................... 3,294,194,899 3,430,698,000 3,411,198,000
==================================================
Primary Airports............................................. 903,768,585 903,768,585 903,768,585
Cargo Service Airports....................................... 115,296,821 120,074,430 120,074,430
Alaska Supplemental (Sec. 4714(e))........................... 21,345,114 21,345,114 21,345,114
States (General Aviation):
Non-Primary Entitlement.................................. 341,047,527 341,147,527 341,147,527
State Apportionment by Formula........................... 317,791,453 344,992,073 344,992,073
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................... 658,838,980 686,139,600 686,139,600
==================================================
Carryover Entitlement........................................ 335,700,203 336,000,000 336,000,000
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Entitlements.................................. 2,034,949,703 2,067,327,729 2,067,327,729
==================================================
Small Airport Fund:
Non Hub Airports......................................... 217,288,910 217,288,910 217,288,910
Non Commercial Service................................... 108,644,455 108,644,455 108,644,455
Small Hub................................................ 54,322,227 54,322,227 54,322,227
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Small Airport Fund............................ 380,255,592 380,255,592 380,255,592
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Non Discretionary............................. 2,415,205,295 2,447,583,321 2,447,583,321
==================================================
Discretionary Set-Aside: Noise............................... 307,646,361 344,090,138 344,090,138
Discretionary Set-Aside: Reliever............................ 5,801,331 6,488,557 6,488,557
Discretionary Set-Aside: Military Airport Program............ 35,159,584 39,324,587 39,324,587
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Discretionary Set-asides...................... 348,607,276 389,903,282 389,903,282
==================================================
C/S/S/N...................................................... 397,786,746 444,908,548 444,908,548
Pure Discretionary........................................... 132,595,582 148,302,849 128,802,849
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Other Discretionary........................... 530,382,328 593,211,397 573,711,397
==================================================
Subtotal Discretionary................................. 878,989,604 983,114,679 963,614,679
==================================================
GRAND TOTAL............................................ 3,294,194,899 3,430,698,000 3,411,198,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $20,060,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168(b) of Public Law 108-199. Does not
include direct appropriation of $1,988,200 pursuant to Division H, section 167 of Public Law 108-199.
Airport Discretionary Grants.--Within the budgetary
resources provided in the accompanying bill, $963,614,679 is
available for discretionary grants to airports. The Committee
has carefully considered a broad array of discretionary grant
requests that can be expected in fiscal year 2005.
Specifically, the Committee expects the FAA to give priority
consideration to applications for the projects listed below in
the categories of AIP for which they are eligible. If funds in
the remaining discretionary category are used for any projects
in fiscal year 2005 that are not listed below, the Committee
expects that they will be for projects for which FAA has issued
letters of intent (including letters of intent the Committee
recommends below that the FAA subsequently issues), or for
projects that will produce significant aviation safety
improvements or significant improvements in systemwide capacity
or otherwise have a very high benefit/cost ratio.
Within the program levels recommended, the Committee
directs that priority be given to applications involving the
further development of the following airports:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Airport Name Project Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Adak Various improvements.
AK Akutan SPB Various improvements.
AK Cold Bay Air terminal improvements.
AK False Pass Various improvements.
AK Juneau International Snow removal equipment building
and site development for GA
aircraft, terminal
enhancement.
AK Kenai Various improvements.
AK Ketchikan International Various improvements.
AK Soldotna Various improvements.
AK Ted Stevens Anchorage Laser lines of tug roads.
International
AK Unalaska Air terminal expansion.
AK Portage Creek Runway extension and
improvements.
AL Atmore Municipal Land acquisition and apron
expansion.
AL Madison County Executive Various improvements.
AL Mobile Downtown Install Perimeter Security
Fence.
AL Montgomery Regional (Dannelly Terminal Renovation--Phase III.
Field)
AL Mobile Downtown Cargo Apron Rehabilitation/
Drainage Repairs.
AL Huntsville International--Jones Taxiway E5 Extension.
Field
AL Bessemer Municipal Runway extension and security
upgrade.
AL Mobile Regional Rehabilitate Access Road to
East Ramp.
AL Mobile Downtown Land Acquisition in Runway
Protection Zone (RPZ).
AL Mobile Regional Asphalt Overlay of Runway 18/36
and Taxiway ``R''.
AL Huntsville International--Jones Expand Intermodal Air Cargo
Field Access Taxiway to 12,600 ft.
Runway (Taxiway L).
AL Huntsville International--Jones Small Community Air Service
Field Development Program for
Competitive Fares/AIP Special
Fund.
AL Gragg-Wade Field Land Acquisition for Approach
Zone.
AL Montgomery Regional (Dannelly Montgomery Regional Airport
Field) Terminal Expansion Phase III.
AL Auburn-Opelika/Robert G Pitts Ramp and taxiway improvements
and property acquisition.
AL Andalusia-Opp Apron and Connector Taxiway
Construction, Runway/Taxiway
Extension Design, Land
Acquisition, Runway Overlay,
Road Relocation, and Runway/
Taxiway Extension.
AL Moton Field Municipal Land acquisition, taxiway
extension, RSA improvements,
other improvements.
AL Franklin Field Land acquisition, runway
extension and parallel
taxiway.
AR Northwest Arkansas Regional Taxiway construction.
AR Texarkana Regional--Webb Field Terminal renovation.
AR Baxter County Regional Runway construction.
AZ Chandler Municipal Heliport relocation.
AZ Phoenix Sky Harbor Taxiways Delta and Echo
International Reconstruction.
CA Gnoss Field Runway extension.
CA Sonoma County Various improvements.
CA San Francisco International SFO Access Control of Airport
Ground Service Equipment (GSE)
System.
CT Tweed-New Haven Various improvements.
DE New Castle County Reconstruct/construct Taxiway
M, Taxiway K-4.
FL Orlando International Elimination of Wildlife
Attractants.
FL Immokalee Runway 9/27 Resurfacing and
Repair Project.
FL Miami International Runway Strengthening.
GA Southwest Georgia Regional Runway extension project and
construction of a new Aircraft
Rescue Firefighting Facility
(ARFF).
GA Fitzgerald Municipal Runway extension.
GA Jackson County Runway Extension.
GA Southwest Georgia Regional Runway extension.
GA Paulding County Land acquisition.
GA Augusta Regional at Bush Field Terminal Construction.
GA Augusta Regional at Bush Field Various improvements.
HI Hilo International Runway Pavement Rehabilitation.
HI Kahului Taxiway Pavement
Rehabilitation.
IA Sioux Gateway Extend and reconstruct
taxiways.
IA Mason City Municipal Rehabilitation of primary
runway 7/35.
IA Atlantic Municipal New runway construction.
IA Council Bluffs Municipal Various improvements.
IA Fairfield Municipal Various improvements.
IA Council Bluffs Municipal Paving and marking new runway
18/36 and paving new taxiway.
IA Ankeny Regional Land acquisition for increased
runway protection zone and 500-
foot long runway extension.
IL Southern Illinois Equipment and various airport
improvements
IL MidAmerica St. Louis Various Improvements
IL Waukegan Regional Environmental work
IN New Castle-Henry County Land acquisition and
Municipal reconstruction and widening of
a runway.
IN Indianapolis Metropolitan Traffic/congestion mitigation
study.
IN Gary/Chicago Improve and correct airfield
safety area.
IN Clark County Various improvements.
IN Indianapolis Executive Various improvements.
KS Forbes Field Taxiway improvements.
KS Salina Municipal Apron repair.
KY Henderson City-County New Terminal.
KY Madisonville Municipal Runway extension.
KY Louisville International- Runway extension--35L.
Standiford Field
KY Owensboro-Daviess County Runway extension.
KY Bowman Field Airfield pavement replacement.
KY Louisville International- Voluntary relocation program.
Standiford Field
KY Taylor County Various improvement projects.
KY Louisville International- Voluntary Relocation Program.
Standiford Field
LA New Orleans International Various Improvements/
(Moisant) Rehabilitate Runway.
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Various Improvements.
Field
LA Houma-Terrebonne North South Runway Upgrade.
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Air Carrier Apron Phase I
Field (South).
LA Lafayette Regional Runway 4R/22L Safety Zone
Improvements.
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Noise Mitigation.
Field
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Runway 4L-22R Extension.
Field
LA Houma-Terrebonne Runway Upgrade.
LA Lafayette Regional Taxiway Bravo rehabilitation/
widening and strengthening.
LA Monroe Regional New Terminal.
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Airfield Drainage Phase II.
Field
LA Lafayette Regional Runway extension and other
improvements.
LA Monroe Regional Various improvements.
LA Morehouse Memorial Runway Expansion.
LA Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Runway 4L Drainage/Safety Area
Field improvement.
LA Alexandria International Taxiway B Reconstruction.
MD Martin State Runway, safety, and taxiway
improvements.
MD Baltimore-Washington Various improvements.
International
MD Cumberland Regional Various Improvements
ME Machias Valley Airport relocation.
MI Detroit City Gateway Development Program.
MI Oakland-Pontiac Relocation of T-Hangars,
runway, associated apron,
taxiways, and fencing.
MI Detroit Metropolitan-Wayne Runway and Airfield Safety
County Improvements.
MI W K Kellogg Regional Runway and taxiway
construction.
MI Capital City Runway extension.
MI Manistee County Blacker New terminal building.
MI Manistee County Blacker Snow removal equipment
procurement.
MN Minneapolis-St Paul Pavement Rehabilitation--
International/Wold-Chamberlain Aprons.
MN Willmar Paving and electrical and
security components.
MO Joplin Regional Terminal Replacement.
MO Kansas City International Various Improvements.
MO Springfield--Brenson Regional Runway construction.
MO Rosencrans Memorial Expansion/improvements
MS Bruce Campbell Field Relocate terminal.
MS Philadelphia Municipal Airport expansion.
MS Jackson International Carrier Apron Replacement.
MS Gulfport-Biloxi Regional Taxiway Improvements.
MS Trent Lott International Runway expansion.
MS Olive Branch Various Improvements.
MS Winona-Montgomery County Various Improvements.
MS Hawkins Field Runway extension.
MT Helena Regional Terminal Remodeling and
Expansion Project.
MT Missoula International Land Acquisition.
MT Havre City-County Terminal Remodeling and
Expansion Project.
MT Great Falls International Northside Interstate Access
Road.
MT Great Falls International Runway Improvements.
NC Statesville Municipal Runway expansion.
NC Rowan County Land acquisition.
NC Sampson County Runway expansion.
NC Morganton-Lenoir Various improvements.
NC Concord Regional Concord Airport Runway
Extension.
NC Andrews-Murphy Various improvements.
NC Hickory Municipal Runway Improvements.
NC Franklin County Runway extension.
NC Burlington Municipal Runway extension.
NC Ashe County Expand terminal apron and
construct taxiway.
NC Wilmington International Rehabilitation and Overlay of
Runway 6-24.
NC Monroe Runway extension and taxiway
improvements.
ND Jamestown Municipal Runway improvements.
ND Hector International Runway improvements.
NE Central Nebraska Regional North Ramp Rehabilitation.
NJ Lakewood Airport Improvement Projects.
NJ Newark International Access Control of Airport
Ground Service Equipment (GSE)
System.
NM Dona Ana County at Santa Teresa Runway extension.
NM Double Eagle II Rehabilitation of runway and
taxiway.
NV Reno/Tahoe International Terminal Apron reconstruction.
NV Reno/Stead Ramp Road reconstruction.
NV Reno/Stead Airport Access Road
Construction.
NV Reno/Tahoe International Cargo ramp construction.
NV Reno/Tahoe International Northeast Ramp (Cargo)
Reconstruction.
NV Reno/Stead Runway reconstruction.
NV Reno/Stead Overlay of Taxiway ``E''.
NV Reno/Stead Existing T-Hangar Taxilane
Reconstruction.
NV Reno/Tahoe International Checked Baggage In Line
Security Screening System
Installation.
NV Beatty Airport Improvement.
NV Reno/Tahoe International FAR Part 150 Noise Insulation
Program.
NV Carson Property Acquisition for the
Reconstruction/Realignment of
Runway 9-27.
NY Niagara Falls International New passenger terminal.
NY Niagara Falls International East Apron Expansion.
NY Buffalo Niagara International Internal Perimeter Road.
NY Greater Rochester International Runway Extension.
NY Niagara Falls International Permeter Access Road.
NY Buffalo Niagara International Runway 5/23 extension and
various improvements.
NY Niagara Falls International East Apron Expansion.
NY Niagara Falls International Circulatory Road and Airport
Parking.
NY Plattsburgh International Various improvements.
OH Cleveland-Hopkins International Runway Safety Area
Improvements--Partial Runway
10/28.
OH Toledo Express Terminal Reconfiguration.
OH Ohio University Airport Safety, Security, and
Economic Development
Initiative.
OH Cleveland-Hopkins International Residential Sound Insulation,
Noise Exposure Map Update, and
Noise Monitor Upgrade.
OH Dayton Wright Brothers Land Acquisition.
OH Cleveland-Hopkins International Residential soundproofing.
OK Richard Lloyd Jones, Jr Access and Perimeter Road
Reconstruction.
OK Richard Lloyd Jones, Jr Drainage Project.
OK Tulsa International Taxiway Rehabilitation.
OK Tulsa International Charlie Taxiway Extension.
OK Altus Municipal Airport Improvements.
OK Sallisaw Municipal Runway Extension.
OK West Woodward Various improvements.
OK Richard Lloyd Jones, Jr and TUL and RVS Pavement and Seal
Tulsa International Coating.
OK Ponca City Municipal Runway 17-35 and Taxiway
Rehabilitation.
OK Tulsa International Taxilanes Project.
OK Eaker Field Various improvements.
OK Tulsa International Noise Mitigation.
OR Roberts Field Taxiway reconstruction.
OR Rogue Valley International-- Terminal Construction.
Medford
OR North Bend Municipal Terminal Construction.
OR Madras/Jefferson County Construction of new flight
services building
PA Clarion County Runway extension.
PA Pittsburgh International Runway/terminal maintenance
complex
PA Philadelphia International Environmental Impact
Statements.
PA Indiana County/Jimmy Stewart Runway extension.
SC Newberry Municipal Security fence installation.
SC Rock Hill Municipal/Bryant Runway Extension Feasibility
Field Study.
SC Columbia Owens Downtown Terminal Project.
SC Pickens County Runway Rehabilitation.
SC Chester Municipal Runway improvements.
SC Georgetown County Terminal and ancillary
improvements.
SC Dillon County Land Acquisition and runway
construction
TN John C Tune Runway Safety Improvements.
TN Nashville International Rescue and Firefighting
Facility Expansion.
TN Upper Cumberland Regional Runway extension.
TN Nashville International Rehabilitation of Runway 13/31.
TX Nacogdoches-A L Mangham, Jr Runway expansion.
Regional
TX Valley International Expansion of concrete parking
area.
TX Denton Municipal Runway expansion and other
improvements.
TX Fort Worth Alliance Runway extension.
TX Brownsville/S Padre Island Runway extension.
International
TX Edinburg International Runway extension.
UT Logan-Cache Various improvements.
VT Edward F Knapp State Emergency Response Center
Hangar.
VT Newport State Taxiway and Apron Improvements.
VT Caledonia County Runway Lighting
WA Spokane International Taxiway ``C'' Extension
Project.
WI La Crosse Municipal Construct parallel taxiway to
enhance safety.
WI Eagle River Union Land reimbursement and
improvements.
WI Dane County Regional Various improvements.
WI John F Kennedy Memorial Install security fencing.
WI General Mitchell International Alternative Fuel Vehicles.
WI L O Simenstad Municipal Various improvements.
WI Rice Lake Regional-Carl's Field Various improvements.
WI Waukesha County Various improvements.
WI Outagamie County Regional Various improvements.
WI Kenosha Regional Develop hangar area and
construct perimeter road.
WI Manitowoc County Various Improvements
WV Raleigh County Memorial Various Improvements
WV Yeager Various Improvements
WV Benedum Various Improvements
WV Tri-State/Walker-Long Field Various Improvements
WV Greenbrier Valley Various Improvements
WV Morgantown Municipal-Walter L Various Improvements
Bill Hart Field
WV Wood County/Gill Robb Wilson Various Improvements
Field
WV Mercer County Various Improvements
WV Upshur County Regional Various Improvements
WV Elkins-Randolph County-Jennings Various Improvements
Randolph Field
WV Fairmont Municipal Various Improvements
WV Logan County Various Improvements
WV Eastern WV Regional/Shephard Various Improvements
Field
WV Marshall County Various Improvements
WV Grant County Various Improvements
WV Philippi-Barbour County Various Improvements
Regional
WV Kee Field Various Improvements
WV Mason County Various Improvements
WV Jackson County Various Improvements
WV Summersville Various Improvements
WV Braxton County Various Improvements
WV Welch Municipal Various Improvements
WV Wheeling-Ohio County Various Improvements
WV Mingo County Various Improvements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letters of Intent.--Congress authorized FAA to use letters
of intent [LOI's] to fund multiyear airport improvement
projects that will significantly enhance systemwide airport
capacity. FAA is also to consider a project's benefits and
costs in determining whether to approve it for AIP funding. FAA
adopted a policy of committing to LOI's no more than roughly 50
percent of forecasted discretionary funds allocated for
capacity, safety, security, and noise projects. The Committee
viewed this policy as reasonable because it gave FAA the
flexibility to fund other worthy projects that do not fall
under a LOI. Both FAA and airport authorities have found
letters of intent helpful in planning and funding airport
development.
In addition, applications are pending for capacity
enhancement projects which would, if constructed, significantly
reduce congestion and delay. These projects require multiyear
funding commitments. The Committee recommends that the FAA
enter into letters of intent for multiyear funding of such
capacity enhancement projects.
Current letters of intent assume the following grant
allocations for fiscal year 2005:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska: Ted Stevens Anchorage International............. $12,362,000
California: Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International..... 3,843,000
Colorado: Denver International.......................... 3,250,000
Florida:
Southwest Florida International..................... 4,000,000
Miami International................................. 8,000,000
Orlando International............................... 7,360,000
Georgia: The William B. Hartsfield Atlanta International 20,368,000
Illinois:
Central Illinois Regional Airport................... 4,872,000
Chicago Midway International........................ 12,000,000
Indiana: Indianapolis International..................... 15,000,000
Kentucky: Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International.... 19,153,000
Maryland:
Baltimore-Washington International.................. 7,748,000
Hagerstown Regional-Richard A. Henson Field......... 8,000,000
Michigan: Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County............. 18,790,000
Minnesota: Minneapolis-St Paul International/World- 8,000,000
Chamberlain............................................
Missouri:
Springfield-Branson Regional........................ 5,400,000
Lambert-St Louis International...................... 17,789,000
North Carolina: Piedmont Triad International............ 12,900,000
Nebraska: Eppley Airfield............................... 1,300,000
New Hampshire: Manchester............................... 5,144,000
Ohio:
Cleveland Hopkins International..................... 10,211,000
Port Columbus International......................... 4,000,000
Pennsylvania: Harrisburg International.................. 6,660,000
Rhode Island: Theodore Francis Green State.............. 1,100,000
Tennessee: Memphis International........................ 6,149,000
Texas:
Dallas/Fort Worth International..................... 5,692,000
George Bush Intercontinental........................ 17,500,000
Utah: Salt Lake City International...................... 7,000,000
Washington: Seattle-Tacoma International................ 25,504,000
---------------
Total............................................. 279,095,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger Facility Charges.--The Committee notes that a
sizable alternative source of funding is available to airports
in the form of passenger facility charges [PFC's]. The first
PFC charge began for airline tickets issued on June 1, 1992.
DOT data shows that as of December 31, 2002, 341 airports were
approved to collect PFC's in the amount of $43,000,000,000.
During calendar year 2003, airports collected $2,014,991,244 in
PFC charges, and $2,045,000,000 is estimated to be collected in
calendar year 2004. Of the airports collecting PFC's,
approximately one-fifth collected about 90 percent of the
total, and all of these are either large or medium hub
airports. The first collections at the new $4.50 PFC level
began on April 1, 2001, at 31 airports. As of December 31,
2003, 200 airports have been approved to collect at the PFC
level of $4.50. Eventually, the funding to airports from the 50
percent nominal increase in authorized passenger facility
charges will result in dramatically increased resources for
airport improvements, expansions, and enhancements.
Runway Incursion Prevention Systems and Devices.--The bill
includes a provision that allows funds for grants-in-aid to
airports to be used by airports to procure and install runway
incursion prevention systems and devises.
Explosive Detection System [EDS] Installation.--The
accompanying bill retains language to prohibit funding under
this limitation to be used for modifications to airports that
are necessary to install bulk explosive detection systems.
Funding for such modifications is now provided by the
Department of Homeland Security.
Administration.--The accompanying bill provides $68,802,000
for administration of the airport program from within the
overall limitation on obligations. The Committee recommendation
fully funds the request for global aviation safety and
strategic management pilot programs and limits funding for e-
grant data transfer systems to $500,000.
Small Community Air Service Development Program.--The
Committee includes $20,000,000, within the overall limitation
on obligations for grants-in-aid to airports, for the small
community air service development program. This is the same
amount as the level provided in fiscal year 2004. The program
is designed to improve air service to underutilized airports in
small and rural communities. The total number of communities or
groups of communities that can participate in the program is
limited to no more than 4 from any one State and no more than
40 in any fiscal year. The program gives priority to
communities that have high air fares, will contribute a local
share of the cost, will establish a public-private partnership
to facilitate airline service, where assistance will provide
benefits to a broad segment of the traveling public, and where
the assistance will be used in a timely fashion.
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
Rescission, 2004........................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ -$265,000,000
The Committee recommends a rescission of contract
authorization of $265,000,000. Section 48112 of title 49,
United States Code, stipulates that additional contract
authorization for the grants-in-aid program is automatically
made available in an amount equal to the difference between the
appropriated level for the facilities and equipment program and
the authorized amount for the same fiscal year. In fiscal year
2004, $265,000,000 was made available pursuant to section
48112. However, such funds exceed the obligation limitation for
that fiscal year and are therefore available for rescission.
This recommendation will have no programmatic impact on the
grants-in-aid program.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
Section 101 provides airports the authority to transfer
certain instrument landing systems to the Federal Aviation
Administration.
Section 102 limits the number of technical staff years at
the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to no more
than 350 in fiscal year 2005.
Section 103 prohibits funds in this Act to be used to adopt
guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to provide
the Federal Aviation Administration ``without cost'' buildings,
maintenance, or space for FAA services. The prohibition does
not apply to negotiations between FAA and airport sponsors
concerning ``below market'' rates for such services or to grant
assurances that require airport sponsors to provide land
without cost to the FAA for air traffic control facilities.
Section 104 authorizes the Federal Aviation Administration
to use funds from airport sponsors, including the airport's
``Grants-in-Aid for Airports'' entitlement funds, for the
hiring of additional staff or for obtaining services of
consultants for the purpose of facilitating environmental
activities related to airport projects that add critical
airport capacity to the national air transportation system.
Section 105 extends the terms and conditions of the
aviation insurance program, commonly known as ``war risk
insurance,'' and air carrier liability for third party claims
arising out of acts of terrorism from December 31, 2004 to
December 31, 2005.
Federal Highway Administration
The principal mission of the Federal Highway Administration
is to, in partnership with State and local governments, foster
the development of a safe, efficient, and effective highway and
intermodal system nationwide including access to and within
National Forests, National Parks, Indian Lands and other public
lands.
Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level
of $35,834,632 would be provided for the activities of the
Federal Highway Administration in fiscal year 2005. The
following table summarizes the fiscal year 2004 program levels,
the fiscal year 2005 program request and the Committee's
recommendations:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-------------------------------- Committee
Program 2004 program 2005 budget recommendation
level estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal-aid highways limitation................................. \1\ 33,643,326 33,643,326 34,900,000
Limitation on administrative expenses....................... \2\ (335,612) (349,594) (349,594)
Exempt Federal-aid obligations.................................. 1,195,139 834,632 834,632
Appalachian Development Highway System.......................... \3\ 124,263 .............. 100,000
Miscellaneous Highway Trust Fund................................ \4\ 49,705 .............. ..............
Miscellaneous Appropriations.................................... \5\ 3,479 .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... (35,351,524) (34,827,552) 35,834,632
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects $199,640,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect
$2,578,204 reduction per Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Reflects $1,992,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect
$1,997,000 reduction per Division F, section 517 of public law 108-199.
\3\ Reflects $738,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
\4\ Reflects $295,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
\5\ Reflects $21,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $335,612,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 349,594,000
Committee recommendation................................ 349,594,000
\1\ Reflects $1,992,000 rescission pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect $1,997,000 reduction per
Division F, section 517 of public law 108-199.
The limitation on administrative expenses controls spending
for virtually all the salaries and expenses of the Federal
Highway Administration. The Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century changed the funding source for the highway
research accounts from the administrative takedown of the
Federal-Aid Highway Program to individual contract authority
provisions. The Committee recommends a limitation of
$349,594,000.
The following table reflects the fiscal year 2004 level,
the 2005 level requested by the administration, and the
Committee's recommendation:
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
---------------------------------- Committee
Program 2005 budget recommendation
2004 level estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Expenses:
Salaries and benefits.................................... 237,450 246,235 246,235
Travel................................................... 9,577 12,757 12,757
Transportation........................................... 470 470 470
GSA rent................................................. 25,598 25,708 25,708
Communications, rent, and utilities...................... 9,712 10,894 10,894
Printing................................................. 1,428 2,454 2,454
Supplies................................................. 1,988 2,500 2,500
Equipment................................................ 5,702 5,026 5,026
Other.................................................... 43,687 43,550 43,550
--------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................. 335,612 349,594 349,594
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,992,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect
reduction of $1,997,000 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
Rail-Highway Crossing.--Title 23 United States Code,
Section 130(d) requires each State to conduct and
systematically maintain a survey of all highways to identify
those railroad crossings which may require separation,
relocation, or protective devices, and establish and maintain a
schedule of projects for this purpose.
In an effort to assist Congress in allocating scarce
Federal funds, the Committee directs the Federal Highway
Administration [FHWA] to submit a report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than March 31,
2005. The report shall contain the schedule of State projects
required by 23 U.S.C. 130(d) related to the installation of
protective devices including cost, location, priority status
and project description.
LIMITATIONS ON ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES
Grants for the National Amber Alert Network.--On April 30,
2003, the president signed into law the PROTECT Act (Public Law
108-21), formally establishing the Federal Government's role in
the Amber Alert system. Amber Alerts use technology to
disseminate information about child abductions in a timely
manner in an effort to quickly recover kidnapped children
through utilization of an integrated response network. Amber
Alert plans are voluntary partnerships including law
enforcement agencies, highway departments, and media companies
that provide emergency alert broadcasts and utilize the
Emergency Alert System [EAS], highway messages boards,
telephone alert systems, the internet, and e-mail.
The Committee is supportive of the National Amber Alert
Network and agrees that national coordination of the many State
Amber Alert systems is essential if the network is to become a
vital law enforcement tool in child abduction cases. The
Committee has included $15,000,000 to support grants for the
National Amber Alert Network.
Delta Region Transportation Development Program.--The
Committee recommendation for additional LAE activities includes
$50,000,000 for grants pursuant to the Delta Region
Transportation Development Program. The Committee is encouraged
by this innovative approach to facilitate multistate
transportation planning and corridor development,
transportation decision-making, and expedited project delivery
for severely economically challenged areas, and directs the
agency to proceed quickly on this program. Priority
consideration is to be given to highway upgrades and
improvements on U.S. 60 from Carter County to Howell County,
Missouri; U.S. 67 Improvements from Madison County to Butler
County, Missouri; East/West corridor realignment and
reconstruction between Montgomery, Alabama and Cuba, Alabama;
widening of LA Highway 671, Jeanerette, Iberia Parish,
Louisiana; repair of the Georgie Ridge Bridge, Richland and
Morehouse Parishes, Louisiana; improvements to US 412 between
Mountain Home and Highway 101 and between Paragould and Big
Slough Ditch, Baxter, Clay, and Greene Counties, Arkansas; the
Mississippi Regional Corridors Project; and Desha County,
Arkansas.
Environmental Streamlining.--The Committee recommendation
includes $5,000,000 for Federal Highway Administration
environmental streamlining initiatives.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Limitation, 2004 \1\.................................... $33,643,326,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 33,643,326,000
Committee recommendation................................ 34,900,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $199,674,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction per Division F,
section 517 of Public Law 108-199 of $2,578,000.
The accompanying bill includes language limiting fiscal
year 2005 Federal-aid highways obligations to $34,900,000,000,
which is $1,256,674,000 more than the budget request and the
fiscal year 2004 comparable level. The following table displays
the State-by-State distribution of funds under the Committee
recommendation, the President's request and the fiscal year
2004 level.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2005 DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATION LIMITATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Fiscal Fiscal Year 2005 Fiscal Year 2005
States Year 2004 President's Committee
Distribution \1\ \3\ Budget \2\ \3\ Recommendation \2\ \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................................ $577,467,570 $611,280,766 $628,046,051
Alaska......................................... 294,287,566 324,572,483 332,240,908
Arizona........................................ 511,224,069 547,691,113 562,349,173
Arkansas....................................... 357,394,759 392,327,433 403,114,275
California..................................... 2,681,210,252 2,938,681,544 3,020,798,084
Colorado....................................... 375,270,871 413,011,467 424,524,694
Connecticut.................................... 406,335,972 441,483,072 453,109,615
Delaware....................................... 126,928,685 141,478,026 145,393,950
District of Columbia........................... 121,142,744 130,696,906 134,537,235
Florida........................................ 1,391,946,967 1,488,757,772 1,527,671,225
Georgia........................................ 1,023,684,867 1,092,873,247 1,121,936,876
Hawaii......................................... 149,717,592 160,736,786 165,165,992
Idaho.......................................... 208,200,453 223,122,371 229,120,290
Illinois....................................... 979,479,163 1,053,895,520 1,083,807,444
Indiana........................................ 635,773,030 697,633,246 716,398,310
Iowa........................................... 353,301,851 380,390,883 391,279,417
Kansas......................................... 344,026,297 370,459,121 381,083,890
Kentucky....................................... 513,084,626 543,304,650 558,373,773
Louisiana...................................... 430,260,918 480,845,267 494,218,508
Maine.......................................... 155,287,705 166,924,389 171,601,796
Maryland....................................... 488,094,759 523,210,217 537,827,200
Massachusetts.................................. 538,671,401 589,243,652 606,007,600
Michigan....................................... 897,815,769 963,557,273 989,982,309
Minnesota...................................... 403,302,576 452,636,575 465,494,025
Mississippi.................................... 343,381,286 376,487,057 387,043,288
Missouri....................................... 652,335,564 716,292,758 736,480,475
Montana........................................ 270,253,084 295,777,150 303,523,763
Nebraska....................................... 238,480,446 256,796,727 264,159,023
Nevada......................................... 211,395,813 226,696,139 232,846,161
New Hampshire.................................. 145,641,399 156,417,932 160,749,599
New Jersey..................................... 781,704,685 840,510,889 864,148,255
New Mexico..................................... 269,649,652 296,659,634 304,782,174
New York....................................... 1,449,490,153 1,555,105,225 1,598,240,499
North Carolina................................. 818,628,471 872,601,020 896,152,003
North Dakota................................... 188,358,939 207,577,455 213,379,389
Ohio........................................... 963,246,831 1,052,938,403 1,082,145,537
Oklahoma....................................... 462,796,057 498,308,858 512,583,357
Oregon......................................... 332,217,342 365,303,798 375,581,667
Pennsylvania................................... 1,396,817,738 1,480,526,093 1,522,032,494
Rhode Island................................... 172,975,997 188,897,991 194,149,844
South Carolina................................. 479,490,022 513,493,248 527,311,948
South Dakota................................... 197,300,274 217,048,937 223,056,255
Tennessee...................................... 623,571,991 674,414,731 693,048,102
Texas.......................................... 2,312,433,868 2,477,807,757 2,544,280,389
Utah........................................... 229,063,221 246,573,313 253,611,558
Vermont........................................ 133,369,431 146,421,641 150,565,010
Virginia....................................... 712,325,661 778,720,282 799,991,006
Washington..................................... 518,418,747 557,887,818 573,752,554
West Virginia.................................. 293,966,446 313,521,146 322,265,127
Wisconsin...................................... 563,831,680 604,145,665 620,350,017
Wyoming........................................ 190,846,450 216,434,506 222,579,866
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL................................. 28,915,901,710 31,262,179,952 32,122,892,000
Allocated Programs \4\......................... 4,724,846,387 2,386,146,348 2,777,108,000
----------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL.................................... 33,640,748,097 33,648,326,300 34,900,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2004 amounts are estimated pending additional action of Congress during the fiscal year. Amounts
do not include additional obligation authority provided by Chapter 4, Section 14003 of the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2005, Public Law 108-287.
\2\ Obligation limitation distributed among the States based on fiscal year 2004 distribution.
\3\ Amounts for each State include special limitation for minimum guarantee and Appalachia and exclude exempt
minimum guarantee and emergency relief.
\4\ Includes territories. Fiscal year 2004 amount includes funding for section 115 projects.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS PROGRAMS
The roads and bridges that make up our nation's highway
infrastructure are built, operated, and maintained through the
joint efforts of Federal, State, and local governments. States
have much flexibility to use Federal-aid highway funds to best
meet their individual needs and priorities, with FHWA's
assistance and oversight.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century [TEA21],
the highway, highway safety, and transit authorization through
fiscal year 2003 makes funds available in the following major
categories:
National Highway System.--The Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA] of 1991 authorized the
National Highway System [NHS], which was subsequently
established as a 163,000-mile road system by the National
Highway System Designation Act of 1995. This system serves
major population centers, intermodal transportation facilities,
international border crossings, and major destinations. It is
comprised of all interstate routes, selected urban and
principal rural arterials, defense highways, and major highway
connectors carrying up to 76 percent of commercial truck
traffic and 44 percent of all vehicle traffic. A State may
transfer up to half of its NHS funds to the Surface
Transportation program [STP] and all NHS funds with the
concurrence of the Secretary of Transportation. The Federal
share of the NHS is an 80 percent match and funds remain
available for 4 fiscal years.
Interstate Maintenance.--The 46,567-mile Dwight D.
Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways
retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program
finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and
reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges,
interchanges, and over-crossings along existing interstate
routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add capacity
other than high occupancy vehicle [HOV] and auxiliary lanes.
All remaining Federal funding to complete the initial
construction of the interstate system has been provided through
previous highway legislation. The 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.--The program
provides assistance for bridges on public roads, including a
discretionary set-aside for high cost bridges and for the
seismic retrofit of bridges. Fifty percent of a State's bridge
funds may be transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the amount
of any such transfer is deducted from the national bridge needs
used in the program's apportionment formula for the following
year.
At least 15 percent, but not more than 35 percent, of a
State's apportioned bridge funds must be spent on bridges not
on the Federal-aid system.
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.
On-road and off-road demonstration projects may be
appropriate candidates for funding under the CMAQ program. Both
sectors are critical for satisfying the purposes of the CMAQ
program, including regional emissions and verifying new mobile
source control techniques.
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.
The Committee directs that the funds allocated for this
program in this bill and in permanent law are to be derived
from the FHWA's public lands discretionary program, and not
from funds allocated to the National Park Service's regions.
Minimum Guarantee.--Under TEA21, after the computation of
funds for major Federal-aid programs, additional funds are
distributed to ensure that each State receives an additional
amount based on equity considerations. This minimum guarantee
provision under current law as extended 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,
$2,800,000,000 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.
National Corridor Planning and Border Infrastructure
Programs.--TEA21 created a national corridor planning and
development program that identifies funds for planning, design,
and construction of highway 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
outlined in legislation. The coordinated border infrastructure
program is established to improve the safe movement of people
and goods at or across the U.S./Mexico and U.S/Canada borders.
Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities.--Section 1207 of
TEA21 authorized funding for the construction of ferry boats
and ferry terminal facilities.
National Scenic Byways Program.--This program provides
funding for roads that are designated by the Secretary of
Transportation as All American Roads [AAR] or National Scenic
Byways [NSB]. These roads have outstanding scenic, historic,
cultural, natural, recreational, and archaeological qualities.
The Committee recommendation provides $26,500,000 for this
program in fiscal year 2005.
Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot
Program.--TEA21 created 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 projects. These grants may be used to
improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce
transportation externalities and the need for future
infrastructure investment, and improve transportation
efficiency and access consistent with community character.
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation.--The
Committee bill includes a rescission of $100,000,000 from this
program. However, the Committee notes that, even with this
rescission, sufficient funds will remain available to entertain
additional applications. The Committee is aware of a proposal
to use TIFIA financing to support the expansion of a fast ferry
project in the Great Lakes region. The Committee encourages the
Secretary to consider such an application should the project be
creditworthy and fully eligible for TIFIA financing.
New Mexico Muscatel Avenue Bridge Project.--Amounts made
available in fiscal year 2004 for the Muscatel Avenue bridge
project shall be available for other bridge projects in or
around the city of Carlsbad damaged by flooding.
I-15 from Utah--Salt Lake County Line to SR-92.--Amounts
made available in fiscal year 2004 for I-15 from the Utah--Salt
Lake County Line to SR-92 shall be available for I-15 Utah
County.
Market Street Bridge Pennsylvania.--Amounts made available
in fiscal year 2004 for the Market Street Bridge shall be
available for the Walnut Street Bridge in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
University of Delaware Intermodal Transportation
Facility.--Amounts made available in fiscal year 2004 for the
University of Delaware Intermodal Transportation Facility shall
be available for the Pedestrian-Bicycle Bridge at the
University of Delaware.
Pierre Rail Bypass.--Amounts made available in fiscal year
2003 for the Pierre Rail Bypass shall be available for expenses
incurred after the date of that appropriation by the city of
Pierre, South Dakota associated for the proposed bypass and for
a mitigation plan associated with the Dakota, Eastern and
Minnesota Railroad line through Pierre, South Dakota.
Alaskan Way Viaduct, Seattle, WA.--The Committee is
dismayed that the FHWA has failed to respond to the Committee's
request in last year's Committee report to review the
eligibility of the Alaskan Way Viaduct project for additional
emergency relief funds. The viaduct and the adjacent seawall
were damaged in the Nisqually earthquake in 2001. While
emergency relief funds were allocated to the viaduct for
immediate repairs needed to keep the facility open to traffic,
significantly further damage resulting from the earthquake has
become evident. The extent of this damage will require the
near-term replacement of the facility since another earthquake
of similar magnitude could easily result in a catastrophic
failure of the roadway. The Committee directs FHWA to report to
the Committee not later than December 31, 2004 on the
eligibility of the viaduct for additional emergency relief
funds, taking into account all engineering information that has
become available subsequent to the initial allocation of funds
to the facility.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(RESCISSION)
The bill rescinds $300,000,000 in contract authority
balances from the five core programs. The Committee directs
FHWA to administer the rescission by allowing each State
maximum flexibility in making these adjustments among the five
programs.
APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $124,263,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\...............................................
Committee recommendation................................ 100,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $737,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ The budget estimate requests funding under the Federal-Aid Highway
obligation limitation.
The Committee recommendation includes $100,000,000 for the
Appalachian Development Highway System [ADHS]. The recommended
amount provided is $24,263,000 less than the fiscal year 2004
comparable level. Funding for this initiative is authorized
under section 1069(y) of Public Law 102-240--the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act. The ADHS program
provides funds for the construction of the Appalachian corridor
highways in the 13 States that comprise the Appalachian region.
These highways, in many instances, are intended to replace some
of the most deficient and dangerous segments of rural roadway
in America.
LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
Limitation, 2004 \1\ \2\................................ $459,771,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \1\ .............................. 428,699,000
Committee recommendation................................ 462,500,000
\1\ Resources requested in fiscal year 2005 are assumed within the
Federal aid highway obligation limitation in the budget request for
fiscal year 2005.
\2\ Reflects $2,729,000 reduction per Division H, section 168 of Public
Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $581,000 pursuant to Division
F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The limitation controls spending for the transportation
research and technology programs of the FHWA. This limitation
includes the intelligent transportation systems, surface
transportation research, technology deployment, training and
education, and university transportation research. The
Committee recommendation provides an obligation limitation for
transportation research of $462,500,000. This limitation is
consistent with current law as extended and is the same level
appropriated in fiscal year 2004.
LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface transportation research......................... $103,000,000
Technology Deployment program........................... 50,000,000
Training and education.................................. 18,000,000
Bureau of Transportation Statistics..................... 31,000,000
ITS Standards, research, operational tests, and 110,000,000
development............................................
ITS Deployment.......................................... 124,000,000
University transportation research...................... 26,500,000
---------------
Subtotal............................................ 462,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
Within the funds provided for highway research and
development, the Committee makes the following recommendations
for the surface transportation research program:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environment, Planning & Right-of-way.................... $17,000,000
Research and Technology Program Support................. 10,000,000
International Research.................................. 400,000
Structures.............................................. 13,000,000
Safety.................................................. 11,000,000
Highway Operations...................................... 12,500,000
Asset Management........................................ 2,750,000
Pavements Research...................................... 15,750,000
Policy Research......................................... 9,200,000
Long Term Pavement Project [LTPP]....................... 10,000,000
Advanced Research....................................... 400,000
R&T; Strategic Planning/Performance Measures............. 1,000,000
---------------
Total............................................. 103,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environment, Planning, and Right of Ways.--The Committee
recommendation includes $17,000,000 for environment, planning,
and right of way research. Within the funds provided for this
research activity, the Committee has provided $1,000,000 to
continue dust and persistent particulate abatement research in
Emmonak, Alaska and $350,000 for the North Carolina University
Center for Transportation and Environment to promote
environmental awareness in the civil engineering and
traditional engineering curricula.
Research and Technology Program Support.--The Committee
recommends $10,000,000. Within the funds available for research
and technology, the Committee has provided $750,000 for the
Center on Coastal Transportation Research at the University of
South Alabama, $400,000 for NEPA training at the Pellissippi
State Community College in Tennessee, and $1,000,000 for the
University of Vermont to conduct research related to Dynamic
Transportation Modeling and Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar
[GPR] Systems.
International Research.--The Committee recommendation
includes $400,000 for international research.
Structures.--The Committee recommends $13,000,000 for
structures research. This research effort allows FHWA to reduce
deficiencies on National Highway System bridges and should
facilitate continued progress on high performance materials and
engineering applications to design, repair, retrofit, inspect,
and rehabilitate bridges. Within the funds provided for this
research activity, the Committee has provided $200,000 for the
University of Maine, to study the use of composite materials to
extend the life of ports, $250,000 to continue to support non-
destructive structural evaluation technology at the New Mexico
State University's Bridge Research Center, $200,000 for the
University of Dayton and the Ohio Department of Transportation
to develop a portable, low cost, wireless bridge inspection
system, and $500,000 for Oklahoma's Center for Structural
Control and Vibration Research for implementing an intelligent
vehicle bridge sensor system. The Committee recommendation also
has provided $500,000 to West Virginia University Constructed
Facilities Center for fire and blast resistant composite
barriers research and $250,000 for the University of Delaware's
innovative bridge research program. In addition, the Committee
continues to be concerned about the damage that alkali-silica
reactivity [ASR] causes to concrete structures and pavements
since ASR is difficult to detect in its early stages. The
Committee strongly encourages FHWA to continue its research and
deployment of lithium technologies to prevent and mitigate ASR
since advances in these lithium technologies have the potential
to help increase the durability of our transportation
infrastructure.
Safety.--The Committee recommendation provides $11,000,000
for safety research. This program develops engineering
practices, analysis tools, equipment, roadside hardware, safety
promotion and public information that will significantly
contribute to the reduction of highway fatalities and injuries.
Within the funds provided for safety, the Committee has
provided $750,000 for Mississippi State University to develop a
regional center for Transportation Safety.
Highway Operations.--The Committee recommendation provides
$12,500,000 for research activities regarding 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. Within the funds provided, the Committee has
included $400,000 for Utah State University Transportation
Center to conduct follow-on research related I-15 and
mitigation of traffic congestion, $2,000,000 for the Puget
Sound In-Vehicle Traffic Map Demonstration Initiative in
Washington State and $500,000 for the Pacific Northwest Freight
Mobility Research Program at Washington State University, the
University of Washington, and North Dakota State University.
Asset Management.--The Committee recommends $2,750,000 for
asset management research activities.
Pavements Research.--The Committee recommends $15,750,000
for highway pavement research, including work on asphalt,
Portland cement pavement research, polymer additives, and
recycled materials for the National Center for Asphalt
Technology [NCAT]. Within the funds provided, the Committee has
included $1,000,000 to the Center for Portland Cements Concrete
Pavement Technology at Iowa State University, $500,000 to fund
pilot studies in Ohio, Montana and South Carolina to test newly
developed Road Pave Map which was designed to increase road
life spans.
Policy.--The Committee recommends $9,200,000 for policy
research. Within the funds provided for this research activity,
the Committee has $750,000 for the University of Kentucky
Academy for Community Transportation Innovation planning to
continue research into methods to integrate transportation
facilities into communities in rural areas.
Advanced Research.--The Committee recommendation provides
$400,000.
R&T; Strategic Planning and Performance Measures.--The
Committee has provided $1,000,000 for research and technology
strategic planning and performance measures. The Committee
anticipates that this level of funding will be sufficient to
support planned strategic planning activities, research
outreach, and development and refinement of performance
measures, as required by the Government Performance and Results
Act [GPRA].
ITS Standards, Research, Operational Tests, Development,
and Deployment.--The Committee recommends $124,000,000 for ITS
deployment projects and $110,000,000 for ITS research and
associated activities in fiscal year 2005 to be allocated in
the following manner:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and Development................................ $52,000,000
Operational Tests....................................... 10,000,000
Evaluation/Program Policy Assessment.................... 7,000,000
Architecture and Standards.............................. 18,000,000
Program Support......................................... 11,500,000
Integration............................................. 11,500,000
ITS Deployment Incentive Program........................ 124,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $30,817,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 32,199,000
Committee recommendation................................ 31,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $183,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect a reduction of $581,000 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics [BTS], which is
charged with compiling, analyzing, and disseminating
statistical information on the Nation's transportation systems,
commenced operation in December 1992 after being established by
section 6006 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act [ISTEA] (Public Law 102-240). BTS was
reauthorized, and its role expanded, by section 5109 of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century [TEA21] (Public
Law 105-178) under which it currently operates. BTS' data
collection programs for aviation and motor carrier information
are authorized under separate legislation enacted when the
Civil Aeronautics Board [CAB] and Interstate Commerce
Commission [ICC] were terminated.
Consistent with current law, the Committee has provided
$31,000,000 for BTS, which is $1,199,000 less than the budget
request and $183,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 level. In
doing so, the Committee denies BTS' request for $4,045,000,000
in reimbursable funding from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund
to fund its air transportation activity. The Committee
maintains BTS' total full time positions at 136.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004.................................... $34,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 34,000,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,000,000,000
The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation
of $35,000,000,000. The recommended level is $1,000,000,000
more than the budget request and is necessary to pay
outstanding obligations from various highway accounts pursuant
to prior appropriations acts.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Section 110 distributes obligation authority among Federal
aid highway programs.
Section 111 credits funds received by the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics to the Federal-aid highways account.
Section 112 related to administrative take downs.
Section 113 rescinds Transportation Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act funds under section 188(A)(1) of title 23.
Section 114 amends section 115, division F, title I of
Public Law 108-199.
Section 115 clarifies eligibility of the Port of Anchorage
for certain highway programs.
Section 116 clarifies RETRAC project contingency fund for
payment of projects.
Section 117 relates to project funding in Utah.
Section 118 names the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge as the Mike
O'Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [FMCSA] was
established within the Department of Transportation through
Congress' enactment of the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act
[MCSIA] (Public Law 106-159) in December 1999. Prior to this
legislation, motor carrier safety responsibilities were under
the jurisdiction of the Federal Highway Administration.
FMCSA's primary mission is to improve the safety of
commercial vehicle operations on our Nation's highways. To
accomplish this mission, FMCSA is focused on reducing the
number and severity of large truck crashes. FMCSA is
responsible for ensuring that Mexican commercial vehicles
entering the United States operate in accordance with the North
American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] and comply with all U.S.
hazardous material and safety regulations. In addition, FMCSA
oversees compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Commercial
Regulations through increased household goods carrier
enforcement, education and outreach.
Agency resources and activities contribute to safety in
commercial vehicle operations through enforcement, including
the use of stronger enforcement measures against safety
violators; expedited safety regulation; technology innovation;
improvements in information systems; training; and improvements
to commercial driver's license testing, recordkeeping, and
sanctions. To accomplish these activities, FMCSA works closely
with Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies, the motor
carrier industry, highway safety organizations, and individual
citizens.
MCSIA and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century [TEA21] provide funding authorizations for FMCSA,
including administrative expenses, motor carrier research and
technology, the national Motor Carrier Safety Assistance
Program [MCSAP] and the Information Systems and Strategic
Safety Initiatives [ISSSI] program. FMCSA's scope was expanded
by the U.S.A. Patriot Act, which created new and enhanced
security measures. In addition, the Appropriations Acts since
fiscal year 2002 have included funding for border enforcement
and safety related activities associated with implementation of
the North American Free Trade Agreement requirement that
Mexican long-haul shippers be allowed to operate within the
United States subject to the same safety and environmental
requirements placed on American commercial carriers.
For fiscal year 2005, it is necessary to reauthorize those
FMCSA programs contained in TEA21 and MCSIA. The budget request
reflects the administration's reauthorization proposal for a
new account structure for FMCSA that consolidates the current
programs into two distinct accounts: Motor Carrier Safety
Operations and Programs and Motor Carrier Safety Grants. As in
fiscal year 2004, the Committee has followed the program
structure found in current law for FMCSA and assumes funding
levels as if authorized through the end of fiscal year 2005.
The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2003 eliminated
the takedown and instead authorized a line item appropriation
for this account.
The Committee recommends a total of $450,000,000 for FMCSA
in fiscal year 2005, which is $5,450,000 less than the
requested amount and $21,589,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
level. The Committee provides this funding with the expectation
that Congress will soon act to provide sufficient contract
authority to reflect this amount.
MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY
(LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $175,031,000
Budget estimate, 2005 (limitation) \2\..................................
Committee recommendation................................ 260,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,039,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ No funding requested under this account for fiscal year 2005.
The motor carrier safety account provides salaries,
expenses, research, and safety program funding for FMCSA. The
Committee has provided a limitation on administrative expenses
of $260,000,000 for the Motor Carrier Safety Account, which is
$5,450,000 less than the requested amount and $83,930,000 more
than the annual authorized level of $176,070,000.
OPERATING EXPENSES
The Committee provides $141,064,000 for FMCSA's operating
expenses. Within this amount the Committee provides the
following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operating Expenses.............................. $93,494,000
Border Operating Expenses............................... 31,735,000
Administrative Infrastructure Completion................ 8,000,000
Household Goods Enforcement............................. 2,000,000
Reviews of Conditional Carriers......................... 2,000,000
Working Capital Fund Desktop Services................... 135,000
Non-Entrant Initiative.................................. 1,000,000
HAZMAT Permitting....................................... 2,000,000
HAZMAT Sampling......................................... 200,000
HAZMAT Routing.......................................... 500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Infrastructure Completion.--The Committee
provides a total of $8,000,000 for FMCSA's administrative
infrastructure completion initiative, which is $2,558,000 less
than the budget request and $1,041,000 more than the fiscal
year 2004 level. Based upon the justification for this funding,
the Committee is confident that this is a sufficient amount for
this effort.
Household Goods Enforcement.--The Committee provides
$2,000,000 for household goods enforcement, which is $700,000
more than the budget request and $1,085,000 more than the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee provides this
additional funding for five new safety specialists to audit
motor carriers transporting household goods. Each year FMCSA
receives approximately 5,000 complaints from consumers
regarding the practices of movers of household goods. The
Committee maintains that additional auditors are needed that
consumers are protected and that these shipments are conducted
safely.
Working Capital Fund Desktop Services.--The Committee
provides $135,000 to cover the increase in FMCSA's estimated
DOT working capital fund contribution. This is $842,000 less
than the budget request, as the Committee believes that the
amount provided for FMCSA's information management program is
sufficient for this balance.
Safety Enforcement Activities.--The Committee believes that
FMCSA should revisit the effectiveness of its safety
enforcement activities. Beginning in the late 1990's, in
response to pointed congressional criticism over lax
enforcement and in response to the concerns raised by the
United States Government Accountability Office [GAO] and the
DOT Office of Inspector General [OIG], FMCSA indicated a
willingness to increase both the amount of effort devoted to
enforcement against carriers and the severity of action when
safety problems are found. After having given FMCSA ample time
to implement this new resolve and to demonstrate results, the
Committee believes that an independent review is both warranted
and timely. Therefore, the Committee requests that GAO assess
the agency's safety enforcement actions as a means of
increasing large commercial truck safety.
PROGRAM EXPENSES
The Committee provides $118,936,000 for FMCSA's program
expenses. Within this amount the Committee provides the
following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal New Entrant Program............................. $4,700,000
State New Entrant Grants................................ 28,711,000
Research & Technology................................... 10,791,000
Regulatory Development.................................. 11,143,000
Outreach & Education.................................... 4,513,000
Information Management Program.......................... 15,300,000
24-Hour Telephone Hotline............................... 378,000
Crash Data Collection................................... 7,400,000
Border Enforcement Grants............................... 33,000,000
Commercial Drivers License Improvement Grants........... 3,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal New Entrant Program.--The administration's budget
request proposes a total of $33,411,000 for the new entrant
program, which includes $16,411,000 for the Federal share of
the Program and $17,000,000 for the State share. The Committee
believes that a greater proportion of the total request should
be provided to the States and that FMCSA's role should focus on
overseeing this program and managing third party auditors as
they conduct reviews of new entrants in those States that do
not fully participate in this activity. Accordingly, the
Committee provides $4,700,000 for the Federal new entrant
program, which is $11,711,000 below the budget request and
$1,200,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The
Committee has provided a corresponding $11,711,000 increase in
State new entrant program grant funding in order to maintain
the balance that was struck in fiscal year 2004 and to continue
effective State participation in the program.
More than 40 States have submitted applications for fiscal
year 2004 new entrant program funding and few States expect to
use third party contractors to conduct these audits. The
Committee therefore denies FMCSA's request for 20 additional
FTEs for program management, review, and approval. The
Committee instead provides 5 FTEs to conduct follow-up
compliance reviews of new entrants. Sufficient funds are also
provided to allow for the annualization of the 5.5 FTEs
initially funded in fiscal year 2004.
State New Entrant Grants.--Because the Committee believes
that State officials and MCSAP program managers need the
certainty of Federal support in order to properly incentivize
their permanent participation in the new entrant program, the
Committee has provided $28,711,000 for State New Entrant
Grants, which is $11,711,000 greater than the requested amount
and $3,811,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
New Entrant Safety Audits.--The Committee is concerned that
the new entrant safety audit program is being conducted as an
education and outreach initiative rather than an enforcement
program. Consequently, within 90 days of enactment of this Act,
FMCSA is directed to submit to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations a letter that explains the audit procedure
improvements the agency's plans to implement in order to
maximize the program's safety benefits and to enhance carrier
compliance. The Committee expects that FMCSA will evaluate and
consider adopting each of the following options: (1) specifying
to its investigators and State personnel that criteria that
would trigger an enforcement action should apply equally to new
entrants as well as to other carriers; (2) collecting
sufficient data, whenever possible, that could lead to the
assignment of a safety rating as a result of a new entrant
audit; and (3) selecting new entrants to be audited based on
risk and inspection data. This letter should detail which, if
any, of these options are being implemented and the reasons for
any that are not.
Federally Conducted Compliance Reviews.--The Committee is
concerned that the number of federally conducted compliance
reviews and enforcement actions has decreased significantly
since the new entrant program commenced and directs FMCSA to
ensure that it reverses this trend consistent with the
objectives and goals of MCSIA. The Committee also directs FMCSA
to work closely with the States to promote their continued
participation in a vigorous compliance review program. In order
to monitor its progress, the Committee directs FMCSA to report
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the
number of completed compliance reviews and new extrant safety
audits with the agency's fiscal year 2006 budget request.
Research and Technology.--The Committee provides
$10,791,000 for FMCSA's Research and Technology [R&T;]
activities, consistent with the requested amount and $3,832,000
more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Within this
amount, funds are provided for the testing and evaluation of
both stationary and mobile radiation detection devices.
A significant volume of anecdotal evidence indicates that
truck driver history and past violations are reliable
predictors of future accidents and safety violations.
Unfortunately, there is a dearth of scientific research
analyzing the potential correlation between these factors. The
Committee therefore provides $200,000 within R&T; for FMCSA to
partner with industry to study this relationship and develop
appropriate enforcement strategies that will reduce the
likelihood of future safety violations and accidents.
As in previous fiscal years, R&T; funds are intended to
remain available for obligation for a period of 3 years.
Outreach and Education.--The Committee provides $4,513,000
for FMCSA's outreach and education Program [O&E;], which is
$1,000,000 more than the requested amount and $4,264,000 more
than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
This amount reflects a decrease of $1,000,000 from the
amount requested for household goods outreach and education,
which is partially offset by the provided increase in funding
for Household Goods Enforcement. The Committee believes that
these amounts represent a better balance in FMCSA Household
Goods efforts.
Approximately 79 percent of fatalities resulting from
crashes involving large trucks are occupants of other vehicles.
Preliminary data from the large truck crash causation study
[LTCCS] indicate an important role that noncommercial drivers
play in crashes involving large trucks. In order for FMCSA's
safety program to be a truly performance-based effort, it is
necessary that the agency take a balanced approach in
addressing the key causal or contributing factors adversely
affecting commercial motor vehicle safety. To accomplish this
objective, the Committee provides $2,000,000 under O&E; to
support a public outreach and evaluation program targeted to
reduce the number and severity of commercial/passenger vehicle
crashes. Working closely with the Commercial Vehicle Safety
Alliance [CVSA] and NHTSA, FMCSA should use these funds to
ensure that effective and targeted public outreach efforts are
made available as soon as possible to bolster its comprehensive
enforcement efforts.
In particular, FMCSA should use these additional funds to
develop and test targeted safety O&E; initatives that are
designed to change the behavior of both commercial and
passenger vehicle drivers. FMCSA, drawing upon the expertise
and experience of NHTSA, should undertake efforts to develop
and distribute targeted media messages and media outreach tool
kits, solicit donated multimedia ad space, and conduct market
research to guide communications outreach, and enhance driver
training manuals and tests. In doing so, FMCSA should pay
particular attention to improved messages that would reduce the
concerns noted in the LTCCS. FMCSA should ensure that the
knowledge acquired as a result of the LTCCS is effectively used
to develop and test improved outreach and enforcement
countermeasures to reduce commercial and passenger vehicle
interactions. These efforts could include programs to enhance
driver awareness, improve driver decisions, increase driver
control, or reduce problems encountered during turning at or
crossing intersections. The Committee directs FMCSA to report
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on its
planned use for these additional funds in this regard within
180 days after enactment of this Act.
Information Management Program.--The Committee provides
$15,300,000 for FMCSA's information management program [IMP],
which is $3,274,000 less than the budget request and $3,527,000
more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Within this
amount, the Committee provides the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Evaluation Initiatives.......................... $2,000,000
IT Strategic Improvement................................ 6,300,000
IT Infrastructure....................................... 2,000,000
Field Support Systems................................... 4,000,000
Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement System 1,000,000
Improvements...........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee does not provide any funding for FMCSA to
assume the collection and analysis of information submitted
under Form M from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics
[BTS]. The Committee questions whether this function is
necessary for FMCSA to carry out its mission and believes that
these activities should remain within the province of the BTS,
which receives sufficient funding to continue these activities.
Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement System.--The Motor
Carrier Safety Status Measurement System [SafeStat] is FMCSA's
data-driven system that determines the current relative safety
status of individual motor carriers based upon analysis in four
areas--accidents, driver violations, vehicle violations and
safety management record--and by which FMCSA selects carriers
for on-site compliance reviews. In a report released in
February 2004, the DOT Inspector General [OIG] identified a
number of SafeStat deficiencies, particularly concerning the
timeliness, quality and accuracy of commercial motor vehicle
crash data used, and made recommendations for improvement. The
Committee therefore directs FMCSA to use no less than
$1,000,000 of the provided IMP funds to establish and implement
data quality control systems and procedures to prevent
incorrect or duplicative data from entering the system, as well
as procedures to provide timely correction of inaccurate safety
data regarding a motor carrier's operations. The Committee also
directs FMCSA to use these funds to correct deficiencies in the
SafeStat methodology, particularly those deficiencies related
to the use of motor carrier ``power units'' in the accident
evaluation area. This system revalidation should be directed
toward ensuring that FMCSA properly targets potentially non-
compliant and potentially unsafe motor carriers.
The Committee understands that FMCSA has removed certain
information from its SafeStat Internet site until data quality
issues are resolved. The Committee expects that future funding
requests from FMCSA will identify the scope and success of
FMCSA's actions to improve data quality, and also identify
milestones for resolving the data quality problems raised by
the OIG.
Commercial Vehicle Analysis Reporting System.--The
Commercial Vehicle Analysis Reporting System [CVARS] is a joint
effort between FMCSA and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration to provide grant funding to the States in order
to improve the collection and reporting of all truck and bus
crash-related data into the motor carrier management
information system. The Committee provides $7,400,000 for
FMCSA's CVARS activities, which is consistent with the
requested amount and $2,429,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level.
A continuing concern in the safety community is the quality
of information that FMCSA uses to make its decisions. For
example, GAO pointed out in July 2000 that FMCSA had adopted a
safety action plan without the underlying data to ascertain the
extent to which the initiatives in the Plan were likely to
contribute to improved safety. As noted above, the OIG recently
reported that SafeStat, FMCSA's primary tool for targeting
carriers for safety reviews, needs to be revalidated.
Similarly, the Committee is concerned that many States have not
yet received CVARS grant funding to improve their data
reporting, and question whether all of the States that have
received CVARS funds have efficiently allocated these resources
in a timely manner. Therefore, the Committee requests GAO to
perform an audit of the progress that FMCSA has made in
fulfilling its safety information needs. This audit should
include--but should not be limited to--assessing the benefits
that have been obtained from the CVARS program and what might
be done to improve the effectiveness of the program. The
requested analysis should consider ways that NHTSA and FMCSA
might maximize the results of this investment and how the CVARS
program could be better targeted to address the concerns raised
in the OIG's February 2004 SafeStat report.
Border Enforcement Program.--The North American Free Trade
Agreement [NAFTA] set forth a schedule for implementation of
its trucking provisions that would have opened the border
States to cross-border trucking competition on December 17,
1995, and all of North America on January 1, 2000. However, the
previous Administration halted implementation of these
provisions and DOT has announced that until safety concerns
regarding Mexican trucks have been resolved, the trucks would
continue to be restricted to the commercial zone adjacent the
border. In the fiscal year 2002 Department of Transportation
Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-87) Congress addressed these
concerns by setting 22 safety-related preconditions for opening
the border to long-haul Mexican trucks. On November 27, 2002,
the Secretary of Transportation announced that all the
preconditions had been met and directed FMCSA to begin to open
the border. However, on January 16, 2003 the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals in Public Citizen v. Department of
Transportation delayed opening the southern border pending
completion of environmental impact statements and a Clean Air
Act conformity determination on the FMCSA's implementing
regulations.
The United States Supreme Court has since overruled the
decision of the Ninth Circuit and thus domestic long haul
operations by Mexican commercial motor carriers appear
imminent. Therefore, the Committee reiterates and underscores
the importance of FMCSA's adherence to the requirements of
Section 350 of Public Law 107-87 in order to ensure the safety
of all cross-border long haul operations and has included a
general provision continuing the cross-border safety provisions
included therein.
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee has
provided total funding of $64,735,000 for border related
programs. As requested, the Committee provides $31,735,000 for
FMCSA border operating expenses, $23,000,000 for State
operations grants to the southern border States, and
$10,000,000 for State operations grants to the northern border
States.
NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Liquidation of
contract (Limitation on
authorization) obligations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\.......... $188,879,000 $188,879,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\......... ................. .................
Committee recommendation.......... 190,000,000 190,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,121,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ No funding requested under this account for fiscal year 2005.
The FMCSA's National Motor Carrier Safety Program [NMCSP]
was authorized by TEA21 and amended by the Motor Carrier Safety
Improvement Act of 1999. This program consists of two major
areas: the motor carrier safety assistance program [MCSAP] and
the information systems and strategic safety initiatives
[ISSSI]. MCSAP provides grants and project funding to States to
develop and implement national programs for the uniform
enforcement of Federal and State rules and regulations
concerning motor safety. The major objective of this program is
to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving
commercial motor vehicles. Grants are made to qualified States
for the development of programs to enforce the Federal motor
carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations and the
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The basic program
is targeted at roadside vehicle safety inspections of both
interstate and intrastate commercial motor vehicle traffic.
ISSSI provides funds to develop and enhance data-related motor
carrier programs.
The Committee provides $190,000,000 in liquidating cash for
this program.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of
$190,000,000 for motor carrier safety grants to be distributed
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program:
Core MCSAP Grants................................... $133,350,000
Safety Performance Incentive Grants................. 7,100,000
High Priority Initiatives Grants.................... 8,450,000
Commercial Drivers License Improvement Grants....... 18,000,000
State Training and Administration................... 2,100,000
---------------
Subtotal.......................................... 169,000,000
===============
Information Systems and Strategic Safety Initiatives:
Performance and Registration Information Systems 5,000,000
Management.........................................
Motor Carrier Management Information System/Data 14,000,000
Analysis...........................................
Driver Programs (CDL Grants)........................ 1,000,000
---------------
Subtotal.......................................... 20,000,000
===============
Large Truck Crash Causation Study....................... 1,000,000
===============
Total............................................. 190,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety Performance Incentive Grants.--The Committee
provides $7,100,000 for safety performance incentive grants,
which is $3,939,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level. Before awarding any of these funds under the regulations
specified in 49 CFR 350, FMCSA is directed to allocate
$1,000,000 to leverage ongoing State and Federal efforts to
improve reported data quality, as outlined in the DOT IG's
February 2004 SafeStat report.
Commercial Drivers License Improvement Program.--The
Committee agrees with a recent management advisory issued by
the OIG that expresses concern over vulnerabilities within the
current commercial driver's license [CDL] program. In contrast
to applicants for CDLs with a hazardous material [hazmat]
endorsement, applicants for non-hazmat CDLs do not have to
demonstrate or provide proof of citizenship or legal presence.
The OIG noted that because nearly 70 percent of the 11,000,000
CDLs issued since 1989 are for the non-hazmat category, this
presents a significant loophole. The OIG management advisory
recommends that all CDL applicants demonstrate that they are
either a U.S. citizen, a permanent legal resident, or otherwise
legally present in the United States.
The Committee notes that this is not the first time that
the OIG has raised this issue. Two years ago, in response to an
audit for improving testing and licensing of commercial
drivers, FMCSA agreed with the Inspector General's
recommendation and stated that it would initiate a planned
rulemaking in October 2003. However, the Committee understands
that this rulemaking has now been pushed back until May 2005.
Because this continuing delay exposes the entire nation to an
undue increased risk, the Committee expects that there will be
no further delays in promulgating this rule and directs FMSCA
to initiate this rulemaking by the scheduled date.
The Committee is aware of various technologies available to
States to improve State CDL protection against counterfeiting.
One such technology involves the use of color-shifting pigment
that can deter as well as detect counterfeit licenses. This
technology is currently in use on the newly designed U.S.
currency and has never successfully been counterfeited. The
Committee encourages FMCSA to work with State and other
stakeholders to incorporate this technology as part of a
layered system to improve CDL security.
Large Truck Crash Causation Study.--The Committee provides
$1,000,000 for the large truck crash causation study [LTCCS]
consistent with the budget request. In providing this funding,
it is the Committee's expectation that FMCSA will utilize the
knowledge acquired from the LTCCS to develop and implement
improved outreach and enforcement measures in order to reduce
accidents involving commercial vehicles.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE E-GOV INITIATIVES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... $450,000
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\ No funding requested under this account for fiscal year 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee declines to provide the $450,000 requested
for Government-Wide E-Gov Initiatives, as it feels that FMCSA's
existing IMP resources are sufficient to absorb this expense.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
Section 130 subjects the funds in this Act to section 350
of Public Law 107-87 in order to ensure the safety of all
cross-border long haul operations conducted by Mexican-
domiciled commercial carriers.
Section 131 prohibits the use of funds in this Act to
implement or enforce any provision of the Final Rule issued on
April 16, 2003, (Docket No. FMCSA-97-2350) as it may apply to
operators of utility service vehicles and as it applies to
motion picture and television production drivers working at a
site within a 100 air mile radius of the reporting location.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2005 PROGRAM
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA]
is responsible for motor vehicle safety, highway safety
behavioral programs, and the motor vehicle information and
automobile fuel economy programs. The Federal Government's
regulatory role in motor vehicle and highway safety began in
September 1966 with the enactment of the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (codified as chapter 301 of
title 49, U.S. Code) and the Highway Safety Act of 1966
(codified as chapter 4 of title 23, U.S. Code). The National
Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 instructs the
Secretary to reduce traffic crashes and deaths and injuries
resulting from traffic crashes; establish motor vehicle safety
standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment in
interstate commerce; carry out needed safety research and
development; and expand the national driver register. The
Highway Safety Act of 1966 instructs the Secretary to increase
highway safety by providing for a coordinated national highway
safety program through financial assistance to the States.
In October 1966, these activities, originally under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, were transferred to
the Department of Transportation, to be carried out through the
National Traffic Safety Bureau. In March 1970, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA] was established
as a separate organizational entity in the Department. It
succeeded the National Highway Safety Bureau, which previously
had administered traffic and highway safety functions as an
organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration.
NHTSA's mission was expanded in October 1972 with the
enactment of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
(codified as chapters 321, 323, 325, 327, 329, and 331 of title
49, U.S. Code). This Act instructs the Secretary to establish
low-speed collision bumper standards, consumer information
activities, and odometer regulations. Three major amendments to
this Act have been enacted: (1) a December 1975 amendment
directs the Secretary to set and administer mandatory
automotive fuel economy standards; (2) an October 1984
amendment directs the Secretary to require certain passenger
motor vehicles and their major replacement parts to be marked
with identifying numbers or symbols; and (3) an October 1992
amendment directs the Secretary to set and administer
automobile content labeling requirements.
Consistent with the general guidance provided in the
report, the Committee has followed the program structure found
in TEA21 and other current laws. The Committee recommendation
of $458,300,000 provides sufficient funding for the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration to maintain current
programs and continue the mobilization and paid media
initiatives that have proven so effective in increasing safety
belt use and impaired driving awareness.
The following table summarizes the Committee
recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 Fiscal year 2005 Committee
Program enacted \1\ estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research................................... $220,420,000 $233,300,000 $228,300,000
National driver register.................................. (3,579,000) (4,000,000) (4,000,000)
Highway traffic safety grants............................. 223,673,000 456,000,000 225,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 447,672,000 689,300,000 453,300,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,774,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ ($223,999,000)
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 233,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ (228,300,000)
\1\ Reflects a reduction of $446,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199 and a reduction of $1,701,300 pursuant to Division
F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
These programs support research, demonstrations, technical
assistance, and national leadership for highway safety programs
conducted by State and local government, the private sector,
universities, research units, and various safety associations
and organizations. These programs emphasize alcohol and drug
countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law
enforcement, emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic
records and licensing, State and community traffic safety
evaluations, motorcycle riders, pedestrian and bicycle safety,
pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy driving, young and
older driver safety programs, and development of improved
accident investigation procedures.
The Committee recommends a total of $228,300,000 in new
budgetary resources which includes $72,000,000 in contract
authority and $152,300,000 under the Federal-aid highway
obligation to finance operations and research activities
eligible under title 23 U.S.C. 403. In accordance with the
budget request, the Committee has provided $4,000,000 to be
derived from the highway trust fund to maintain the National
Drivers Register.
The accompanying bill provides appropriations totaling
$228,300,000 to be distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and benefits.................................. $71,250,000
Travel................................................. 1,347,000
Operating expenses..................................... 23,749,000
Contract Programs:
Safety performance................................. 11,552,000
Safety assurance................................... 17,751,000
Highway safety..................................... 46,374,000
Research and analysis.............................. 68,624,000
General administration............................. 663,000
Grant administration reimbursement..................... -17,010,000
National Drivers Register.......................... 4,000,000
----------------
Total............................................ 228,300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATING EXPENSES
Computer Support.--The Committee feels that the equivalent
of a 100 percent rise in an account that provides no measurable
increase or benefit to continuing safety programs is excessive
given the budget limitations facing the Committee and the
highway trust fund. The Committee recommendation provides
$2,850,000 for computer support.
Workforce Planning and Development.--NHTSA established this
program in fiscal year 2001 in an effort to encourage young
professionals to enter into the fields of engineering,
research, science and technology, vehicle safety and injury.
The Committee recognizes the agency's desire to build a base
for future employment but notes that the challenges of
attrition in the transportation workforce are not unique to
NHTSA. The Committee continues to encourage that this type of
workforce planning be done throughout the entire Department of
Transportation and be coordinated by the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Administration. Accordingly, the
Committee, again, has not included the requested funding to
support the initiative.
SAFETY PERFORMANCE
Safety Standards Support.--The Committee recommends
$2,604,000 for safety standards support, which is $500,000 more
than the budget request. The Committee directs that these
additional funds be used to advance efforts to address mounting
safety challenges confronting NHTSA. These challenges include,
but are not limited to, roof crush problems, the adverse
consequences of side and frontal impacts, driver aggressivity,
and vehicle compatibility as well as occupant ejections. The
Committee requests the Administrator of NHTSA to submit a plan
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March
31, 2005, summarizing the scope of NHTSA's plan to address the
growing number of safety issues. The plan shall include the
nature of issues and what actions are being taken to address
each of the key safety challenges facing NHTSA.
New Car Assessment Program.--The Committee recommends
$7,800,000 for the New Car Assessment Program [NCAP]. Within
the funds provided the Committee recommendation includes
$200,000 to be used to accelerate purchase schedules for
vehicle testing.
highway safety programs
The Committee recommends the following adjustments to the
budget request:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupant Protection: Outreach initiatives to increase $13,400,000
seatbelt use..........................................
Impaired Driving....................................... 14,095,000
Judicial and Prosecutorial Awareness............... (1,500,000)
Target Populations................................. (1,000,000)
Peds/Bicycle........................................... 1,250,000
Highway Safety Research................................ 6,933,000
Emergency Medical Services............................. 2,271,000
Motorcycle Safety...................................... 800,000
Enforcement and Justice Services....................... 2,217,000
Records and Licensing.................................. 2,621,000
Emerging Traffic Safety Issues......................... 1,187,000
NOPUS.................................................. 1,600,000
----------------
Total, Highway Safety Programs................... 46,374,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Share the Road Safely.--NHTSA is the agency with the
primary responsibility for behavioral programs geared toward
passenger car drivers. The Committee is disappointed that NHTSA
and FMCSA have shown an inability to work together on this
important initiative. The Consolidated Omnibus Appropriations
Act of Fiscal Year 2004 provided clear direction that NHTSA is
the Agency responsible for administering this program. The bill
directs that NHTSA administer the funds and the Committee
expects the full cooperation of the relevant agencies to ensure
successful implementation of this program.
To ensure the smooth transition of full responsibility for
the Share the Road program to FMCSA in fiscal year 2006, the
Committee directs FMCSA to provide one FTE, for a 12-month
detail, to NHTSA to help oversee the program. NHTSA will
recruit and hire a full time communications/program manager at
the full performance level, with the assistance and cooperation
of FMCSA. The staffer will be housed in NHTSA's Office of
Communications and Consumer Information, and will work closely
with NHTSA's Program Development and Delivery Office and FMCSA
in the development and management of the Share the Road
demonstration effort. As an FMCSA employee, this individual
will obtain the necessary experience from the pilot program to
maintain the continuity and quality of the program when it is
returned to FMCSA to manage.
National Occupant Protection Program.--The objectives of
the occupant protection program are to increase seat belt use
and decrease the number of child occupant fatalities. The
Committee is encouraged by recent statistics showing that
safety belt use stands at a national average of 79 percent,
surpassing NHTSA's goal of 78. Statistics show that for each
percentage point increase in the national safety belt use rate
about 2.8 million more Americans are buckling up, saving an
estimated 270 additional lives and preventing 4,000 serious
injuries. In 2003, of the 31,904 passenger vehicle occupants
killed in U.S. traffic crashes, 56 percent were not wearing a
seat belt.
To continue this progress, the Committee believes that
NHTSA must be vigilant and creative in its efforts to increase
the national safety belt use rate, with particular attention to
those groups that are high risk and difficult to reach. The
Committee recommends $13,400,000 for NHTSA's occupant
protection efforts which is $1,800,000 more than the budget
request. In reviewing NHTSA's 2003 Assessment, the Committee is
especially concerned that nearly two-thirds of teen passenger
vehicle occupants (ages 16-20) who were killed in 2003 were not
wearing a seat belt, a statistic virtually unchanged from 2002.
The Committee believes that if teenagers and young adults can
be convinced to wear safety belts now they will continue to
wear a seatbelt throughout their adult lives. The Committee
directs that these additional funds be used to continue
outreach activities towards teens, minority populations and
rural populations. The Committee encourages NHTSA to: (1)
initiate and continue programs with public sector organizations
and private sector employers and insurance companies to raise
the safety belt use among the Nation's workforce; (2) develop
new strategies to reach cultural and ethnic groups with lower
seatbelt use rates; and (3) develop and evaluate the next
generation of combined public education/communication and
enforcement strategies to increase occupant protection and
determine the most effective ways to encourage and increase
booster seat use.
To supplement NHTSA's overall safety belt effort, the
Committee has included language in the Section 157 program to
continue the ``Click It or Ticket'' national public service
message program that began in fiscal year 2002.
Impaired Driving.--In August 2004, NHTSA released its most
current assessment of the 2003 data from the Fatality Analysis
Reporting System [FARS]. Of the 42,643 people who died on the
Nation's highways in 2003, 17,013 or 40 percent were alcohol-
related. This most recent FARS assessment indicates that, while
far too many people are still dying at the hands of drunk
drivers, the number of alcohol-related fatalities decreased for
the first time since 1999. This is a positive first step in
what remains a very difficult and challenging highway safety
problem. However, since alcohol-related crashes cause an
estimated 275,000 injuries and roughly $50,000,000,000 in
economic costs each year, the Committee believes that NHTSA
should commit adequate resources toward this tragic problem and
remains disappointed that the agency continues to send up
budgets that cut the funding dedicated toward the impaired
driving core program. In fiscal years 2004 and 2005, NHTSA
recommended reductions to the impaired driving account by 28
percent and 35 percent respectively. As for the FARS data, the
Committee is mystified by the large discrepancy in the overall
number of alcohol-related fatalities between the early and
current assessment of the data and believes that the State-by-
State data warrants further scrutiny and explanation.
The Committee recommends funding of $14,095,000 to support
the impaired driving program. This amount is $4,150,000 more
than the budget request. These additional funds will allow
NHTSA to continue to: (1) promote high visibility law
enforcement; (2) educate prosecutors, judges and law
enforcement regarding impaired driving and promote specialized
or enhanced court systems; (3) develop effective messages and
countermeasures to reach high risk groups; (4) encourage
widespread adoption of medical screening and brief intervention
for individuals with alcohol abuse problems; and (5) complete
NHTSA's model impaired driving records information system pilot
which will assist States in tracking repeat offenders and begin
to promote its use in more States. The additional funding will
also provide NHTSA with resources to advance the use of
standard field sobriety testing [SFST], continue to train law
enforcement to use SFST, fund the standardization of the SFST
course and study how to significantly reduce the time required
to present the course to law enforcement.
The Committee recommendation has combined NHTSA's impaired
driving and drug impaired driving programs into one program
line item, in recognition of the fact that countermeasures must
focus on the impaired driving issue with adequate attention to
both alcohol and drugs.
In addition, the Committee recommends additional funding of
$20,000,000 to support national advertising in coordination
with the annual ``You Drink & Drive. You Lose'' impaired
driving law enforcement crackdown. These funds will be derived
from the section 163 grant program.
To better understand what strategies and factors work best
to reduce alcohol fatalities and crashes, the Committee directs
the Department's Office of Inspector General to review and
compare the scope and direction of programs and activities
conducted by States with the highest and lowest rates of
alcohol-related fatalities using a 5-year average of fatality
data. The Inspector General should, at a minimum, focus on:
State and Federal resources dedicated to reducing alcohol-
impaired driving; an analysis of those expenditures; State law
enforcement efforts, including the use of sobriety checkpoints
or other high-visibility enforcement methods; law enforcement
officer training standards; and the use of paid and earned
media. The OIG shall report to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations no later than April 1, 2005.
Judicial and Prosecutorial Awareness.--The Committee has
provided $1,500,000 for Judicial and Prosecutorial Awareness to
expedite the detection, identification and tracking of hard
core drunk drivers. The Committee is aware that one of the
major factors in alcohol-related crashes is the number of
habitual drunk drivers involved in alcohol-related traffic
crashes.
The Committee directs NHTSA to work with State and local
law enforcement officials, judges, prosecutors and parole
officers to assist them in developing strategies that
specifically target the removal of habitual drunk drivers from
the road.
The Committee directs NHTSA to provide a report to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by June 1, 2005,
on the strategies developed to measure the effectiveness of
this program and NHTSA's plan to carry it out. The report shall
also include a detailed study of the effectiveness and the
costs related to the implementation of a Statewide cellular
drunk driving reporting program that provides free air time and
allows motorists with a cell phone to dial a special number
[*DUI] to report drunk drivers. The Committee is aware that at
least three States are currently providing this service to
motorists. The Committee also directs NHTSA to look at the
effectiveness of other innovative techniques employed by States
to discourage repeat offenders from drinking while driving.
Impaired Driving and Targeted Populations.--The Committee
is concerned that there continues to be certain segments of the
population that are over represented in alcohol-related motor
vehicle crashes. For example in 2002, 24 percent of drivers 15-
20 years old killed in crashes had levels of alcohol at or
above a blood alcohol level of 0.08. The Committee strongly
encourages NHTSA to aggressively pursue strategies that reduce
impaired driving among the age groups and ethnic populations
that are over-represented in alcohol-related fatalities. Within
the funds provided for NHTSA's impaired driving programs the
Committee has included $1,000,000 to increase outreach efforts
that target these populations. The Committee directs NHTSA to
notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, no
later than 90 days after enactment of this Act, detailing the
target populations, strategies, and activities that will be
utilized.
Pedestrian Safety.--The Committee has provided $1,250,000
for pedestrian and bicycle safety. Within the funds provided
under this account the Committee has included $50,000 for NHTSA
to conduct a study to identify the characteristics of vehicle-
related accidents, injuries and fatalities that involve
pedestrians on the roadside or travel lane. NHTSA's Fatality
Analysis Reporting System indicates that there were 4,749
pedestrians killed and approximately 70,000 pedestrians injured
in motor vehicle crashes in 2003.
The Committee is particularly interested in NHTSA's
countermeasure recommendations concerning the unintended
pedestrian--a driver and or passenger of a broken-down vehicle
or one involved in a previous accident afoot on the shoulder of
the roadway working on the car, pushing it, inspecting damage
to the vehicle, trading information with another driver or
simply waiting/walking on the roadside seeking assistance. The
Committee directs NHTSA to provide a report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 31, 2005, which
shall include countermeasures aimed at the unintended
pedestrian. In addition, the Committee is interested in
receiving data and recommended countermeasures on vehicle-
related accidents, injuries and fatalities involving law
enforcement and public safety officers who have exited their
vehicles and are standing alongside the roadway.
Highway Safety Research.--The Committee includes $6,933,000
for NHTSA's highway safety research program. Within the funds
provided, the Committee includes $400,000 to support the
Drivers Edge Safety Program, a non-profit program that provides
real life driver training to young drivers to combat teen
accidents and driving fatalities.
Emergency Medical Services.--The Committee recommends
$2,271,000 for emergency medical services. Within the funds
provided, the Committee includes $500,000 to support pediatric
trauma research, TraumaLink, at the Children's Hospital of
Philadelphia. There have been a number of highly publicized
cases of crash victims who were stranded for extended periods
of time because their vehicles were not easily located.
Advanced location technology associated with wireless E 9-1-1
can assist law enforcement and EMS personnel in reaching
victims quickly. The Committee has also included $500,000
within the total amount for research at the USA Center for the
study of Rural Vehicular Trauma.
The Committee is aware that national databases exist that
support police and fire services; however, there has been no
similar national repository for Emergency Medical Services
[EMS] data and no current method to easily link disparate EMS
databases to allow analysis at a local, State, and national
level. It is the Committee's understanding that NHTSA, in
cooperation with the Health Resources and Services
Administration, has funded a cooperative agreement with the
National Association of State EMS Directors to develop and
implement a National EMS Information System [NEMSIS], which is
necessary for post crash injury control. The Committee
encourages NHSTA to continue the implementation of NEMSIS which
will provide data entry and reporting capabilities at the local
and State EMS levels and a national EMS database with a
resource center to assist EMS systems in data collection and
use.
Motorcycle Safety.--The Committee provides $800,000 for
NHTSA's motorcycle safety efforts. The Committee remains
concerned that for a sixth year in a row the number of
motorcycle fatalities increased. In 2003, the number of
motorcycle fatalities has increased 12 percent. The Committee
has provided increased funding to further assist in the
implementation of the urgent and essential recommendations
included in the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety. Further,
the Committee urges NHTSA to focus on strategies to reduce the
alarming numbers of motorcyclists killed and injured in
alcohol-related crashes.
Highway Safety Oversight.--Statement of Managers
accompanying the Consolidated Omnibus Appropriations Act,
fiscal year 2004, directed NHTSA to examine its policies with
regard to the State grant programs and to submit a report to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on current
guidance provided to States on crafting effective highway
safety plans. The conference report also directed NHTSA to
examine what steps it would undertake if, in reviewing a
State's plan, NHTSA disagreed with the State's planned use of
Federal grant funds.
The Committee has reviewed NHTSA's report and finds its
proposed response to the concerns raised by the GAO to be
insufficient. The response from NHTSA proposes to perform
management reviews of individual States as infrequently as
every 3 years. While NHTSA has outlined other procedures to
provide guidance to States in its report, the Committee is
concerned about the lack of oversight NHTSA exercises with
respect to State use of Federal highway safety funds.
Alcohol-related fatalities have increased over the past
several years, however, attachment ``A'' of NHTSA's report
shows that section 402 grant expenditures for alcohol programs
decreased by more than 19 percent (from $25,300,000 to
$20,400,000) between 2000 and 2003. While NHTSA claims that
increasing seat belt use is its highest priority, section 402
expenditures for occupant protection programs declined almost 7
percent (from $21,800,000 to $20,300,000) over the same time
period. These spending patterns suggest that the priorities of
the States are markedly different from those of NHTSA.
The Committee directs NHTSA to develop uniform criteria
that hold the States accountable for the Federal dollars
provided from the grant program. The Committee expects that
this spending should be result-oriented and NHTSA should
require the States to demonstrate the nexus between the safety
goals and the plan to attain those goals.
The Committee directs NHTSA to provide an updated report on
implementation of policies to oversee State highway safety
programs by category, including expenditures of section 402
funds. The Committee also is concerned that NHTSA's policy
lacks sufficient clarity as to when a performance enhancement
plan would be required. The Committee urges NHTSA to work with
its regional offices to develop specific criteria that would
require a State to develop a performance enhancement plan. As
part of the report, the Committee directs NHTSA to provide the
number of completed management and special management reviews
along with a detailed description of any required performance
enhancement plans. The report shall be submitted to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 1, 2005. In
addition, the Committee directs NHTSA to solicit public
comments on the subject of management and oversight of
federally funded State highway safety programs. The Committee
expects NHTSA to incorporate a summary of the comments in the
updated report. The Committee has provided $50,000 in operating
expenses to complete this updated report.
RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
Safety Systems Research.--The Committee recommends
$9,818,000 for safety systems research which is $500,000 more
than the budget request. The Committee directs that $500,000 be
used to accelerate research related to the increased safety
challenges including but not limited to, rollovers, roof crush
problems, the adverse consequences of side and frontal impacts,
vehicle aggressivity and compatibility, as well as, occupant
ejections. These funds are to be used in tandem with the
increased funding provided under safety system support.
Biomechanical Research.--The Committee provides a total of
$14,475,000 for biomechanics research. The Committee's
recommendation includes necessary resources for the continued
research of the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network
program. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes
$2,000,000 to continue research related to traumatic brain and
spinal cord injuries caused by motor vehicle, motorcycle, and
bicycle accidents at the Southern Consortium for Injury
Biomechanics, and $1,000,000 to support a joint research
initiative between the University of Vermont's College of
Medicine [UVM] and Fletcher Allen Health Care that will assist
victims of automobile accidents in rural areas to determine the
capabilities and outcomes of advanced mobile telecommunications
links.
Driver/Vehicle Performance.--The Committee recommends
$3,795,000 for driver/vehicle performance research, which is
$300,000 more than the budget request. With in the funds
provided, the Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for
research and development of eye-tracking and monitoring devices
to detect driver drowsiness and fatigue. The Committee directs
that NHTSA to explore existing patented technologies for this
research in an effort to reduce accidents and injuries related
to driver drowsiness.
Driver Behavior/Simulation Research.--The Committee
recommends $3,650,000 for NHTSA's driver behavior/simulation
research efforts, which is $95,000 more than the budget
request. Within the funds provided, the Committee
recommendation includes $100,000 for the National Advanced
Driving Simulator in order to conduct research on the driving
capabilities of individuals that suffer from moderate visual
loss and whether bioptic telescopes improve their driving
performance.
Crash Avoidance Initiative.--This program will assist NHTSA
in evaluating technologies such as electronic stability control
systems, alternate braking, vision enhancement and lane
departure warnings. The Committee believes that this technology
holds potential to assist drivers in avoiding accidents. While
the Committee supports this initiative it is unable to provide
funding for the request due to budgetary limitations. The
Committee would encourage NHTSA to seek funding for this
initiative through other funding sources such as the
Intelligent Vehicle Initiative.
Fatality Analysis Reporting System.--The Committee
recommends $6,763,000 for the Fatality Analysis Reporting
System [FARS]. This represents an $850,000 increase over the
budget request. The Committee is aware that the proposed budget
for the FARS data collection for fiscal year 2005 is
insufficient to pay State FARS analysts for the entire data
collection year. As a result, NHTSA will have to lay off well
trained staff. The Committee is providing an increase of
$850,000 to the base FARS program to ensure that sufficient
funding is available.
FAST FARS.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for this
new initiative. With the FAST FARS data collection program,
NHTSA will implement a data collection system that will provide
more timely fatality data.
Examples of the need for effective instant feedback program
evaluations are (1) impaired driving (drunk & drugged driver
campaign), (2) safety belt usage (``Click It or Ticket''), and
(3) holiday period fatality statistics (Memorial Day weekend
summary fatality counts). An effective FAST FARS data
collection program will permit the agency to analyze
effectiveness more quickly, thereby improving decision making
to better utilize limited safety funding resources.
Human Occupant Computer Models.--The Committee encourages
NHTSA to work with members of the Global Human Body Models
Partnership and Consortium in developing a set of computer
models of human occupants that can be used in automotive safety
design. These models have the potential of reducing the cost of
testing and may also enable the designer to study directly the
injury potential of safety systems on the human occupant
instead of its effect on dummies. The Committee understands
that there are a number of technical challenges that need to be
addressed before virtual testing can become a functional
reality. The Committee looks forward to learning about the
results and progress of this partnership.
National Automotive Sampling System.--The Committee
provides $12,100,000 for the National Automotive Sampling
System [NASS]. The NASS General Estimates System data assists
in assessing the trend and magnitude of the crash situation in
this country, and the NASS Crashworthiness Data System provides
more in-depth and descriptive data allowing NHTSA to quantify
the relationships between the occupants and vehicles in the
real-world crash environment.
National Tire Fuel Efficiency Study.--The Committee
continues to be interested in the progress of the study that
the National Academy of Sciences has underway commissioned by
NHTSA on a national tire fuel efficiency study to consider the
relationship that low rolling resistance replacement tires have
on fuel consumption and tire wear life. The Committee would
appreciate a progress report to the Committee on Appropriations
by December 31, 2004 on the initial findings of that effort and
an anticipated schedule for completion of the study.
Tread Act Compliance.--The primary purpose of the TREAD Act
is to improve the safety of the motoring public. The Committee
is concerned that some producers of tires exported to the
United States may not comply with the early warning reporting
and future tire testing requirements of the TREAD Act.
Therefore the Committee urges NHTSA to aggressively monitor
compliance with the TREAD Act to ensure that all tire
manufacturers comply with the letter and the spirit of those
requirements that are being implemented to improve safety.
national driver register
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\ ............................... ($3,579,000)
Budget estimate, 2005................................... (4,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................ (4,000,000)
\1\ Reflects reduction of $21,240 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The National Driver Register [NDR] is a central repository
of information on individuals whose licenses to operate a motor
vehicle have been revoked, suspended, canceled, or denied. The
NDR also contains information on persons who have been
convicted of serious traffic-related violations such as driving
while impaired by alcohol or other drugs. State driver
licensing officials query the NDR when individuals apply for a
license to determine whether driving privileges have been
withdrawn by other States. Other organizations such as the
Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Railroad
Administration also use NDR license data in hiring and
certification decisions in overall U.S. transportation
operations.
The bill includes $4,000,000 for the NDR which is an
increase of $421,000 over the fiscal year 2004 authorized level
and equal to the budget request.
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $223,673,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 456,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 225,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,328,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
For fiscal year 2005, the Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century must be reauthorized. Consistent with the general
guidance provided in the report, the Committee has followed the
structure provided in TEA21 which authorizes the following
State grant programs: The section 402 State and community
formula grant program, the section 410 alcohol-impaired driving
countermeasures incentive grant program, and the section 405
occupant protection incentive grant program.
Under the Section 402 grant program, grant allocations are
determined on the basis of a statutory formula established
under 20 U.S.C. 402. Individual States use this funding in
national priority areas established by Congress which have the
greatest potential for achieving safety improvements and
reducing traffic crashes, fatalities and injuries. The section
410 alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures incentive grant
program encourages States to enact stiffer laws and implement
stronger programs to detect and remove impaired drivers from
the roads. The section 405 occupant protection program
encourages States to promote and strengthen occupant protection
initiatives.
The Committee recommends an appropriation for liquidation
of contract authorization of $225,000,000 for the payment of
obligations incurred in carrying out provisions of these grant
programs.
The Committee has continued a provision prohibiting the use
of section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or
remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for
State, local, or private buildings or structures.
limitation on obligations
The bill includes language limiting the obligations to be
incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants
programs. Separate obligation limitations are included in the
bill with the following funding allocations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 Fiscal year 2005 Committee
enacted \1\ estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and Community Formula Grants........................ $164,027,000 $396,000,000 $165,000,000
Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grants........... 39,764,000 ................ 40,000,000
Occupant protection incentive grants...................... 19,882,000 ................ 20,000,000
Section 412 State highway safety data grants.............. ................ 50,000,000 ................
Emergency Medical Services................................ ................ 10,000,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total................................................. (223,673,000) (456,000,000) (225,000,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,327,500 pursuant to section 168(b) of Public Law 108-199.
Safety Belt Usage.--While outcome data is not yet
available, the May 2004 ``Click It or Ticket'' Mobilization
built on the successful previous effort with significant law
enforcement participation from across the country and increase
use of the media. The Committee is pleased that the funding
that has been provided for the ``Click It or Ticket'' campaign
and the accompanying public safety messages continues to prove
effective in increasing usage rates but believes that NHTSA's
work in this area is not done. The Committee encourages NHTSA
to build upon its successes and continue to work with State and
local governments to further increase seat belt usage rates in
2005.
Public Safety Messages.--The bill contains a provision
(sec. 140) extending the authority for States to use traffic
safety grant funds under Section 402 to produce and place
highway safety public service messages in television, radio,
cinema, print media and on the Internet. The Committee
continues a provision that was included in previous
appropriations Acts which designated grant funds to be used for
public safety messages related to safety belt use and support
of the ``Click It or Ticket'' mobilization that is conducted
each year in May and November. In fiscal year 2004, NHTSA again
used this funding to support State high-visibility ``Click It
or Ticket'' enforcement programs and bolstered these programs
with almost $30,000,000 in targeted State and national
advertising. The fiscal years 2003 and 2004 campaign
specifically addressed young drivers who are at higher risk of
being in a car crash and less likely to use seat belts than
other age groups. As a result, in 2003 usage increased seven
percentage points among 16-24 year olds, compared to 4
percentage points in the overall population. The Committee is
encouraged by NHTSA's efforts to reach out to this and other
target populations whose seat belt usage rates are below the
national average.
The Committee has again included bill language providing
$10,000,000 from the seat belt grant program to be used
consistent with current practice and as directed by the NHTSA
Administrator for broadcast advertising to support the national
law enforcement mobilization aimed at increasing seat belt use.
Just as high visibility enforcement programs have proven so
effective in increasing seat belt use, research has also
concluded that sobriety checkpoints are highly effective in
reducing alcohol-related traffic fatalities and injuries.
NHTSA's own survey has indicated that 4 out of 5 Americans
support increased enforcement and tougher laws to protect
themselves and their families from impaired drivers.
The Committee continues to be concerned with the high
number of alcohol-related fatalities. The Committee believes
that NHTSA should continue to implement a more proactive role
in working with States to recognize and develop new and
innovative measures that target impaired drivers. For fiscal
year 2005, the Committee has continued bill language providing
$20,000,000 from the impaired driving grant program to be used
as directed by the NHTSA Administrator for broadcast
advertising to support a national law enforcement mobilization
aimed at controlling impaired driving. It is the Committee's
intent that these funds support a national mobilization and
sustained enforcement of impaired driving laws, and that NHTSA
work on this initiative with the States and non-profit safety
organizations that have been active in conducting recent
mobilizations. Further, the Committee has specified that no
less than $6,000,000 be provided to the States to ensure that
they have adequate resources for impaired driving enforcement
activities to support the mobilization and for sustained
impaired driving enforcement throughout the year. The Committee
believes that continued funding for evaluation is unnecessary
as it appears that mobilization coupled with paid advertising
is an effective deterrent.
NHTSA has set aggressive goals for achieving seat belt use
and has exceeded these goals resulting in saving countless
lives, reducing injuries, and economic costs. The Committee is
pleased with the results of this multiyear effort and directs
NHTSA to continue their successful model of high visibility
enforcement and paid media to support national law enforcement
mobilization aimed at increasing seat belt use. NHTSA has
recently undertaken a similar course of action in impaired
driving which holds promise to stimulate national action
through high visibility enforcement, including sobriety
checkpoints, saturation patrols, and paid media to support a
national law enforcement mobilization. These two mobilizations
scheduled for the peak travel times of summer, Memorial Day and
Labor Day holidays, must continue to be implemented and
evaluated to have an impact on the motoring public. The
Committee applauds NHTSA's efforts to implement sustained
impaired driving enforcement as a complement to mobilizations.
The Committee also recognizes NHTSA and the highway safety
community, including the States, law enforcement, and non-
profit safety organizations, achievement in successfully
reducing alcohol related crashes around the winter holidays,
including New Year's Eve. The impaired driving holiday
messaging and enforcement has become a routine part of the
winter celebrations, including paid and earned media messages
and heightened law enforcement activity with limited Federal
resources. The Committee awaits the pending results of last
year's combined seat belt and impaired driving messages to
assess its potential in future highway safety programs.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
Section 140 allows States to use funds provided under
section 402 of title 23, U.S.C. to produce and place highway
safety public service messages related to seat belt usage and
impaired driving. The provision allocates $10,000,000 for the
purpose of national paid media to support national safety belt
mobilizations under section 157 and a total of $20,000,000
under section 163 to include: $6,000,000 to support State
impaired driving mobilization enforcement efforts and
$14,000,000 for paid media to support national law enforcement
mobilizations on impaired driving.
Section 141 requires NHTSA to retain the lead
responsibility for developing the national share the road
safely program strategy and work with the FMCSA to ensure the
effective implementation, monitoring and evaluation of this
program.
Section 142 allows the Secretary of Transportation for
fiscal year 2005, to use the funds necessary to carry out the
provisions of section 157 of title 23.
Federal Railroad Administration
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2005 PROGRAM
The Federal Railroad Administration [FRA] became an
operating administration within the Department of
Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau of
Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, the
Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the Department
of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the Department of the
Interior. The Federal Railroad Administration is responsible
for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad
industry. Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation
[Amtrak] and other financial assistance programs to
rehabilitate and improve the railroad industry's physical
infrastructure are also administered by the Federal Railroad
Administration.
The Committee recommends $1,437,074,000 for the activities
of the Federal Railroad Administration for fiscal year 2005,
which is $348,653,000 more than the budget request and
$6,608,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
The following table summarizes the Committee
recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
----------------------------------- Committee
Program 2005 budget recommendation
2004 enacted \1\ estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety and Operations....................................... $130,053,000 $142,396,000 $139,849,000
Railroad Research and Development........................... 33,824,000 36,025,000 35,225,000
Next Generation High-Speed Rail............................. 37,179,000 10,000,000 20,000,000
Alaska Railroad Rehabilitation.............................. 24,853,000 ............... 25,000,000
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation........... 1,217,773,000 900,000,000 1,217,000,000
---------------------------------------------------
Total budgetary resources............................. 1,443,682,000 1,088,421,000 1,437,074,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $8,568,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
SAFETY AND OPERATIONS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $130,053,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 142,396,000
Committee recommendation................................ 139,849,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $772,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Safety and Operations account provides support for FRA
rail safety activities and all other administrative and
operating activities related to staff and programs.
The Committee recommends $139,849,000 for Safety and
Operations for fiscal year 2005, which is $2,547,000 less than
the budget request and $10,313,000 more than the fiscal year
2004 enacted level. Of this amount the bill specifies that,
$15,350,000 remains available until expended. The Committee
denies the requests of $91,000 for a financial analyst for the
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing program,
$300,000 for workforce planning, and $193,000 for citizen
centered government because it believes that FRA's existing
operational resources are sufficient to undertake these tasks.
Student Inspector Trainees.--In support of FRA's efforts to
gain both diversity and experience by training new railroad
inspectors, the Committee provides funding for 8 of the 16
requested positions for this new initiative.
Track Geometry Vehicle.--Recognizing the safety advantages
gained by doing so, the Committee provides funding for the
requested additional Track Geometry Vehicle. However, because
manufacturing constraints preclude this equipment from being
delivered in fiscal year 2005, the Committee provides only
$1,500,000 of the funding necessary for the vehicle's purchase.
It is the Committee's intention to provide the remaining
$1,500,000 in fiscal year 2006.
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety.--The Committee notes
that FRA has agreed with OIG recommendations to develop a means
for including Federal Transit Administration statistics in its
grade crossing accident tabulations and to identify those
States with the highest number of grade crossing accidents. In
order to ensure FRA's timely progress in implementing these
recommendations, the Committee directs FRA to report on the
status of its efforts in this regard, including expected
milestones, no later than 90 days following the enactment of
this Act.
Washington Union Station Air Rights Development Project.--
The Committee is concerned that the congressionally-directed
sale of air development rights over the rail yard at Union
Station in Washington, DC, which was to have been completed by
the end of fiscal year 2002, remains pending because of a
potential leasehold encroachment into the air rights parcel
subject to the sale. While negotiations among the affected
parties are ongoing, the Committee is troubled by the slow
progress in completing this transaction. The Committee
therefore directs FRA to work with all parties involved in
order to resolve the outstanding issues and reach a timely and
equitable solution.
RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $33,824,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 36,025,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,225,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $201,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
Railroad Research and Development provides for research in
the development of safety and performance standards for
railroads and the evaluation of their role in the Nation's
transportation infrastructure.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,225,000
for railroad research and development, which is $800,000 less
than the budget request and $1,401,000 more than the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level. Within the funds provided, $2,000,000
is for Marshall University and the University of Nebraska for
safety research programs in rail equipment, human factors,
track, and rail safety related issues.
The Committee recommends the following funding levels
within the Railroad research and development programs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Railroad System Issues.................................. $3,225,000
Human Factors........................................... 4,178,000
Rolling Stock and Components............................ 2,587,000
Track and Structures.................................... 4,125,000
Track and Train Interaction............................. 3,350,000
Train Control........................................... 950,000
Grade Crossings......................................... 1,935,000
Hazardous Materials Transportation...................... 1,000,000
Train Occupant Protection............................... 6,450,000
R&D; Facilities and Test Equipment....................... 1,425,000
NDGPS................................................... 6,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Track and Structures.--The Committee provides $4,125,000
for FRA's track and structures research efforts. Track and
structures provides for research in inspection techniques,
material and component reliability, track and structure design
and performance, and track stability data processing and
feedback. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes
$250,000 for structural integrity research utilizing fiber
reinforced recyclable thermoplastic composite shell and
discarded tire core on railroad ties at West Virginia
University's Constructed Facility Center.
Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System.--The
Committee has provided $6,000,000 for continued deployment of
the Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System network,
which is $800,000 less than the requested amount and $234,220
more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. This amount
includes $5,000,000 for maintaining existing sites and
$1,000,000 for new site installations, which the Committee
believes is sufficient for FRA's role in the continuation of
this project.
RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM
The Rail Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program
[RRIF], as established in section 7203 of the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century [TEA21], does not authorize any
direct appropriations, but it enables the Secretary of
Transportation to provide loans and loan guarantees to State
and local governments, Government-sponsored authorities and
corporations, railroads and joint ventures to acquire, improve,
or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or facilities,
including track, bridges, yards, and shops. No appropriations,
new loan guarantee commitments, nor loan repayment extensions
are proposed for fiscal year 2005.
NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $37,179,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $221,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Next Generation High-Speed Rail Technology
Demonstration Program [NGHSR] seeks to demonstrate technology
that will facilitate the incremental development of high-speed
rail passenger service that has air or road competitive door-
to-door trip times between major city pairs and reliable, high
quality, cost-effective service.
The Committee provides $20,000,000 for NGHSR, which is
$10,000,000 more than the budget request and $17,179,000 less
than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee
recommends the following funding levels within this amount:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
High-speed train control systems........................ $10,000,000
High-speed non-electric locomotives..................... 1,000,000
Grade crossing hazard mitigation/Low-cost innovative 2,000,000
technologies...........................................
Track and structures technology......................... 1,000,000
Corridor planning....................................... 4,000,000
Magnetic levitation..................................... 2,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Train Control Systems.--The Committee notes that progress
has been made on several pilot projects that are important to
demonstrating the operational and safety benefits of wider
deployment of train control system technologies on freight
railroads. The Committee encourages FRA to utilize a portion of
its train control systems funding to further the development
and testing of safety overlay train control technologies that
work in conjunction with existing methods of operation and
signal and control systems and enforce movement authorities and
track restrictions generated by those systems to protect
against the consequences of human and technology failures.
High-Speed Non-Electric Locomotive.--The Committee provides
$1,000,000 for the high-speed non-electric locomotive program
and directs FRA to submit a plan, detailing the location and
timetable for demonstrating the non-electric locomotive, within
90 days of the enactment of this Act.
Grade Crossing Hazard Mitigation/Low-cost Innovative
Technologies.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for grade
crossing hazard mitigation and low-cost innovative technology
initiatives. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes
the following allocation:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska Railroad Luminescent Grade Crossings............. $1,000,000
Vicksburg, MS Fairgrounds Street Grade Crossing 1,000,000
Mitigation.............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corridor Planning.--The Committee includes $4,000,000 for
passenger rail corridor planning. Within the funds provided,
the Committee includes the following allocations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Utah High Speed Rail Corridor Study............. $400,000
Florida High Speed Rail Corridor Study.................. 1,200,000
Gulf Coast High Speed Rail Corridor Study............... 1,000,000
Memphis Region High Speed Rail Study.................... 400,000
Spokane Region High Speed Rail Corridor Study........... 1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Magnetic Levitation Transportation.--The Committee provides
$2,000,000 for magnetic levitation activities, $1,000,000 of
which is provided for the California-Nevada Interstate Maglev
Project and $1,000,000 of which is provided for the
Pennsylvania Maglev Deployment Project.
RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING HAZARD ELIMINATIONS
Section 1103 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century [TEA21] provides $5,250,000 for the elimination of
rail-highway crossing hazards on high speed rail corridors. Of
these set-aside funds, the following allocations are made:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grade Separation of CSX/US 90 at Hamilton Boulevard, $1,000,000
Mobile, AL.............................................
Grade Separation at McCord Road, Lucas County, OH....... 1,000,000
Illinois Statewide Highway-Rail Crossing Safety Program. 500,000
Vermont Statewide Highway-Rail Crossing Safety Program.. 1,000,000
Wisconsin Railway-Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination 500,000
Project................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALASKA RAILROAD REHABILITATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $24,853,000
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 25,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $147,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Alaska Railroad was established by Congress on March
12, 1914, in order to facilitate economic development and
access to mineral deposits in the Territory of Alaska.
Completed in 1923, the railroad was part of the Department of
the Interior until the creation of the Department of
Transportation at which time the railroad became part of FRA.
On January 5, 1985, pursuant to authority delegated by the
Alaska Railroad Transfer Act of 1982, (45 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.),
FRA sold the Federal Government's interest in the Alaska
Railroad to the Alaska Railroad Corporation [ARRC], a public
corporation of the State of Alaska. Today, the ARRC provides
freight and passenger service from the ice-free ports of
Whittier, Seward and Anchorage to Fairbanks as well as Denali
National Park and military installations. Vessel and rail barge
connections are provided from Seattle, Washington and Prince
Rupert, British Columbia.
The Committee provides $25,000,000 for rail safety and
infrastructure improvements benefiting passenger and freight
operations of the Alaska Railroad.
GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,217,773,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 900,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,217,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $7,227,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation [Amtrak] is a
for-profit corporation that operates intercity passenger rail
services in 46 States and the District of Columbia, in addition
to serving as a contractor in various capacities for several
commuter rail agencies. Congress created Amtrak in the Rail
Passenger Service Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-518) in response
to private carriers' inability to profitably operate intercity
passenger rail service due a steady decline in ridership that
began in the 1920s. Thereafter, Amtrak assumed the common
carrier obligations of the private railroads in exchange for
the right to priority access of their tracks for incremental
cost.
Amtrak has operated at a deficit every single year since
its inception in 1971. This is despite generating more than
$35,000,000,000 in revenue and receiving approximately
$28,000,000,000 in Federal subsidy assistance during this time.
During this time, Amtrak has accumulated a significant backlog
of both deferred maintenance costs and capital investment while
also failing to make any substantial progress toward financial
self-sufficiency or even operational solvency.
Recently, Amtrak's annual deficits have grown from
approximately $900,000,000 during the 1990s to well over
$1,000,000,000 each year since 2001. Even with the efforts of
Amtrak's current management team to control core expenses and
institute disciplined financial controls, its most recent
strategic plan forecasts a budget deficit of over
$1,200,000,000 in fiscal year 2004, increasing to over
$1,500,000,000 by fiscal year 2009. Meanwhile, Federal grants
to Amtrak have increased from $571,000,000 in fiscal year 2000
to over $1,200,000,000 in fiscal year 2004 with projections
that this amount must increase to approximately $1,800,000,000
in fiscal year 2005 and each year through fiscal year 2009 in
order to maintain Amtrak as an ongoing viable entity.
Today, Amtrak serves less than 1 percent of America's
intercity passengers, even while its operating losses continue
to increase, its on-time performance continues to decrease and
its Federal subsidy requests spiral upward. The Committee
remains convinced that Amtrak's current operating structure is
not a sustainable business model and that Amtrak is in need of
comprehensive reform.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Resources Available to Amtrak in Fiscal Year
2005 Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Subsidy....................................... $1,217,000,000
JOBS Act Tax Credits.................................. 330,000,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 1,547,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee provides $1,217,000,000 for Amtrak, which is
$317,000,000 more than the budget request. The Committee notes
that section 636 (Railroad Revitalization and Security
Investment Credit) of the ``Jumpstart Our Business Strength Act
[JOBS]'' (S. 1637), which passed the Senate on May 11, 2004 and
is currently awaiting consideration by House and Senate
conferees, will provide an estimated $330,000,000 for Amtrak's
ongoing operations and capital investment during fiscal year
2005. The Committee believes that these combined resources,
totaling $1,547,000,000, will be sufficient to meet Amtrak's
Federal funding requirements during fiscal year 2005.
The Committee also includes bill language maintaining the
accountability measures put in place by the fiscal year 2004
Act (Public Law 108-199).
Diesel-multiple Units.--The Committee is encouraged by
Amtrak's advancement of the procurement of FRA compliant DMU
railcars for delivery early in fiscal year 2006 that will be
used for commuter rail service operated by Amtrak in Vermont,
Wisconsin, Illinois, Oklahoma, New York, Oregon, Connecticut,
Washington, and California. The Committee understands the
numerous efficiency, environmental, operational, and cost-
saving benefits that will be achieved by this procurement. This
is a positive example of a sound business decision that will
well serve Amtrak, its riders, and is the type of economically
grounded decision that the Committee encourages.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--FEDERAL RAIL ADMINISTRATION
Section 150 requires the Secretary of Transportation to
continue development and implementation of a fair competitive
bid procedure to assist states in introducing carefully managed
competition to demonstrate whether competition will provide
higher quality rail services at reasonable prices.
Section 151 clarifies that Federal funds provided to the
Alaska Railroad may only be used for railroad and related
purposes and that the right of way may be fully utilized.
Section 152 clarifies fiscal year 2004 funding for KBS
railroad improvements.
Federal Transit Administration
The Federal Transit Administration was established as a
component of the Department of Transportation by Reorganization
Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968, which transferred
most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit
Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.),
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The
missions of the Federal Transit Administration are: to assist
in the development of improved mass transportation facilities,
equipment, techniques, and methods; to encourage the planning
and establishment of urban and rural transportation services
needed for economical and desirable development; to provide
mobility for transit dependents in both metropolitan and rural
areas; to maximize the productivity and efficiency of
transportation systems; and to provide assistance to State and
local governments and their instrumentalities in financing such
services and systems.
The programs funded by the Federal Transit Administration,
as contained in TEA21 and a series of short-term extensions for
fiscal year 2004, need to be reauthorized for fiscal year 2005,
and the budget request for the Federal Transit Administration
reflects the administration's reauthorization proposal. The
budget request retains a separate account for administration
and restructures the Federal transit programs into two
accounts: Formula Grants and Research and Major Capital
Investment Grants. In addition, the budget request proposes to
consolidate funding from the general fund for the
administration account and from the Highway Trust Fund for the
proposed Formula Grants and Research account.
The Committee recommendation provides sufficient funding
and stability for the Federal Transit Administration pending
completion of the reauthorization of the surface transportation
programs. Consistent with the general guidance provided in the
report, the Committee has followed the program structure found
in current law and has resisted the temptation to prejudge
programmatic priorities and modifications that may emerge from
the reauthorization process. Nevertheless, the Committee is
concerned that the single-minded focus to increase local
flexibility and funding stability as presented in the budget
request may cause neglect to other important Federal interests
in a national transit program. The Federal interest in transit
should be--and is--greater than establishing rote entitlements
that merely redistribute trust fund revenue by formula.
Under the Committee recommendation, a total program level
of $7,758,000,000 is provided for the administrative expenses
and programs of the Federal Transit Administration for fiscal
year 2005. This funding is comprised of $993,024,000 in
appropriations from the general fund and $6,764,976,000 in
limitations on contract authority from the mass transit account
of the Highway Trust Fund.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations compared to fiscal year 2004 and the
administration's request:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program 2004 enacted \1\ 2005 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses................................ $75,055,000 $79,931,000 $78,000,000
Formula grants \2\..................................... 3,766,645,000 ................. 4,007,175,000
Formula grants and research............................ ................. 5,622,871,000 .................
University transportation research..................... 5,965,000 ................. 6,000,000
Transit planning and research.......................... 125,257,000 ................. 128,000,000
Capital investment grants \3\ \4\...................... 3,188,576,000 ................. 3,413,825,000
Major capital investment grants........................ ................. 1,563,198,000 .................
Job access and reverse commute grants \3\.............. 104,380,500 ................. 125,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ 7,265,878,000 7,266,000,000 7,758,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $43,123,000 in fiscal year 2003 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-
199.
\2\ Fiscal year 2004 reflects transfer of $49,705,000 from Formula grants to Capital investment grants.
\3\ Fiscal year 2004 reflects transfer of $19,882,000 from Job Access and Reverse Commute grants to Capital
investment grants.
\4\ Excludes transfers of unobligated balances of $4,514,482 from Job Access and Reverse Commute grants to
Capital investment grants.
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\.......... $15,010,910 $60,043,640
Budget estimate, 2005............. 79,931,000 ................
Committee recommendation.......... 9,984,000 68,016,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects total reduction of $445,000 pursuant to Division, H,
section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of
$654,519 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
Administrative Expenses funds personnel, contract
resources, information technology, space management, travel,
training, and other administrative expenses necessary to carry
out its mission to promote public transportation systems.
The accompanying bill provides a total of $78,000,000 in
new budget resources for the agency's salaries and
administrative expenses, which is comprised of an appropriation
of $9,984,000 from the general fund and a limitation on
obligations of $68,016,000 from the mass transit account of the
highway trust fund. The recommended level of funding is
$2,945,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
The specific levels of funding recommended by the Committee
are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Administrator............................ $900,000
Office of Chief Counsel................................ 4,050,000
Office of Civil Rights................................. 2,750,000
Office of Communications and Congressional Affairs..... 1,210,000
Office of Budget and Planning.......................... 6,700,000
Office of Planning..................................... 4,000,000
Office of Program Management........................... 7,120,000
Office of Research, Demonstration, and Innovation...... 4,830,000
Office of Administration............................... 6,725,000
Central Account........................................ 18,015,000
Regional Offices....................................... 19,200,000
National Transit Database.............................. 2,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Justifications.--The FTA is directed to submit its
fiscal year 2005 congressional justification for administrative
expenses by office, with material detailing salaries and
expenses, staffing increases, and programmatic initiatives of
each office.
National Transit Database.--The Committee recommendation
continues funding for the operation of the National Transit
Database in the administrative expenses account. The budget
request assumed funding for the National Transit Database to be
set aside under the proposed Formula Grants and Research
account. The Committee believes that the activities of the
database are administrative in nature and therefore provides
$2,500,000 for continued operation and maintenance of the
National Transit Database.
FORMULA GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\............ $713,565,000 $3,053,079,920
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\........... ................ ................
Committee recommendation............ 512,918,000 3,494,257,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $22,650,000 pursuant to Division, H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect FHWA flex funding
transferred to FTA.
\2\ For comparative purposes $5,622,871,000 in Trust Funds is included
in the fiscal year 2005 estimate for the proposed Formula Grants and
Research account.
Formula grants to States and local agencies funded under
this heading fall into four categories: urbanized area formula
grants; clean fuels formula grants; formula grants and loans
for special needs of elderly individuals and individuals with
disabilities; and formula grants for non-urbanized areas. In
addition, setasides 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.
The Committee recommends $4,007,175,000 for transit formula
grants. The recommended level of funding is comprised of an
appropriation of $512,918,000 from the general fund and
$3,494,257,000 from a limitation on obligations from the mass
transit account of the highway trust fund. The recommendation
is $190,825,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level
and provides approximately 5 percent growth in funding for
formula grants.
The Committee recommendation maintains the set-aside for
project oversight in current law instead of providing an
increase for program management of formula funds, as requested.
The Committee distributes, consistent with statutory set
asides, the total level of funding among the formula categories
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urbanized areas (sec, 5307).......................... $3,604,215,608
Clean fuels (sec. 5308).............................. 50,000,000
Elderly and disabled (sec. 5310)..................... 94,689,001
Nonurbanized areas (sec. 5311)....................... 251,320,391
Over-the-Road Bus Program............................ 6,950,000
Alaska railroad...................................... 4,825,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, urbanized formula
grants may be used to fund capital projects and to finance
planning and improvement costs of equipment, facilities, and
associated capital maintenance used in mass transportation. All
urbanized areas greater than 200,000 in population are
statutorily required to use 1 percent of their annual formula
grants on enhancements, which include landscaping, public art,
bicycle storage, and connections to parks.
Clean Fuels Program.--The Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century, as extended, requires that $50,000,000 be set-
aside from funds made available under the formula grants
program to fund the 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 assumes continuation of the
program for fiscal year 2005.
Over-the-Road Buses.--The Committee has included $6,950,000
in fiscal year 2005 for the over-the-road accessibility
program. These funds are intended to assist over-the-road bus
operators in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act
accessibility requirements.
The following table displays the State-by-State
distribution of the formula program funds within each of the
program categories:
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2005 APPORTIONMENTS FOR FORMULA GRANTS PROGRAMS (BY STATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 5310
Section 5307 Section 5311 Non- Elderly & Persons State Total
State Urbanized Area urbanized Area with Formula Grants
Disabilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama............................. $15,898,702 $6,990,843 $1,653,143 $24,542,688
Alaska.............................. \1\ 8,670,039 974,358 245,856 9,890,253
America Samoa....................... ................. 159,828 60,574 220,402
Arizona............................. 46,617,920 3,410,398 1,726,433 51,754,751
Arkansas............................ 8,253,732 5,056,871 1,073,452 14,384,055
California.......................... 614,884,086 10,746,168 9,939,916 635,570,170
Colorado............................ 49,350,475 3,036,059 1,209,859 53,596,393
Connecticut......................... 47,131,364 1,554,087 1,176,983 49,862,434
Delaware............................ 6,451,578 704,605 363,974 7,520,157
District of Columbia................ 72,418,262 ................. 317,906 72,736,168
Florida............................. 173,636,437 7,008,648 6,350,964 186,996,049
Georgia............................. 70,536,840 8,861,223 2,400,181 81,798,244
Guam................................ ................. 431,869 158,779 590,648
Hawaii.............................. 27,700,370 1,047,905 493,060 29,241,335
Idaho............................... 5,955,172 1,925,341 471,699 8,352,212
Illinois............................ 229,844,756 7,481,641 3,690,071 241,016,468
Indiana............................. 36,721,488 7,447,419 1,955,634 46,124,541
Iowa................................ 13,354,885 5,053,750 1,022,083 19,430,718
Kansas.............................. 10,358,179 4,130,483 919,144 15,407,806
Kentucky............................ 19,459,263 6,904,687 1,526,225 27,890,175
Louisiana........................... 30,806,655 5,393,621 1,519,637 37,719,913
Maine............................... 3,198,322 2,680,881 552,739 6,431,942
Maryland............................ 72,508,637 2,787,045 1,613,893 76,909,575
Massachusetts....................... 131,297,338 1,991,801 2,133,714 135,422,853
Michigan............................ 70,204,631 9,373,231 3,074,372 82,652,234
Minnesota........................... 44,718,372 6,159,040 1,425,777 52,303,189
Mississippi......................... 5,296,756 6,039,083 1,076,439 12,412,278
Missouri............................ 39,486,640 6,987,147 1,868,942 48,342,729
Montana............................. 2,696,343 1,863,561 396,982 4,956,886
N. Mariana Islands.................. 706,082 20,996 61,527 788,605
Nebraska............................ 8,684,724 2,527,949 619,219 11,831,892
Nevada.............................. 25,109,731 898,158 750,690 26,758,579
New Hampshire....................... 4,849,649 1,908,080 473,884 7,231,613
New Jersey.......................... 225,370,638 1,842,800 2,706,387 229,919,825
New Mexico.......................... 9,480,259 2,668,971 680,743 12,829,973
New York............................ 571,605,629 9,685,603 6,378,466 587,669,698
North Carolina...................... 38,879,660 11,963,735 2,681,178 53,524,573
North Dakota........................ 3,191,712 1,147,717 319,670 4,659,099
Ohio................................ 90,857,300 11,275,793 3,590,431 105,723,524
Oklahoma............................ 15,082,367 5,487,507 1,260,578 21,830,452
Oregon.............................. 38,047,194 4,031,974 1,170,555 43,249,723
Pennsylvania........................ 157,200,959 11,354,481 4,233,205 172,788,645
Puerto Rico......................... 44,960,403 925,975 1,461,102 47,347,480
Rhode Island........................ 9,566,380 335,329 479,283 10,380,992
South Carolina...................... 14,685,410 5,965,045 1,443,863 22,094,318
South Dakota........................ 2,452,427 1,562,992 349,627 4,365,046
Tennessee........................... 29,619,787 7,600,878 2,001,033 39,221,698
Texas............................... 205,012,213 16,894,688 5,910,386 227,817,287
Utah................................ 30,020,839 1,353,283 614,828 31,988,950
Vermont............................. 1,090,348 1,404,539 302,586 2,797,473
Virgin Islands...................... ................. 303,002 152,013 455,015
Virginia............................ 55,946,239 6,598,382 2,108,857 64,653,478
Washington.......................... 98,819,934 4,436,609 1,797,795 105,054,338
West Virginia....................... 5,170,282 3,607,969 816,085 9,594,336
Wisconsin........................... 40,883,944 7,033,496 1,644,213 49,561,653
Wyoming............................. 1,443,178 1,026,245 262,366 2,731,789
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................... 3,586,194,530 250,063,789 94,689,001 3,930,947,320
Oversight........................... 18,021,078 1,256,602 ................. 19,277,680
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 3,604,215,608 251,320,391 94,689,001 3,950,225,000
Over-the-Road Bus Program........... ................. ................. ................. 6,950,000
Clean Fuels......................... ................. ................. ................. 50,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Total................... ................. ................. ................. 4,007,175,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $4,825,700 to Alaska Railroad for improvements to passenger operations.
UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\.................... $1,193,000 $4,771,680
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\................... ............ ............
Committee recommendation.................... 768,000 5,232,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $35,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
\2\ For comparison purposes, $6,000,000 included in proposed ``Formula
Grants and Research'' account.
Section 5505 of TEA21 provides authorization for the
university transportation research program. The purpose of the
university transportation research program is to foster a
national resource and focal point for the support and conduct
of research and training concerning the transportation of
passengers and property. Funds provided under the FTA
university transportation research program are transferred to
and managed by the Research and Special Programs Administration
and combined with a transfer of funds from the Federal Highway
Administration. The transit university transportation research
program funds are statutorily available only to the following
universities: University of Minnesota and Northwestern
University. Funding is also statutorily available for awards
based on competitive applications of approved universities.
The Committee action provides $6,000,000 to continue the
university transportation research program. The recommended
funding level is comprised of an appropriation of $768,000 from
the general fund and $5,232,000 from a limitation on
obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust
fund. The Committee recommendation is the same as the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level and is consistent with the level of
funding during the authorization period covered by TEA21.
TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\ \2\.............. $25,051,000 $100,205,280
Budget estimate, 2005 \3\................. .............. ............
Committee recommendation.................. 16,384,000 111,616,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $743,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to FTA.
\3\ For comparative purposes, total program level of $190,437,000 is
request as included in proposed ``Formula Grants and Research''
account and appropriations in the ``Major Capital Investment Grants.''
This appropriation provides financial assistance to States
for statewide planning and other technical assistance
activities; local and regional planning support for
metropolitan areas and non-urban areas; research, development,
and demonstration projects; and the national transit institute.
National research and planning funds are used to partner with
the transportation industry and academic institutions to
further transit technology and increase the quality and level
of transit services.
The Committee action provides $128,000,000 for transit
planning and research. The recommended level of funding is
comprised of an appropriation of $16,384,000 from the general
fund and a limitation on obligations from the mass transit of
the highway trust fund of $111,616,000.
The accompanying bill specifies that $5,250,000 is
available for rural transportation assistance; $4,000,000 for
the National Transit Institute at Rutgers University;
$8,250,000 for transit cooperative research; $60,385,600 for
metropolitan planning; $12,614,400 for State planning; and,
$37,500,000 for the national planning and research program.
National Planning and Research.--Within the total funding
level for the national planning and research program, the
Committee recommendation includes the following activities in
the corresponding amounts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced vehicle technology concepts, University of $500,000
Kansas.................................................
Center for composite manufacturing, AL.................. 1,000,000
Chester County transit security training facility, PA... 150,000
Fischer-Tropsch clean diesel technology demonstration, 900,000
OK.....................................................
hOurCar, MN............................................. 100,000
Lehigh Carbon Community College transit first responder 100,000
training facility......................................
Low cost carbon fiber production technology, University 500,000
of Tennessee...........................................
Nanostructured catalysts for hydrogen fuel cells (CATV 1,000,000
UA)....................................................
National Bio-Terrorism Civilian Medical Response Center, 750,000
PA.....................................................
NDSU Transit Center for Small Urban Areas, ND........... 400,000
Pawtucket train depot rehabilitation initiative, RI..... 235,000
Phillipsburg to Northeastern NJ/NYC commuter rail study, 400,000
NJ.....................................................
Project Action.......................................... 3,000,000
Sitting Bull College bus facility planning, SD.......... 65,000
Southern Fuel Cell Coalition............................ 500,000
Statewide multimodal trip planner Initiative, WA........ 1,000,000
Transit access CUMTD initiative, IL..................... 500,000
Transit technology career ladder partnership training 500,000
program................................................
WVU exhaust emissions testing initiative, WV............ 1,400,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORMULA GRANTS AND RESEARCH
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Obligation limitation, 2004.............................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... $5,622,871,000
Committee recommendation................................................
As proposed in the budget, the Formula Grants and Research
would include formula grants to States and local agencies and
transit planning and research activities. Formula grants to
States and local agencies under the administration's proposal
would include the following categories: urbanized areas (49
U.S.C. sec. 5307), fixed guideway modernization, special needs
of elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities (49
U.S.C. sec. 5310), non-urbanized areas (49 U.S.C. sec. 5311),
and the New Freedom Initiative. The administration's budget
also proposes to distribute funding for Job Access and Reverse
Commute by formula instead of as a competitive program.
Finally, set-asides of formula funds are directed to: the bus
testing program, authorized under 49 U.S.C. section 5318; the
National Transit Database; a grant program for intercity bus
operations to finance Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA]
accessibility costs; and the Alaska Railroad for improvements
to its passenger operations.
The Committee does not recommend funding for formula grants
and research and has funded these activities consistent with
current law in the absence of completion of the surface
transportation reauthorization bill. On February 12, the U.S.
Senate passed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act of 2003 to reauthorize the surface
transportation programs. The Committee notes the
reauthorization Act passed by the U.S. Senate does not
consolidate current transit programs and does not change the
distribution of current discretionary and competitive programs
to formula apportionments.
TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
The liquidation cash appropriation provides for liquidation
of obligations incurred pursuant to contract authorization and
annual limitations on obligations for the highway trust fund
share of the administrative expenses, formula grants,
university transportation research, transit planning and
research, job access and reverse commute grants, and capital
investment grants.
The Committee recommends $6,764,976,000 in liquidating cash
for the administrative expenses and programs of the Federal
Transit Administration, which is $6,435,970,000 more than the
budget estimate and $952,274,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level. The recommended level is equal to limitations on
obligations included for fiscal year 2005 and is necessary to
meet the accounting principles of the highway trust fund.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General funds Trust funds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\ \2\.......... $693,385,000 $2,495,191,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \3\............. 1,234,192,000 329,006,000
Committee recommendation.............. 436,970,000 2,976,855,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $18,511,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Includes $49,705,000 transferred from Formula Grants and $19,882,000
transferred from Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants pursuant to
Public Law 108-199.
\3\ For comparative purposes, $1,563,198,000 is listed for the proposed
new Major Capital Investment Grant Account, of which $1,234,192,000
are General Funds, $329,006,000 are Trust Funds.
Section 5309 of 49 U.S.C. authorizes discretionary grants
or loans to States and local public bodies and agencies thereof
to be used in financing mass transportation investments.
Investments may include construction of new fixed guideway
systems and extensions to existing guideway systems; major bus
fleet expansions and bus facility construction; and fixed
guideway expenditures for existing systems.
The Committee action provides a level of $3,413,825,000.
Within this total, $2,976,855,000 is derived from the mass
transit account of the highway trust fund and $436,970,000 is
appropriated from the general fund.
The Committee provides that funding for capital investment
grants shall be distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bus and bus facilities.................................. $725,000,000
Fixed guideway modernization............................ 1,214,400,000
New starts.............................................. 1,474,425,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUS AND BUS FACILITIES
The Committee recommendation for bus and bus facilities
funding is $725,000,000. These funds may be used to replace,
rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment and to
construct bus-related facilities.
Limited Extensions of Discretionary Funds.--There have been
occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of
capital investment funds. These extensions are granted on a
case by case basis and, in nearly all instances, are due to
circumstances that were unforeseen by the project's sponsor.
The availability of these particular funds is intended for one
additional year, absent further congressional direction. The
Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in
fiscal year 2002 or previous Acts for the following bus and bus
facilities projects:
Norwich bus terminal and pedestrian access, CT;
East Haddam transportation vehicles and transit facilities,
CT;
Indianapolis Downtown transit facility, IN;
Lake Charles bus and bus-related facilities, LA;
Springfield Union Station intermodal facility, MA;
Blue Water Area Transportation Commission bus facilities,
MI;
Las Cruces intermodal transit facility, NM;
Oglala Sioux Tribe buses and bus facilities, SD;
Montgomery Rosa Parks bus project, AL;
State dock intermodal passenger and freight terminal bus
and bus related facilities, AL;
Statewide buses and bus facilities, KS;
Cab Care paratransit facility, MO;
Missouri Pacific Depot, MO;
Brookhaven multi-modal facility, MS;
Hattiesburg intermodal facility, MS;
Granite CNG buses and facilities, NH;
Wilkes-Barre Intermodal Transportation Center, PA;
Butler County multi-modal transfer center, PA;
Callowhill bus garage replacement, PA;
County of Lackawanna bus facility, PA;
Hershey intermodal transportation center, PA;
Monroe County park and ride, PA;
Cherry Street multi-modal facility, IN;
Memphis intermodal facility, TN; and
Southern Teton Area, WY--bus facility.
Pooled Purchase Pilot Projects.--The Committee directs the
Administrator to continue the pilot program that was authorized
by section 166 of the Transportation, Treasury, and Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004, for cooperative procurement
of major capital equipment under sections 5307, 5309, and 5311.
The Committee intends that the program be administered as
required under subsections (b) through (g) of section 166.
However, given the level of interest in this program, the
Committee believes there should be a total of five pilot
projects.
The Committee expects the Administrator to evaluate the
proposals based on the selection criteria set forth in the
announcement of the program and request for proposals (Federal
Register Notice--Vol. 69, No. 120 Page 35127, June 23, 2004).
The Committee also expects the Administrator to review
proposals expeditiously, so that the proposing party receives
notification of acceptance or denial by no later than 15 days
after the FTA receives the request for review.
Finally, the Committee directs the Secretary to submit a
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on
the results of each of the five pilot projects. Each report
should be submitted no later than 30 days after delivery of the
base order for the pilot project in question. Each report
should evaluate any savings realized through the cooperative
procurement and the benefits of incorporating cooperative
procurement, as shown by that project, into the mass transit
program as a whole.
Bus Procurement Process.--Federal, State, and local
governments spend hundreds of thousands of dollars every year
to procure transit buses and bus equipment. The Committee is
interested in ensuring that grants for bus and bus facilities
are made in a judicious manner, particularly since these
investments are funded with a Federal share of 80 percent.
There has been a rapid increase in new technology in buses
between 1980 and 1990, and an even greater increase between
1990 and 2000. The enormous number of technological options
available has led to extremely complex procurements. It has
also resulted in dramatic increases in the initial capital cost
of bus procurement.
Besides raising the cost of the procurement, exceedingly
customized bus specifications cause production problems for bus
manufacturers. Bus manufacturing is a low-margin business, so
financial difficulties due to customization are hard to absorb.
In addition to the problems for manufacturers, maintenance on
highly individualized buses can create operational issues for
transit agencies, in terms of training required as well as the
ability to find and retain maintenance staff.
Standard bus procurement guidelines--painstakingly
negotiated--do exist. However, there are numerous forces in
play, other than the sheer volume of options, that lead to
deviations from those guidelines. For example, transit agencies
often suggest that they have unique operating situations that
require deviations.
Brand loyalty is also a factor in the procurement of buses,
and can adversely affect the cost-effectiveness of
procurements. Some transit agencies specify makes and models
for components such as engines and braking systems. When a
brand name is specified, there is little or no incentive for
suppliers to negotiate on price. The resultant increased
component costs are passed through to the transit agency and
ultimately absorbed by the Federal Government.
Many transit agencies seem to have significant portions of
their fleet originating from one manufacturer. The Committee is
especially concerned that some recipients of Federal transit
assistance have steered procurements to specific manufacturers.
The Committee questions how much weight fleet stability should
receive in awarding bus contracts that are paid for
predominately from Federal transit funding.
Finally, transit agencies come under political pressure to
procure buses from a local manufacturer, regardless of whether
that manufacturer is the best choice or the lowest cost
provider.
With this in mind, the Committee directs the Office of
Inspector General of the Department of Transportation to
conduct a study of the processes used by recipients of
assistance under chapter 53, title 49, United States Code, to
procure buses. Because of the potential for irregularities
compromising the integrity of the procurement process, the
Committee believes it important to have the study carried out
by an agency with criminal investigatory powers.
The study should include, but not be limited to, the six
most recent bus procurements completed by recipients of
assistance under chapter 53, title 49, as of the date of
enactment of this Act.
The Inspector General is also directed to consider the
following cost-related issues:
--To what extent terms and conditions, including but not
limited to those regarding performance surety bonds and
liquidated damages, are themselves cost factors in
vehicle pricing;
--To what extent specifying makes and models of components
adds to vehicle costs;
--To what extent departing from the standard bus procurement
guidelines adds to vehicle costs; and
--Any other factors that the Inspector General finds may
adversely affect competition, thereby unduly driving
down the cost-effectiveness of the Federal investment.
The Committee is particularly concerned that many
recipients require performance surety bonds and liquidated
damages at levels out of proportion to likely risks to the
buyer. Therefore, in examining terms and conditions, the
Inspector General should take care to evaluate the
appropriateness of the amounts commonly required for
performance surety bonds and liquidated damages and determine
whether they unduly raise the cost of buses to be procured.
The Inspector General is also directed to examine the
extent to which recipients of assistance under chapter 53,
title 49, utilize the same manufacturer for 20 percent or more
of their fleets or steer procurements to specific
manufacturers; the reasons for doing so; and the effect this
usage has on the competitive process.
Finally, the Committee expects to receive a report of the
results of this study within 1 year of enactment of this Act.
The report should include, but not be limited to: (1) a
description of the problems in the procurement process
identified by the study and (2) recommendations to Congress
concerning actions needed to address such problems.
Hoover and Vestavia Hills, Alabama.--Funds provided in
fiscal year 2003 to the cities of Hoover and Vestavia Hills for
diesel hybrid buses shall instead be available to procure
alternative fuel buses.
Reno Bus Rapid Transit High-Capacity Articulated Buses.--
Amounts made available in fiscal year 2002 for the Reno bus
rapid transit high-capacity articulated buses shall be
available for the Reno/Sparks intermodal transportation
terminals and related joint development.
Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District Electric Bus
Investment.--Amounts made available in fiscal year 2004 for the
Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District electric bus
investment in California shall be made available to the Ventura
County Transportation Commission to fulfill the intent of this
project.
South Bend Intermodal Facility.--Amounts previously
obligated in fiscal year 1996 and fiscal year 1997 shall be
made available for the South Street Station project in South
Bend, Indiana.
Greater New Haven Transit District CNG Vehicle Project.--
Amounts made available in fiscal year 2002 for CNG vehicles for
the Greater New Haven Transit District shall be available for
alternative fuel vehicles for the GNHTD.
Jackson, Wyoming.--Funds designated for the Southern Teton
Area Rapid Transit bus facility in fiscal year 2002, shall
instead be made available to the Town of Jackson, Wyoming, for
the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses and
related equipment and the construction of bus-related
facilities.
fixed guideway modernization
The Committee recommends a total of $1,214,400,000 for the
modernization of existing rail transit systems. The Committee
action continues the practice under TEA21, as extended, to
distribute the funds by formula. The following table itemizes
the fiscal year 2005 rail modernization allocations by State:
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5309 FIXED GUIDEWAY MODERNIZATION
APPORTIONMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska.................................................. $2,115,870
Arizona................................................. 2,361,176
California.............................................. 147,724,101
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA................ 34,583,358
San Francisco-Oakland, CA........................... 66,777,607
San Diego, CA....................................... 13,574,750
San Jose, CA........................................ 13,306,474
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA........................ 3,636,184
Sacramento, CA...................................... 3,196,161
Concord, CA......................................... 7,778,640
Mission Viejo, CA................................... 1,291,472
Oxnard, CA.......................................... 1,093,925
Lancaster-Palmdale, CA.............................. 1,885,035
Thousand Oaks, CA................................... 600,495
Colorado................................................ 3,126,150
Connecticut............................................. 40,942,085
Southwestern Connecticut............................ 39,334,715
Hartford, CT........................................ 1,607,370
District of Columbia.................................... 50,261,990
Florida................................................. 18,197,629
Miami, FL........................................... 17,967,020
Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL............................ 121,469
Jacksonville, FL.................................... 109,140
Georgia................................................. 27,429,753
Hawaii.................................................. 1,150,273
Illinois................................................ 134,603,901
Chicago, IL-IN...................................... 132,435,068
Round Lake Beach-McHenry-Grayslake, IL-WI........... 2,168,833
Indiana................................................. 8,713,586
Chicago, IL-IN...................................... 7,983,380
South Bend, IN-MI................................... 730,206
Louisiana............................................... 2,855,997
Maryland................................................ 28,254,850
Baltimore Commuter Rail............................. 18,840,867
Baltimore, MD....................................... 9,413,983
Massachusetts........................................... 74,715,321
Boston, MA-NH-RI.................................... 71,063,849
Providence, RI-MA................................... 2,696,848
Worcester, MA-CT.................................... 954,624
Michigan................................................ 608,258
Minnesota............................................... 6,144,908
Missouri................................................ 4,328,750
St. Louis, MO-IL.................................... 4,297,789
Kansas City, MO-KS.................................. 30,961
New Jersey.............................................. 103,893,255
Northeastern New Jersey............................. 86,354,458
Philadelphia, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 14,566,124
Trenton, NJ......................................... 1,406,716
Atlantic City, NJ................................... 1,565,957
New York................................................ 368,538,253
New York............................................ 367,213,399
Buffalo, NY......................................... 1,324,857
Ohio.................................................... 17,826,760
Cleveland, OH....................................... 12,822,271
Dayton, OH.......................................... 5,004,489
Oregon.................................................. 4,293,510
Pennsylvania............................................ 101,222,045
Philadelphia, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 79,975,985
Pittsburgh, PA...................................... 20,496,349
Harrisburg, PA...................................... 749,711
Puerto Rico............................................. 2,310,745
Rhode Island............................................ 82,724
Tennessee............................................... 294,402
Memphis, TN-MS-AR................................... 208,532
Chattanooga, TN-GA.................................. 85,870
Texas................................................... 10,253,005
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX..................... 3,240,837
Houston, TX......................................... 7,012,168
Virginia................................................ 16,559,531
Washington, DC-VA-MD................................ 15,294,768
Virginia Beach, VA.................................. 1,264,763
Washington.............................................. 22,684,306
Wisconsin............................................... 762,866
---------------
Total Apportioned................................. 1,202,256,000
---------------
Oversight (1 percent)............................. 12,144,000
---------------
Grand Total....................................... 1,214,400,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW STARTS
The bill provides $1,474,425,000 for the new starts
program. These funds are available for major investment
studies, preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition,
project management, oversight, and construction for new systems
and extensions. Under section 3009(g) of TEA21, there is an 8-
percent statutory cap on the amount made available for
activities other than final design and construction--that is,
alternatives analysis, environmental impact statements,
preliminary engineering, major investment studies, and other
predesign and preconstruction activities.
FTA Restrictions on Funding for Non-FFGA Projects.--The
Committee is troubled by the actions taken last year by FTA to
withhold the release of appropriated funds for new start
projects that have received more than $25,000,000 in Federal
funding prior to receiving a full funding grant agreement. This
significant shift in policy is based on a reinterpretation of
the requirements of Sections 5309(e)(6), (7), and (8) of title
49 U.S.C. The Committee continues to question the timing of a
significant policy change The Committee also questions the
conclusions considering that subsection (8) was designed more
as a relief from Federal regulatory scrutiny than as a cap on
pre-project planning.
The accompanying bill continues a general provision that
rejects the FTA interpretation that once a project exceeds
$25,000,000 it is subject to FTA review and evaluation and
therefore FTA must approve it for advancement. Further, there
is no limit of $25,000,000 on alternatives analysis,
preliminary engineering, or final design, and a project seeking
more than that amount for such activities does not need an
early systems work agreement, as FTA has interpreted to be
required under subsection (g)(1). The Committee is aware that
numerous projects seeking a FFGA have significant unobligated
balances because FTA has delayed awarding these grants without
articulating any rationale. The Committee therefore directs FTA
to expeditiously release previously appropriated funds for all
new start projects identified in this and prior appropriations
acts that remain unobligated and have not been reallocated by
the Congress, upon the request of the grantee and the
satisfaction of statutory requirements.
Limited Extensions of Discretionary Funds.--There have been
occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of
capital investment funds. These extensions are granted on a
case by case basis and, in nearly all instances, are due to
circumstances that were unforeseen by the project's sponsor.
The availability of these particular funds is intended for one
additional year, absent further congressional direction. The
Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in
fiscal year 2002 or previous Acts for the following new starts
projects:
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-Schuylkill Valley Metro Project;
Johnson County, Kansas-Kansas City, Missouri I-35 Commuter
Rail Project;
Kensoha-Racine-Milwaukee Rail Extension Project;
Sioux City, Iowa Light Rail Project;
Honolulu, Hawaii Bus Rapid Transit Project;
Puget Sound, Washington RTA Sounder Commuter Rail Project;
Greater Albuquerque Mass Rail Transit Project;
Roaring Fork Valley Project;
Birmingham, Al, Transit Corridor;
Northeast Indianapolis, Indiana Downtown Corridor Project;
and
Dulles Corridor Project.
MAJOR CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004................. ................. ..............
Budget estimate, 2005................ $1,234,192,000 $329,000,000
Committee recommendation............. ................. ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The account funds planning, engineering, and construction
of new fixed guideway systems and extensions to existing
systems. Funds are also available for metropolitan and
statewide planning activities.
The Committee does not recommend funding for major capital
investment grants and instead has provided funding for the new
starts program and planning activities consistent with current
law in the absence of completion of the surface transportation
reauthorization bill. The Committee notes that the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act
of 2003, as passed by the Senate, does not follow the
programmatic or budgetary account changes envisioned by the
fiscal year 2005 budget request.
JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General fund Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................ $4,971,000 $99,410,000
Budget estimate, 2005................... .............. ..............
Committee recommendation................ 21,112,000 103,888,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects total reduction of $737,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199 and reflects transfer of $19,882,000 to
Capital investment grants.
The program makes competitive grants to qualifying
metropolitan planning organizations, local governmental
authorities, agencies, and nonprofit organizations. Grants may
not be used for planning or coordination activities.
The budget requests funding for job access grants within
the formula grants and research account.
The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the Job Access
and Reverse Commute Grants program. Of the total recommended
amount of funding, $21,112,000 is appropriated from the general
fund and $103,888,000 is a limitation on obligations from the
mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
Section 160 exempts limitations previously made available
on obligations for programs of the FTA under 49 U.S.C. 5338.
Section 161 allows funds under this Act, Federal Transit
Administration, Capital investment grants not obligated by
September 30, 2007 to be made available for other projects
under 40 U.S.C. 5309.
Section 162 allows funds appropriated before October 1,
2004, that remain available for expenditure may be transferred.
Section 163 allows funds made available for Alaska or
Hawaii ferry boats or ferry terminal facilities to be used to
construct new vessels and facilities, or to improve existing
vessels and facilities.
Section 164 allows unobligated funds for new projects under
Federal Transit Authority to be used during this fiscal year to
satisfy expenses incurred for such projects.
Section 165 expands authorization allowing cooperative
procurement of major capital equipment to five pilot projects.
Section 166 allows amounts previously made available the
Port Authority of Allegheny County for the Airport Busway/
Wabash HOV Facility project that remain unexpended to be used
to purchase buses and bus-related equipment in accordance with
49 U.S.C. 5309.
Section 167 relates to the Greater New Haven Transit
District and transfers bus project funding to the transit
research account.
Section 168 allows amounts previously made available to
Matanuska Susitna Borough for a ferry boat and ferry facilities
project to be used for the Port MacKenzie Intermodal Facility
project.
Section 169 allows Honolulu bus funds to be made available
for transit and highway projects.
Section 170 relates to funding for passenger ferry boats
for the State of Hawaii.
Section 171 directs the FTA to comply with the coordinated
development and governmental funding requirements of Section
3042 of the Federal Transit Act of 1988.
Section 172 extends the calculation of local contributions
toward the San Francisco Muni 3rd Street project.
Section 173 relates to Vermont Commuter Rail project and
transfers funding to upgrade an existing rail project.
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation [SLSDC]
is a wholly owned Government corporation established by the
Saint Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954. The SLSDC is a vital
transportation corridor for the international movement of bulk
commodities such as steel, iron, grain, and coal, serving the
North American region that makes up one-quarter of the United
States population and nearly half of the Canadian population.
The SLSDC is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and
development of the United States portion of the Saint Lawrence
Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie. The SLSDC's major
priorities include: safety, reliability, trade development, and
management accountability.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $14,315,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 15,900,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,900,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $85,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $42,006 pursuant to
Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
Appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and
revenues from non-federal sources finance the operation and
maintenance of the Seaway for which the SLSDC is responsible.
The Committee recommendation includes $15,900,000 to fund
the operations and maintenance of the SLSDC. This amount is the
same as the President's request and is $1,585,000 above the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee recommendation
provides sufficient funding for the SLSDC's highest capital
priorities. This amount will allow the start of a 4-year,
concrete replacement project that is critical to the future
operation of the two U.S. locks. The Committee recommendation
provides sufficient resources for the SLSDC to continue to
implement additional security measures for the Saint Lawrence
Seaway.
Maritime Administration
The Maritime Administration [MARAD] is responsible for
programs authorized by the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as
amended. MARAD is also responsible for programs that strengthen
the U.S. maritime industry in support of the Nation's security
and economic needs. MARAD prioritizes DOD's use of ports and
intermodal facilities during DOD mobilizations to guarantee the
smooth flow of military cargo through commercial ports. MARAD
manages the Maritime Security Program, the Voluntary Intermodal
Sealift Agreement Program and the Ready Reserve Force, which
assure DOD access to commercial and strategic sealift and
associated intermodal capacity. MARAD also continues to address
the disposal of over 123 obsolete ships in the National Defense
Reserve Fleet which are deemed a potential environmental risk.
Further, MARAD administers education and training programs
through the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and six State maritime
schools help provide skilled merchant marine officers who are
capable of serving defense and commercial transportation needs.
The Committee continues to fund MARAD in its support of the
United States as a maritime nation, and to help MARAD meet its
management challenge to dispose of obsolete merchant-type
vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet by the end of
2006.
MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $98,118,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 98,700,000
Committee recommendation................................ 98,700,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $582,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Maritime Security Program provides resources to
maintain a U.S. flag merchant fleet crewed by U.S. citizens to
serve both the commercial and national security needs of the
United States. The program provides direct payments to U.S.
flag ship operators engaged in U.S. foreign trade.
Participating operators are required to keep the vessels in
active commercial service and are required to provide
intermodal sealift support to the Department of Defense in
times of war or national emergency.
The Committee recommends $98,700,000 for the Maritime
Security Program, consistent with the budget request.
OPERATIONS AND TRAINING
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $106,366,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 109,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 110,910,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $631,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $691,876 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Operations and Training appropriation primarily funds
the salaries and expenses for MARAD headquarters and regional
staff in the administration and direction for all MARAD
programs. The account includes funding for the U.S. Merchant
Marine Academy, six State maritime schools, port and intermodal
development, cargo preference, international trade relations,
deep-water port licensing, and administrative support costs.
The Committee recommends $110,910,000 for Operations and
Training for fiscal year 2005. The recommendation is $1,610,000
above the President's budget request and $4,544,000 above the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee has included
$13,138,000 for the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy to continue
with the major design and construction projects as identified
in the 10-year capital improvement plan.
Funds appropriated for Operations and Training is
sufficient to maintain the operating costs incurred by
headquarters and region staffs in administering and directing
the Maritime Administration programs. The Committee
recommendation provides sufficient resources to cover the total
cost of officer training at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy;
provide Federal financial support to the six State maritime
academies; support coordination efforts for U.S. maritime
industry activities under emergency conditions; to promote port
and intermodal development activities; support MARAD
responsibilities under the American Fisheries Act; and
facilitate Federal technology assessment projects designed to
achieve advancements in ship design, construction and
operations.
Funds provided for this account are to be distributed as
follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2005 Committee
Activity Request Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy:
Salary and benefits............. 23,753 23,753
Midshipmen program.............. 6,303 6,303
Instructional program........... 3,448 3,448
Program direction and 2,945 2,945
administration.................
Maintenance, repair, and 6,327 6,327
operating requirements.........
Capital improvements............ 13,138 13,138
-----------------------------------
Subtotal, USMMA............... 55,914 55,914
===================================
State Maritime Schools:
Student incentive payments...... 1,200 1,200
Direct schoolship payments...... 1,200 1,200
Schoolship maintenance and 8,090 8,090
repair.........................
-----------------------------------
Subtotal, State Maritime 10,490 10,490
Academies....................
===================================
MARAD Operations:
Salaries and benefits........... 26,112 26,112
Non-salary base budget.......... 10,448 10,448
GSA Space increase.............. 94 94
Infrastructure Enhancements..... 150 150
DOT Working Capital Fund (IT 5,926 5,926
Consolidation).................
Information Management System... ................ 1,000
Set-aside for DOT E-Gov costs... 166 166
Security Training Center........ ................ 610
-----------------------------------
Subtotal, MARAD Operations.... 42,896 44,506
===================================
Total, Operations and Training 109,300 110,910
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maritime Information Management System.--The DOT estimated
that the volume of domestic and international maritime trade
will more than double over the next 20 years. This increase in
traffic volume will contribute to unmanaged congestion on the
inter-coastal waterways and poses a potential security risk. To
better understand and prepare to address this very critical
issue, the Committee directs the Maritime Administration to
prepare a conditions and performance report and needs
assessment on the inland waterway system. Furthermore, the
Maritime Administration is directed to initiate the development
of an integrated marine transportation system information
management system. The Committee has provided $1,000,000 to
immediately begin this effort.
Maritime Security Professional Training Center.--In support
of Section 109 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act, the
Committee has included $610,000 as a one-time appropriation for
the relocation and reconfiguration of the CAPE CHALMERS from
the National Defense Reserve Fleet to the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center in Charleston, South Carolina to
establish a maritime security professional training center. The
Committee is encouraged that MARAD is working with the
Department of Homeland Security to expand their maritime
security professional training curriculum to include any
Federal, State, local, and private law enforcement or security
personnel.
SHIP DISPOSAL
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $16,115,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 21,616,000
Committee recommendation................................ 21,616,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $96,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Ship Disposal account provides resources to dispose of
obsolete merchant-type vessels of 150,000 gross tons or more in
the National Defense Reserve Fleet [NDRF] which the Maritime
Administration is required by law to dispose of by the end of
2006. Currently there is a backlog of more than 130 ships
awaiting disposal. These vessels, many of which are 50 years in
age, pose a significant environmental threat due to the
presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid and
liquid polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs].
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,616,000
for ship disposal. This amount is the same as the budget
request and $5,501,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level.
MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,471,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,764,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,764,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $27,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, commonly referred to
as, ``Title XI,'' provides for a Federal Government guarantee
of private-sector debt for ship construction and shipyard
modernization. This program fosters and sustains a U.S.
shipbuilding and repair industry which helps ensure that the
United States remains a maritime nation.
As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this
account includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan
guarantee commitments made in 1992 and beyond (including
modifications of direct loans or loan guarantees that resulted
from obligations or commitments in any year), as well as the
administrative expenses of this program. The subsidy amounts
are estimated on a present value basis and administrative
expenses are estimated on a cash basis.
Funds for administrative expenses for the Title XI program
are appropriated to this account, and then transferred by
reimbursement to Operations and Training to be obligated and
outlayed.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,764,000 for
the Title XI, Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program. This amount is
the same as the administration's 2005 budget request and
$293,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
NATIONAL DEFENSE TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004....................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $150,000,000
The fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Act (Public Law
108-136) authorized the National Defense Tank Vessel
Construction Program to provide financial assistance for the
construction of five privately owned product tank vessels to be
available for national defense purposes in time of war or
national emergency.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $150,000,000
for the National Defense Tank Vessel Construction Program. The
budget estimate proposed no funding for this program.
The Committee supports the goal of this program to
revitalize commercial tank ship construction in the United
States. The program provides the last dollar in for U.S.-flag,
U.S.-crewed, and U.S.-built double-hulled, commercially-viable,
and militarily-useful product tankers. Vessels constructed
under this program will operate as part of the Maritime
Security Fleet.
In addition, this program addresses a critical deficiency,
as identified by the Department of Defense, for U.S.-flag
tankers capable of carrying multiple petroleum cargoes. The
Committee notes that the U.S. military was forced to rely on
foreign-flag, foreign-crewed tankers during recent military
operations in Afghanistan because of the shortage of U.S. flag
tankers. In at least one instance, an Iraqi-crewed support ship
provided support to the U.S. military operations in
Afghanistan.
Tankers constructed under this program will operate only in
the international shipping trades but the experience and skills
acquired through the program will also facilitate construction
in the United States of new vessels for the domestic or Jones
Act shipping trades.
SHIP CONSTRUCTION
(RESCISSION)
The Committee rescinds $1,900,000 of unobligated balances
from the Ship Construction Account which is currently inactive.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Section 180 authorizes the Maritime Administration to
furnish utilities and services and make repairs to any lease,
contract, or occupancy involving Government property under the
control of MARAD. Rental payments received pursuant to this
provision shall be credited to the Treasury as miscellaneous
receipts.
Section 181 prohibits obligations incurred during the
current year from construction funds in excess of the
appropriations and limitations contained in this Act or in any
prior appropriation Act.
Research and Special Programs Administration
The Research and Special Programs Administration [RSPA] was
established by the Secretary of Transportation's organizational
changes dated July 20, 1977, and serves as a research,
analytic, and technical development arm of the Department for
multimodal research and development, as well as special
programs. Particular emphasis is given to pipeline
transportation and the transportation of hazardous cargo by all
modes. RSPA's two reimbursable programs--Transportation Safety
Institute and the Volpe National Transportation Systems
Center--support research safety and security programs for all
modes of transportation.
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $46,167,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 52,936,000
Committee recommendation................................ 49,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $274,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $438,000 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Research and Special Programs Account provides funding
for the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, the Office of
Emergency Transportation, the Office of Research and
Technology, and RSPA's Program and Administrative Support
function.
The Committee provides a total of $49,000,000 for the
Research and Special Programs account, of which, consistent
with the budget request, $645,000 shall be derived from the
Pipeline Safety Fund. This amount is $3,936,000 less than the
budget request and $2,833,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level. Within this amount the Committee provides the
following level of funding and FTEs:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
---------------------------------- Committee
2004 enacted 2005 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous materials safety................................... $23,535,000 $25,486,000 $24,496,000
(FTE).................................................... 140.5 149.5 148
Emergency transportation..................................... $2,705,000 $4,323,000 $3,800,000
(FTE).................................................... 13.5 22.0 18
Research and technology...................................... $2,492,000 $2,597,000 $2,383,000
(FTE).................................................... 8.5 9.5 9
Program and administrative support........................... $17,435,000 $20,530,000 $18,321,000
(FTE).................................................... 56.5 63.0 59.0
--------------------------------------------------
Total, research and special programs \1\............... $46,167,000 $52,936,000 $49,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $274,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect
reduction of $438,000 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY
The Office of Hazardous Materials Safety [OHMS] administers
a nationwide program of safety regulations to fulfill the
Secretary's duty to protect the Nation from the risks to life,
health, and property that are inherent in the transportation of
hazardous materials by water, air, highway, and railroad. OHMS
plans, implements, and manages the hazardous materials
transportation program consisting of information systems,
research and analysis, inspection and enforcement, rulemaking
support, training and information dissemination, and emergency
procedures.
The Committee provides $24,496,000 for hazardous materials
safety, of which $1,732,000 will remain available until
September 30, 2007. Within this amount the Committee provides
the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation & Benefits [PC&B;]................ $15,500,000
Administrative Expenses................................. 1,350,000
Hazmat Information System [HMIS]........................ 1,800,000
Contract Research and Analysis.......................... 600,000
Inspection and Enforcement.............................. 220,000
Rulemaking Support...................................... 450,000
Training and Outreach................................... 1,300,000
Emergency Preparedness.................................. 375,000
Hazmat Registration Program............................. 1,200,000
Information Systems..................................... 500,000
Research and Analysis................................... 651,000
Regulation Compliance................................... 550,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee has provided funding for eight new positions
within OHMS: four hazardous materials regulation compliance
personnel; and two engineers, one policy personnel and one
enforcement personnel related to the transport of Spent Nuclear
Fuel [SNF] and High Level Radioactive Waste [HLW]. The
Committee has provided less than the requested amount for OHMS
because it believes that the resources provided are sufficient
for the tasks to be performed.
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION
The Office of Emergency Transportation [OET] provides
support to the Secretary of Transportation for his statutory
and administrative responsibilities in the area of
transportation civil emergency preparedness and response. OET
develops and coordinates the Department's policies, plans, and
programs, in headquarters and the field to provide for
emergency preparedness.
OET is responsible for implementing the Department of
Transportation's National Security Program initiatives,
including an assessment of the transportation implications of
the changing global threat. OET also coordinates civil
emergency preparedness and response for transportation services
during national and regional emergencies, across the entire
continuum of crises, including natural catastrophes such as
earthquakes, hurricanes and tornados, and international and
domestic terrorism. OET develops crisis management plans to
mitigate disasters and implements these plans nationally and
regionally in an emergency.
The Committee provides $3,800,000 for OET. Within this
amount the Committee provides the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Function Amount FTEs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crisis Management Center.............. $1,200,000 8
U.S. Disaster Response................ 1,500,000 5.5
Training and Exercises................ 500,000 1
Continuity of Operations.............. 500,000 2.5
International Disaster Response....... 100,000 1
---------------------------------
Total........................... 3,800,000 18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee has provided funding for two new positions
within OET: one Regional Emergency Transportation Coordinator
[RETCO]; and one Continuation of Operations [COOP] personnel.
Because the Committee believes that the current rotational
staffing of the OET's Crisis Management Center [CMC] is
sufficient, the Committee denies the funding requested for
these eight new positions.
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
The Office of Research and Technology [ORT] is responsible
for managing department-wide strategic transportation research,
technology, education and training programs; performing
strategic planning; conducting system-level assessments and
policy research; facilitating government, university and
industry partnerships; fostering innovative inter/multi-modal
research, education and safety training; and disseminating
information on departmental, national and international
transportation research, technology and education activities.
The Committee provides $2,383,000 for ORT, of which
$1,152,000 will remain available until September 30, 2007.
Within this amount the Committee provides the following funding
levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation & Benefits [PC&B;]................ $1,131,000
Administrative Expenses................................. 100,000
Hazardous Materials Research and Development............ 85,000
Hydrogen Fuels R&D......................................; 500,000
Research and Development Planning and Management........ 567,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee denies the funding requested for an
additional hydrogen fuel engineer, as well as the requested
increase in funding for hydrogen fuel research. In light of the
extensive level of resources already devoted to hydrogen fuel
research by the Department of Energy, the Committee believes
that the as-yet-unfilled hydrogen fuel engineer position
authorized in fiscal year 2004 and the $500,000 already
budgeted for hydrogen fuel research provides a sufficient
commitment of DOT resources for this initiative in fiscal year
2005.
PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
RSPA's program support function provides legal, financial,
management and administrative support to the operating offices
within RSPA. These support activities include executive
direction, program and policy support, civil rights and special
programs, legal services and support, and management and
administration.
The Committee provides $18,321,000 for program and
administrative support. Within this amount the Committee
provides the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation and Benefits..................... $7,350,000
GSA Rent................................................ 2,925,000
Working Capital Fund.................................... 2,490,000
Admin costs for all new RSP employees................... 200,000
Communications, Utilities, Misc......................... 700,000
Accounting.............................................. 120,000
Training................................................ 100,000
Travel.................................................. 50,000
Equipment............................................... 50,000
Printing................................................ 20,000
Training................................................ 20,000
Supplies................................................ 20,000
Budget and Financial Management......................... 200,000
Civil Rights: Drug Program.............................. 5,000
Civil Rights: Intern Program............................ 51,000
Human Resources Support Systems......................... 20,000
Information Resources Management........................ 1,000,000
Information Technology Infrastructure................... 3,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee provides the funding requested for three
additional information technology [IT] positions as well as the
funding requested for additional IT contractual support. The
Committee notes RSPA's assurance that these additional
resources will be sufficient to fulfill its IT needs for the
foreseeable future and accordingly looks forward to receiving
subsequent budget requests that reflect this assurance.
The Committee believes that the funding provided, which
reflects an $886,000 increase over the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level, is sufficient to allow RSPA to carry out its
administrative functions. Accordingly, the Committee denies the
funding requested for eight new administrative personnel.
PIPELINE SAFETY
(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)
(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipeline
safety fund Trust fund Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\........................................ $52,991,000 $12,923,000 $65,914,000
Budget estimate, 2005........................................... 51,073,000 19,000,000 70,073,000
Committee recommendation........................................ 52,073,000 19,000,000 71,073,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $391,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect
reduction of $314,000 pursuant to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Research and Special Programs Administration is
responsible for overseeing the Department of Transportation's
pipeline safety program. In doing so, RSPA supervises the
safety, security, and environmental protection of gas and
hazardous liquids pipeline systems, as well as liquefied
natural gas facilities, through analysis of data, damage
prevention, education and training, enforcement of regulations
and standards, research and development, grants for State
pipeline safety programs, and emergency planning and response
to accidents. Also included is research and development to
support the pipeline safety program and grants-in-aid to State
agencies that conduct a qualified pipeline safety program and
to others who operate one-call programs.
Funding for the Office of Pipeline Safety [OPS] is made
available from two primary sources: the Pipeline Safety Fund,
comprised of user fees assessed on interstate pipeline
operators; and the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, a revolving
fund comprised of an environmental tax on petroleum and oil
spill damage recovery payments. The pipeline safety program
promotes the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound
transportation of natural gas and hazardous liquids by
pipeline.
The Committee provides $71,073,000 for the Office of
Pipeline Safety. The bill specifies that, of the total
appropriation, $52,073,000 shall be from the Pipeline Safety
Fund and $19,000,000 shall be from the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation and Benefits [PC&B;].............. $17,677,000
Travel.............................................. 2,265,000
WCF................................................. 847,000
GSA Rent............................................ 1,460,000
Communications...................................... 973,000
Equipment........................................... 539,000
Training............................................ 953,000
Accounting.......................................... 88,000
Printing............................................ 75,000
Other Services...................................... 5,000
Supplies............................................ 52,000
Information and Analysis............................ 1,635,000
Pipeline Integrity Management....................... 7,862,000
Compliance.......................................... 300,000
Training and Information Dissemination.............. 1,400,000
Emergency Notification.............................. 100,000
Community Assistance and Technical Services......... 3,096,000
Implementing the Oil Pollution Act...................... 2,416,000
Mapping and Information Systems......................... 1,200,000
Enhanced Operations, Control and Monitoring............. 1,874,000
Damage Prevention, and Leak Detection................... 3,913,000
Improved Material Performance........................... 2,071,000
State Pipeline Safety Grants............................ 18,272,000
State One-Call Grants................................... 1,000,000
Public Safety and Education Programs.................... 1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee's recommendation provides funding to support:
two new system-focused inspectors based in Houston, Texas; two
new natural gas transmission integrity management inspectors;
and two new State program managers.
Pipeline Safety Research.--Consistent with the budget
request, the Committee provides $9,058,000 for pipeline safety
research, which will remain available until September 30, 2007.
State One-Call Grants.--The Committee continues to believe
that State One-Call Grants have a proven track record in
effective damage prevention and thus has again provided
$1,000,000 for this purpose.
Natural Gas Distribution Pipeline Safety.--The Committee
notes that OIG recently reported to Congress that operators of
natural gas distribution pipelines, which constitute over 85
percent of the 2.1 million miles of natural gas pipelines, are
not required to have Integrity Management Plans [IMP]. Over the
last 10 years, natural gas distribution pipelines have
experienced over 4 times the number of fatalities and more than
3 times the number of injuries than the combined totals for
hazardous liquid and natural gas transmission pipelines, which
are covered by IMP requirements.
The Committee understands that ``smart pig'' technologies
are not currently available for natural gas distribution
pipelines, but concurs with OIG that certain IMP elements can
be readily applied to this segment of the industry, such as
developing timeframes on how often inspections should take
place and when repairs should be made. The Committee encourages
this approach and directs the Administrator to report to
Congress no later than 180 days following the enactment of this
Act, on its approach for requiring operators of natural gas
distribution pipelines to have IMPs. The report should detail
specific milestones and activities, including the completion of
a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund Allocation.--The Committee
notes the significant increase in funding derived from the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund since fiscal year 2003. The Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 requires that these trust funds be used
only for oil spill prevention and response activities. As in
fiscal year 2004, the requested increase has been provided.
However, the Committee again directs the Office of Pipeline
Safety to factor the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund into the
allocation formula that determines the hazardous liquid
pipeline user fee assessment in order to accurately reflect the
actual oversight activities conducted by the Office of Pipeline
Safety.
Public Safety and Education Programs.--The Pipeline Safety
Improvement Act of 2002 requires pipeline operators to
undertake public safety and education program activities to
educate and promote pipeline safety with the public. The law
further requires a review of the quality of these public safety
and education programs, which will number more than 2,200. The
Committee includes $1,000,000 for initial efforts to create a
clearinghouse so that Federal and State experts can review and
evaluate these public education programs.
Proposed Reorganization.--The Committee supports the DOT's
effort to better organize and increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of its Research activities. However, the
Committee is very concerned the Department's pending
reorganization plan may have the unintended consequence of
reducing the Department's mission to ensure the safe and
reliable operation of the Nation's pipeline system. The
Committee believes the pending reorganization plan that calls
for regulation of the safety of pipelines to become the
responsibility of the Federal Railroad Administration, will
greatly diminish the Department's effectiveness and ability to
adequately carry out its pipeline safety function.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS
(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $199,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 200,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act [HMTA] (title 49
U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) requires RSPA to: (1) develop and
implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grants program;
(2) monitor public sector emergency response training and
planning and provide technical assistance to States,
territories, and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update
periodically a national training curriculum for emergency
responders. These activities are financed by receipts received
from the hazardous materials shipper and carrier registration
fees, which are placed in the emergency preparedness fund. The
hazardous materials transportation law provides permanent
authorization for the emergency preparedness fund for planning
and training grants, monitoring and technical assistance, and
for administrative expenses. An appropriation of $200,000, also
from the emergency preparedness fund, provides for the training
curriculum for emergency responders.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
Bill language is included that limits the obligation of
emergency preparedness training grants to $14,300,000 in fiscal
year 2005.
Office of Inspector General
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $55,670,000
Budget estimate, 2005 \2\............................... 59,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 59,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $330,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $426,582 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of of Public Law 108-199. Does not include
reimbursements of $3,524,000 from FHWA, $2,250,000 from FAA, $2,000,000
from FTA, and $100,000 from NTSB.
\2\ Does not include reimbursements of $3,524,000 from FHWA, $1,200,000
from FAA, $2,000,000 from FTA, and $250,000 from NTSB.
The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of
Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective
organization, with a mission to: (1) conduct and supervise
audits and investigations relating to the programs and
operations of the Department; (2) provide leadership and
recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness in the administration of programs and operations;
(3) prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; and (4) keep
the Secretary and Congress currently informed regarding
problems and deficiencies.
OIG is divided into two major functional units: the Office
of Principal Assistant Inspector General for Auditing and
Evaluations [PAIGAE] and the Office of Assistant Inspector
General for Investigations [AIGI]. The PAIGAE and AIGI are
supported by headquarters and regional staff.
The Committee recommendation provides $59,000,000 for
activities of the Office of Inspector General, which is
$3,330,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level and the
same as the budget request. In 2003, DOT awarded about 1,100
fixed-price or cost-reimbursable contracts valued at
approximately $3,000,000,000. Also, in fiscal year 2003, DOT
planned to spend $2,700,000,000 on information technology with
over half of this amount funding contractor services. With this
increase, the OIG is expected to provide greater oversight of
the DCAA audits requested by the Department (in fiscal year
2003 DOT requested 221 audit reports), increase its ability to
apply forensic auditing techniques to better detect contract
fraud, and carry out more timely audits and investigations of
contracting and procurement issues.
Unfair Business Practices.--The bill maintains language
which authorizes the OIG to investigate allegations of fraud
and unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of
competition by air carriers and ticket agents.
Surface Transportation Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crediting
Appropriation offsetting
collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2004 \1\.............. $19,406,000 $1,050,000
Budget estimate, 2005................. 20,521,000 1,050,000
Committee recommendation.............. 21,250,000 1,050,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $115,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199. Does not reflect reduction of $16,422 pursuant
to Division F, section 517 of Public Law 108-199.
The Surface Transportation Board [STB] was created on
January 1, 1996, by the Interstate Commerce Commission
Termination Act of 1995 [ICCTA] (Public Law 104-88). The Board
is a three-member, bipartisan, decisionally independent
adjudicatory body organizationally housed within DOT and is
responsible for the regulation of the rail and pipeline
industries and certain non-licensing regulation of motor
carriers and water carriers.
STB's rail oversight activities encompass rate
reasonableness, car service and interchange, mergers, line
acquisitions, line constructions, and abandonments. STB's
jurisdiction also includes certain oversight of the intercity
bus industry and pipeline carriers, rate regulation involving
noncontiguous domestic water transportation, household goods
carriers, and collectively determined motor carrier rates.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,250,000
for activities of the Board, which is $729,000 more than the
requested amount and $1,844,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level. Included in the recommended amount is an
estimated $1,050,000 in fees to be collected, which will offset
the appropriated funding. The Board is authorized to credit the
fees collected to the appropriated amount as offsetting
collections reducing the general funds appropriation on a
dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees are received and collected.
Within this amount the Committee provides the following
funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount FTEs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rail Oversight Activities...................... $20,000,000 140.8
Motor Oversight Activities..................... 880,000 6.4
Water Oversight Activities..................... 360,000 2.7
Pipeline Oversight Activities.................. 10,000 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee's recommendation provides a one-time increase
to STB's base budget solely in order to allow it to fill the
following five new positions: one administrative law judge, one
economist and three transportation industry analysts, one of
which specializes in passenger rail issues. The Committee
expects that these additional positions will allow STB to fully
execute its mission into the foreseeable future and that
subsequent funding requests will reflect this understanding.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Section 185 allows funds for maintenance and operation of
aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or
allowances, as authorized by law.
Section 186 limits appropriations for services authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 3109 not to exceed the rate for an Executive Level
IV.
Section 187 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and
expenses of more than 106 political and Presidential appointees
in the Department of Transportation, and prohibits political
and Presidential personnel to be assigned on temporary detail
outside the Department of Transportation or an independent
agency funded in this Act.
Section 188 prohibits funds for the implementation of
section 404 of title 23, U.S.C.
Section 189 prohibits recipients of funds made available in
this Act to release personal information, including a social
security number, medical or disability information, and
photographs from a driver's license or motor vehicle record
without express consent of the person to whom such information
pertains; and prohibits the Secretary of Transportation from
withholding funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a
State is in noncompliance with this provision.
Section 190 allows funds received by the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal
Railroad Administration from States, counties, municipalities,
other public authorities, and private sources for expenses
incurred for training may be credited to each agency's
respective accounts.
Section 191 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to
allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase
preferred stock sold to the Department of Transportation.
Section 192 prohibits funds in this Act to make a grant
unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriation at least 3 full business
days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or
full funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is
announced by the Department or its modal administration.
Section 193 allows rebates, refunds, incentive payments,
minor fees and other funds received by the Department of
Transportation from travel management center, charge card
programs, subleasing of building space and miscellaneous
sources are to be credit to appropriations of the Department of
Transportation.
Section 194 allows that amounts from improper payments to a
third party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the
Department of Transportation shall be available to cover
expenses incurred in recovery of such payments.
Section 195 authorizes the transfer of unexpended sums from
``Minority Business Outreach'' to ``Office of the Secretary,
Salaries and expenses''.
Section 196 prohibits funds for the Office of the Secretary
of Transportation to approve assessments or reimbursable
agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal
administrations in this Act, unless such assessments or
agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for
congressional notification.
Section 197 limits funds for the fiscal year 2005 working
capital fund of the Department of Transportation.
Section 198 continues the provision designating the city of
Norman, Oklahoma, to be considered part of the Oklahoma City
Transportation urbanized area for fiscal year 2005.
Section 199 extends a prohibition on the implementation of
a mandatory cost-sharing pilot program for essential air
service communities.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices
salaries and expenses
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $175,070,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 185,041,000
Committee recommendation................................ 161,313,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,039,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Departmental Offices in the Department of the Treasury
provide basic support to the Secretary of the Treasury, who is
the chief operating executive of the Department. The Secretary
of the Treasury has the primary role in formulating and
managing the domestic and international tax and financial
policies of the Federal Government. The Secretary's
responsibilities funded by the Salaries and Expenses
appropriation include: recommending and implementing United
States domestic and international economic and tax policy;
fiscal policy; governing the fiscal operations of the
Government; maintaining foreign assets control; managing the
public debt; managing development financial policy;
representing the United States on international monetary, trade
and investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury
overseas operations; and directing the administrative
operations of the Department of the Treasury. In support of the
Secretary, the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides
resources for policy formulation and implementation in the
areas of domestic and international finance, tax, economic,
trade, financial operations and general fiscal policy. This
appropriation also provides resources for administrative
support to the Secretary and policy components, and
coordination of Departmental administrative policies in
financial and personnel management, procurement operations, and
automated information systems and telecommunications.
The Committee recommends $161,313,000 for the Salaries and
Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices of the
Department of the Treasury, $23,728,000 below the
administration's request and $13,757,000 less than the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level. The Committee recommendation includes
the requested funding level for the Office of Foreign Assets
Control, but provides funds in a new appropriations account.
Within the funds provided the accompanying bill specifies
$3,000,000 for information technology modernization; $150,000
for official reception and representation expenses; $258,000
for unforeseen emergencies; $2,900,000 for grants to States to
fight money laundering; and $3,393,000 for the Treasury-wide
financial statement audits.
The Committee commends the Department of the Treasury for
its participation through the Internal Revenue Service in the
Washington Semester American Indian Program [WINS]. The
Committee believes that the Washington Semester American Indian
Program is an excellent way to advance the goals of Executive
Order 13270, which directs all Federal agencies to take steps
to enhance access to Federal opportunities and resources for
American Indian and Alaska Native students. The Committee urges
the Department to expand the number of internship slots it
makes available for the program and to accommodate participants
in a second-year internship program.
Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.--Although
no funds were requested for the Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence, the Committee recommends $12,726,710
for the office for fiscal year 2005. The Secretary has
identified establishment of this office and reorganization of
financial intelligence activities as one of his highest
priorities, and adjustments made to the budget request to
accommodate funding for this office have been made with the
concurrence of the Department.
The Committee has established the Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence within the Department of the Treasury.
This office will be responsible for providing the policy and
the strategic and operational direction to the Department of
the Treasury on issues relating to terrorist financing and
financial crimes; including money laundering, counterfeiting
and other offenses threatening the integrity of the financial
system. In addition, the office will be responsible for
carrying out the United States economic sanctions programs;
implementation of Titles I and II of Public Law 91-508, as
amended (the Bank Secrecy Act); asset forfeiture; and the
receipt, analysis, collation, and dissemination of
intelligence, including foreign intelligence and foreign
counterintelligence (within the meaning of section 3 of the
National Security Act of 1947) (50 U.S.C. 401a) related to the
operation and responsibilities of the Department of the
Treasury.
Emergency Preparedness.--The recommended level includes
$1,900,000, and not more than 5 FTE, for the permanent creation
of the Office of Emergency Preparedness. This office will allow
Treasury to establish and maintain viable and executable plans
which ensure continuity of the Department's critical functions
during an emergency.
Treasury Protection.--The Committee recommendation denies
the budget request to reimburse the United States Secret
Service [USSS] $2,400,000 for protection of the Secretary of
the Treasury. The Committee is concerned about the lack of
sufficient documentation to support this new budget request.
The Committee believes that protective services are a core
responsibility of the USSS which should be funded in the
Department of Homeland Security's budget.
Contributions to Federal Accounting Standards Advisory
Board [FASAB] and the Joint Financial Management Improvement
Program [JFMIP].--The Committee recommendation provides $12,000
for Treasury activities that support FASAB and JFMIP. The
Committee recommendation denies new funding of $639,000 to
support the cost of the Office of Management and Budget [OMB]
payments to FASAB and JFMIP. The Committee believes that it is
more appropriate to provide this funding under the OMB heading.
Financial Literacy.--Title V of the Fair and Accurate
Transactions Act (Public Law 108-159) established the Financial
Literacy and Education Commission [FLEC]. The Committee
provides $1,000,000 to be used for the development and
implementation of the national strategy to promote basic
financial literacy and education among all American consumers
that is required by 20 U.S.C. 9703. With these funds, the
Commission shall develop methods to increase the general
financial education level and understanding of current and
future consumers of financial services and products. It is
important that the Commission consult with State and local
governments and private, nonprofit, and public institutions
during the formulation and implementation of the national
strategy and continue with the development of a plan to improve
coordination and reduce duplication of financial literacy
activities. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Treasury
to submit a plan for the use of funds to the Appropriations
Committee prior to the expenditure of any funds for FLEC within
the Act. The Committee further directs that these funds not be
used for travel expenses.
Critical Infrastructure Protection.--The Office of Critical
Infrastructure Protection and Compliance Policy coordinates the
Department's development and implementation of policies
regarding the protection of the critical infrastructure of the
financial services sector. The office also staffs the Financial
and Banking Infrastructure Committee. The Committee understands
that the Department has developed a research and development
plan that identifies the key infrastructure that must be
protected in the event of a terrorist attack or natural
disruption. Both the President's national strategy to secure
cyberspace and the Department's own research and development
agenda identify the need for advanced data replication
technology and practices to protect the central functions of
the Nation's financial systems. The Committee provides
$1,000,000 to the Department for critical infrastructure
protection research and development through the ``e-Cavern
partnership''. These funds are to be utilized to begin the
process of using a hardened storage facility that has research
capabilities and provides a geographic location that has added
physical security and protection.
General Counsel.--The Committee recommendation provides
$7,415,212 for the general counsel. This amount reflects a
downward adjustment requested by the Department of $415,389, as
well as an additional reduction of $100,000. The Committee is
disappointed by the general counsel's continual and aggressive
efforts to circumvent appropriations law and undermine the long
standing accommodation between the Department and the
Committee.
Audit of Mint-BEP Merger.--The Committee directs the
Government Accountability Office [GAO] to conduct an in-depth
analysis of the conclusions drawn by the United States Mint-
Bureau of Engraving and Printing merger study. The GAO analysis
should identify: (1) how the study was paid for, what accounts
were used to fund the study, and whether or not the funds
expended from these accounts were consistent with accepted
guidelines; (2) what criteria were used to hire the contractor,
and what contract specifications were used to ensure an
objective result. The GAO shall also look at the conclusions in
the study and all supporting materials including, ``Improving
Service Delivery in BEP and Mint Operations'' dated June 30,
2004, to determine if: (1) the conclusions of the study were
consistent with the documentation and findings; (2) all cost
savings projected in the study have accurate supporting
documentation; and (3) whether alternatives were considered in
the study process.
Congressional Budget Justification Materials.--The
Committee directs the Department to submit all of its fiscal
year 2006 budget justifications on the first Monday in
February, concurrent with official submission of the
President's budget to Congress. These justifications should
have the customary level of detailed data and explanatory
statements to support the appropriations requests, including
tables that detail each agency's programs, projects, and
activities for fiscal years 2005 and 2006. The Committee
directs the CFO to ensure that adequate justification is given
to each increase, decrease, and staffing change proposed across
the Department for the fiscal year 2006 budget. With respect to
requests for Departmental Offices, particular attention should
be paid to information within the Departmental operations and
management accounts. The Committee expects that the Department
will coordinate with the Appropriations Committee in advance on
its planned presentation products for the budget justifications
to the Congress in support of the fiscal year 2006 budget
request. In addition, the Committee directs the Department to
submit, as part of the fiscal year 2006 budget justification, a
table identifying the last year that authorizing legislation
was provided by Congress for each program, project, or
activity; the specific authorization legislation supporting the
bureau, organization, and program; the amount of the
authorization; and the appropriation in the last year of the
authorization in those instances where the authorization has
lapsed.
Treasury Forfeiture Fund.--The Committee remains concerned
about the management of the Forfeiture Fund. As a result, the
Committee directs the Department to include in its fiscal year
2006 budget submission a detailed operating budget, including
but not limited to, the following: salaries and expenses,
FTE's, detailees, travel, rent, furniture, utilities, supplies,
communications, storage costs, and postage for fiscal years
2004, 2005 and 2006. The budget materials shall also include
the total amount in the fund, the number of funding
applications received and the number of funding requests
awarded. The material shall also include all evaluation
criteria used for granting requested expenditures from the
fund.
Currency Manipulation Report.--The Committee has included a
new general provision, (Sec. 221) providing for the Secretary
of the Treasury to submit a report by December 1, 2004, to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The report shall
describe how existing statutory provisions addressing currency
manipulation by America's trading partners can be better
clarified administratively, to provide for improved and more
predictable evaluation of the subject and to enable the problem
of currency manipulation to be better understood by both the
American people and the U.S. Congress. The Secretary shall
include in the report definitions of terms relevant to Title 22
U.S.C. 5304 and 5305, such as ``material global current account
surpluses'', ``significant bilateral trade surpluses'', and how
it is or can be determined ``whether [other] countries
manipulate the rate of exchange between their currency and the
United States dollar''. Such definitions shall address
currencies that are pegged to the dollar (with and without
bands) and identify what constitutes currency manipulation,
including what is meant by sustained intervention in the
currency markets, the effect of currency controls, etc. The
report shall also examine what the United States is doing to
ensure that both the Department and the IMF's review of
individual country trade data permit the examination of
competing data where significant differences in global current
account surpluses are identified (e.g., by comparing such
current account surpluses to actual trade figures provided by
U.S. trading partners). Further, the report shall identify
steps the Department is taking to obtain definitions from and
within the IMF of such terms as ``manipulating exchange
rates'', ``protracted large-scale intervention in one direction
in the exchange market'', and other terms relevant to
acceptable exchange rate practices provided in the IMF's
Decision No. 5392 (77/63), as amended, on ``Exchange
Arrangements and Surveillance, Principles of Fund Surveillance
over Exchange Rate Policies.'' Finally, the Secretary shall
provide an update regarding additional steps that the United
States can take, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 286y, to strengthen
article IV consultation procedures of the Fund to address
undervalued rates of exchange that flow from currency controls
or significant market interventions. During the period these
issues are being clarified and pending resolution of whether
certain major trading nations are engaged in currency
manipulation, the Secretary of the Treasury is urged to vote
against multilateral lending or investment guarantees to any
nation with which the United States had a trade deficit (in
goods) in 2003 in excess of $100,000,000,000.
Program and Office Funding.--For fiscal year 2005, the
Committee recommends funding for the salaries and expenses
appropriation according to the program activities that comprise
the Departmental Offices. These program activities include:
Executive Direction; General Counsel; Economic Policies and
Programs; Financial Policies and Programs; Financial Crimes;
Treasury-Wide Management; and Administration.
The Committee has established specific limitations for each
individual program and policy within the Departmental Offices.
The accompanying bill includes a provision authorizing a
cumulative total of transfers of up to 5 percent between each
activity (Executive Direction; General Counsel; Economic
Policies and Programs; Financial Policies and Programs;
Financial Crimes; Treasury-Wide Management; and Administration)
and after 5 percent, the Department must seek prior approval
from the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
The Committee recommends this budgetary change due to its
concern regarding the Department's application of its internal
reprogramming guidelines counter to congressional intent
established in the Fiscal Year 2004 Appropriation Act.
The following table compares the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level to the fiscal year 2005 budget estimate and the
Committee's recommendation for each office:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
2004 enacted 2005 budget Committee
\1\ estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secretary/Deputy Secretary...................................... $765,005 $808,526 $808,200
Secretarial Protection.......................................... .............. 2,400,000 ..............
Secretarial Delegation.......................................... 1,050,000 1,050,000 1,050,000
Chief of Staff.................................................. 1,393,279 1,480,321 1,479,700
Executive Secretary............................................. 600,562 665,843 665,000
Public Affairs.................................................. 1,725,620 1,841,676 1,800,716
Legislative Affairs & Public Liaison............................ 1,459,292 1,553,587 1,436,090
Treasurer....................................................... 263,103 277,610 115,537
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Executive Direction............................. 7,256,861 10,077,563 7,355,243
===============================================
General Counsel................................................. 7,530,660 7,929,601 7,415,212
===============================================
Economic Policy................................................. 4,272,449 4,469,560 4,180,117
International Affairs........................................... 26,549,390 28,716,550 27,727,336
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Economic Policies and Programs.................. 30,821,839 33,186,110 31,907,453
===============================================
Under Secretary for Domestic Finance............................ 833,275 869,542 868,800
Financial Markets............................................... 3,044,957 3,240,801 3,144,341
Critical Infrastructure......................................... .............. .............. 1,000,000
Financial Literacy.............................................. .............. .............. 1,000,000
Fiscal Policy................................................... 2,992,537 3,079,606 3,002,783
Financial Institutions.......................................... 2,728,221 2,895,051 2,731,283
Tax Policy (New Activity)....................................... 14,214,071 14,828,913 14,324,487
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Financial Policies and Programs................. 23,813,061 24,913,913 26,071,694
===============================================
U/S for Enforcement............................................. .............. .............. 1,632,382
Exec Office of Terrorist Finance and Fin Crimes................. 5,186,000 5,911,816 ..............
Intelligence Support............................................ 2,204,711 2,342,527 ..............
Terrorist Financing and Intelligence Support.................... .............. .............. 10,594,328
Office of Foreign Assets Control \2\............................ 21,855,000 22,291,000 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Terrorism & Financial Intel..................... 29,245,711 30,545,343 12,226,710
===============================================
Assistant Secretary for Management & CFO........................ 507,120 543,387 424,446
Office of Emergency Preparedness................................ .............. 1,935,267 1,900,000
DAS Human Resources............................................. 1,934,797 2,397,670 2,298,013
DAS Information Systems/Security Operations..................... 2,455,068 2,917,941 2,385,752
Deputy Chief Financial Officer.................................. 3,339,654 3,405,713 3,222,125
Treasury-wide Financial Statement Audits.................... 3,393,000 3,393,000 3,393,000
DAS Management and Budget....................................... 2,433,361 2,976,022 2,896,344
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Treasury Wide Management........................ 14,063,000 17,569,000 16,519,680
===============================================
DAS DO Headquarters Operations.................................. 1,873,013 1,981,815 1,981,815
Office of Information Technology............................ 20,859,167 20,982,476 20,826,400
Office of Financial Management.............................. 3,366,280 3,569,377 3,432,383
Office of Human Resources................................... 1,649,517 1,772,826 1,702,434
Office of Facilities and Support Services................... 11,248,554 11,915,874 11,915,874
Executive Office JFMIP/FASAB Contribution....................... .............. 651,000 12,000
Centralized Services, Space, and Utilities...................... 23,342,337 19,946,102 19,946,102
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Administration.................................. 62,338,868 60,819,470 59,817,008
===============================================
Grand Total Salaries and Expenses......................... 175,070,000 185,041,000 161,313,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,059,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
\2\ Committee recommendation provides funding for the Office of Foreign Assets Control in a separate location.
OFFICE OF FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL
Appropriations, 2004 \1\ \2\............................................
Budget estimate, 2005 \3\...............................................
Committee recommendation................................ $22,291,000
\1\ Enacted level of $21,855,000 appropriated under Departmental
Offices.
\2\ Reflects reduction of $130,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
\3\ Budget request assumes funding within departmental offices.
The Office of Foreign Assets Control [OFAC] administers and
enforces economic sanctions against targeted foreign countries,
terrorists, terrorist organizations and narcotic traffickers in
furtherance of U.S. foreign policy and national security
objectives. OFAC currently administers and enforces 27 economic
sanctions programs--initiatives usually undertaken in
conjunction with diplomatic and occasionally military action.
OFAC acts under general Presidential wartime and national
emergency powers, as well as specific legislation, to prohibit
transactions and freeze assets subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
OFAC's primary statutory authority is the Trading with the
Enemy Act of 1917 and its successor statute, the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act, enacted in 1977. The
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and the
Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act of 1999 provide OFAC
with the responsibility to administer sanctions against
terrorists and narcotics traffickers. OFAC also administers
restrictions on the import and export of rough diamonds under
the Clean Diamonds Trade Act of 2003.
Since September 11, 2001 the United States has designated
368 individuals and entities as Specially Designated Global
Terrorists [SDGTs] pursuant to Executive Order (``EO'') 13224
administered by the OFAC. OFAC has developed a close
collaborative working relationship with elements of the
Department of Defense [DoD] to develop a more systemic and
systematic approach to identifying, isolating, and attacking
terrorists, terrorist groups and their support structures. This
is aided by tapping unique information available throughout the
Combatant Commands regions of responsibility to understand how
terrorist networks operate. The DoD has backed this approach by
funding 6 positions for OFAC officers, one OFAC officer at each
of the Combatant Commands. OFAC also has offices in the
embassies in Mexico and Colombia and will soon open an office
in Bahrain to support this effort.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,291,000
for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Foreign Assets
Control.
The Committee's recommendation supports a full funding
level of no less than 138 FTE for fiscal year 2005. In
addition, OFAC is reimbursed by the Department of Defense for
an additional 6 positions detailed to the U.S. Combatant
Commands [USCC] to total 144 FTE. Detailees are to serve in
each of the USCC's Joint Interagency Coordination Groups
[JIACG] to fight the continuing Global War on Terror.
The Committee believes that the Office of Foreign Assets
Control serves a vital mission on the front line of the war on
terrorism, and therefore the Committee is providing a direct
appropriation to the Office due to this increasingly vital
mission. The Committee recommendation denies the
administration's request allowing the funds of OFAC to be
intermingled in the Departmental Offices Account. The Committee
is concerned that vital resources will be diverted from
counter-terrorism efforts to fund less critical missions within
the Department if the funding floor is removed. The Committee
has repeatedly included a statutory floor for this office and
without a clear justification for its removal the Committee
believes the floor is more justified now than ever. The
transfer authorities provided for the Department do not apply
to this account.
The Committee supports OFAC's technology modernization
efforts and encourages OFAC to continue developing its
electronic data mining abilities. The Committee directs OFAC to
submit a letter, 90 days after enactment, outlining the status
of its modernization efforts.
DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAM
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $36,185,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 36,072,000
Committee recommendation................................ 30,260,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $215,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
established this account, which is authorized to be used by or
on behalf of Treasury bureaus, at the Secretary's discretion,
to modernize business processes and increase efficiency through
technology investments, as well as other activities that
involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's interface
with other Government agencies.
The Committee has provided a total of $30,260,000 to remain
available until September 30, 2007, which is $5,812,000 less
than the budget request and $5,925,000 less than the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level.
DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Fiscal year
2004 enacted 2005 budget Committee
\1\ estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HR Connect...................................................... $25,310,000 $17,491,000 $15,491,000
Treasury Enterprise Architecture................................ 199,000 1,000,000 400,000
Critical Infrastructure......................................... 8,940,000 5,800,000 5,800,000
Integrated [Wireless) Treasury Network.......................... .............. 1,500,000 1,500,000
Treasury Asset Management System................................ .............. 175,000 ..............
Treasury back-up/Disaster recovery.............................. 1,736,000 1,746,000 1,746,000
Information Assurance........................................... .............. 1,000,000 1,000,000
E-Authentication................................................ .............. 561,000 561,000
IT Governance................................................... .............. 275,000 ..............
Operational Security............................................ .............. 1,000,000 1,000,000
E-Government.................................................... .............. 5,524,000 2,762,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 36,185,000 36,072,000 30,260,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $215,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of Public Law 108-199.
HR Connect.--The Committee recommendation provides
$15,491,000 in continued funding for this project, this is
$2,000,000 below the amount requested in the budget. The
Committee is concerned that after committing $165,000,000, few
of the savings promised by the system have been realized. The
Committee directs the Secretary to report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations, within 90 days of
enactment, the report shall include the initial savings
estimate of the system, a list of the types and amounts of
savings realized to date, and how those savings were used to
support other department programs. The report should also
provide complete cost acquisition and maintenance schedules,
and the estimated cost of maintenance by bureau through fiscal
year 2008.
E-Gov Initiatives.--The Committee recommendation provides
$2,762,000 in new funding in support of the Department's e-Gov
initiatives. The Committee is supportive of these initiatives
and the role they can play in better operations and
effectiveness across the Department's information systems
program. The amount provided is a result of financial
limitations on the Committee.
IT Governance.--The Committee recommendation does not
provide $275,000 requested for this program effort, viewing
this primarily as on-going management efforts previously
supported by the Department's base funding.
Treasury Enterprise Architecture.--The Committee
recommendation provides $400,000. This amount is $200,000 above
the current funding level for this project. The Committee is
supportive of efforts in this area and has doubled the current
level of effort dedicated by the Department. Although new
funding was provided, the justification materials do not
elaborate on the full purposes of the request.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $12,923,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 14,158,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,158,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $77,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General
[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office
of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989.
The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and
investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency,
and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste and abuse in
departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the
Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of problems
and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs
and operations. The audit function provides program audit,
contract audit and financial statement audit services. Contract
audits provide professional advice to agency contracting
officials on accounting and financial matters relative to
negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement
of contracts. Program audits review and audit all facets of
agency operations. Financial statement audits assess whether
financial statements fairly present the agency's financial
condition and results of operations, the adequacy of accounting
controls, and compliance with laws and regulations. These
audits contribute significantly to improved financial
management by helping Treasury managers identify improvements
needed in their accounting and internal control systems. The
evaluations function reviews program performance and issues
critical to the mission of the Department, including assessing
the Department's implementation of the Government Performance
and Results Act [GPRA]. The investigative function provides for
the detection and investigation of improper and illegal
activities involving programs, personnel, and operations.
The Committee believes that it is important to have an
independent Inspector General office to maintain oversight over
departmental programs. The duties and responsibilities of the
Treasury Inspector General and the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration are vastly different in substance. The
Committee believes that a merger would dilute the vigorous
oversight that Congress and the taxpayers expect and the two
are not conducive to being integrated.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,158,000
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General.
The Committee has provided $2,000,000 over the budget request
to the Treasury Inspector General and $3,235,000 above the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee directs that the
funds be divided evenly between the Office of Audit and the
Office of Investigations. The Committee believes that
increasing the number of audit positions is necessary to
provide more aggressive analysis of the regulatory and
compliance operations performed by the Department. This
includes coordination between enforcement and regulatory
functions and the reliability and usefulness of Bank Secrecy
Act data. The Committee believes that increasing the number of
investigative positions is necessary to detect and prevent
fraud, related financial crimes, as well as criminal employee
misconduct. The Committee notes that although the number of
investigators has declined more than 80 percent since fiscal
year 2003, the Treasury Office of Inspector General's
investigative caseload has more than doubled. The office is
currently engaged in a number of high-profile cases of bank
fraud and examiner obstructions by regulated institutions,
inappropriate release of national security and other sensitive
information, and misuse of the Treasury seal. The Committee is
also aware that some bureaus and offices within the Department
have not had a financial audit performed in the last 5 years.
The Committee expects that these funds will ensure that the
Inspector General has sufficient funds to complete the audit of
the Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration account.
TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $127,277,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 129,126,000
Committee recommendation................................ 129,126,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $755,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
[TIGTA] was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act
of 1998 (Public Law 105-206). Funding was first appropriated
for this account in the fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58).
TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to
assess the operations and programs of the Internal Revenue
Service [IRS] and Related Entities, the IRS Oversight Board and
the Office of Chief Counsel to (1) promote the economic,
efficient and effective administration of the nation's tax laws
and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS programs and
operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve fraud and
other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these
programs and operations, and keep the Secretary and Congress
fully and currently informed of these issues and the progress
made in resolving them. TIGTA reviews existing and proposed
legislation and regulations relating to the programs and
operations of the IRS and Related Entities and makes
recommendations concerning the impact of such legislation and
regulations on the economy and efficiency in the administration
of programs and operations of the IRS and Related Entities. The
audit function provides program audit, contract audit and
financial statement audit services. Program audits review and
audit all facets of IRS and Related Entities. Contract audits
provide professional advice to IRS contracting officials on
accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation,
award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts.
The evaluations function reviews program performance and issues
critical to the mission of the IRS. The investigative function
provides for the detection and investigation of improper and
illegal activities involving IRS programs and operations and
protects the IRS and Related Entities against external attempts
to corrupt or threaten their employees.
The Committee believes that a merger of TIGTA and the
Treasury Inspector General would diminish the oversight that
Congress and the taxpayers expect and the two entities are not
good candidates for integration.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $129,126,000
for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This
amount is the same as the President's request and $1,849,000
over the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Of this amount, the
accompanying bill provides $1,500 for official reception and
representation account.
AIR TRANSPORTATION STABILIZATION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $2,523,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 2,800,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $15,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act,
Public Law 107-42, established the Air Transportation
Stabilization Board. The Board may issue up to $10,000,000,000
in loan guarantees.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for
the Air Transportation Stabilization Program. This amount is
$800,000 less than the budget request.
TREASURY BUILDING AND ANNEX REPAIR AND RESTORATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $24,853,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 20,316,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,316,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $148,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration
appropriation funds the repairs, selected improvements and
construction necessary to renovate and maintain the main
Treasury Building and the Treasury annex.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,316,000
for the repair and restoration of the Treasury Building and
Annex, $8,000,000 less than the budget request and $12,537,000
less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
The Department's budget justification has identified this
as the final year of funding for the Treasury Building and
Annex Repair and Restoration. The Department's responses to
questions related to the budget justification indicated that
``some critical repairs to the Treasury Building have been
deferred or cancelled in order to meet the 2005 deadline'' for
completion. In light of this response and preliminary
information received from the Inspector General, the Committee
is highly skeptical of the actual status of this program. The
Committee is disappointed that after appropriating
$234,000,000, not only is the renovation of the historic
Treasury building not complete, but the Annex has received
virtually no repair. The Committee is concerned about the long
term continuing character of this renovation and even though no
funds will be requested in this account in future years, it is
clear that this project is not complete.
The Committee recommends a decrease of $8,000,000 from the
budget request due to the budget constraints of the Committee
and ongoing concerns about the cost escalation and delayed
completion. The Committee expects the Department to manage the
completion within the funds available. The Committee directs
the Department to provide a report to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations no later than March 1, 2005. The
report shall contain the following: (1) the original plan and
scope for the Treasury Department and Annex; (2) the final plan
and scope of the project scheduled for completion in 2005; (3)
a full assessment and explanation of cost variances by project
compared to the original plan; (4) an assessment of all future
requirements for new and deferred maintenance and repairs for
the main Treasury building and the Annex; and (5) all
restoration work done to the Annex.
EXPANDED ACCESS TO FINANCIAL SERVICES
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, 2004........................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... -$4,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -4,000,000
The Expanded Access to Financial Services account is
intended to help low and moderate income Americans benefit from
access to basic financial services.
The Committee recommends a rescission of $4,000,000 in
unobligated balances from fiscal years 2002 and 2003
appropriations. This is the same as the President's request.
VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION PROGRAM
(VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION TRUST FUND)
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, 2004........................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... -$1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -1,200,000
Amounts for the Department of the Treasury's portion of
Crime Control Programs are derived from transfers from the
Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund, as authorized by the Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
The Committee recommends a rescission of $1,200,000. The
budget recommendation is $200,000 more than the budget request.
TERRORISM INSURANCE PROGRAM
On November 26, 2002, President Bush signed into law the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-297). The
Act establishes and provides mandatory funding for a temporary
Terrorism Insurance Program to be administered by the
Department of the Treasury. Under the program, the Federal
Government is responsible for paying 90 percent of the insured
losses arising from acts of terrorism above the applicable
insurer deductible and below the $100,000,000,000 annual cap.
The budget includes estimates of the general administrative
costs of the program. Given the uncertainty surrounding the
risk of future terrorist attacks, the budget does not include
estimates of the timing or magnitude of potential insurance
claims under the program, which is scheduled to sunset on
December 31, 2005. Any such claims would be paid from
permanent, indefinite authority and would not require
subsequent appropriations.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $57,231,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 64,502,000
Committee recommendation................................ 72,502,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $340,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN] was
established in 1990 as a government-wide, service-oriented,
financial information-sharing agency. FinCEN's mission is to
help safeguard the U.S. financial system from the abuses of
money laundering and illicit finance, including the financing
of terrorism. FinCEN achieves this mission through the
administration of the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA], as amended;
through tactical and strategic analysis of financial
information; through education and outreach with the goal of
achieving greater financial transparency; and, through the
timely sharing of financial intelligence to aid law enforcement
and, where appropriate, the intelligence community in the
detection and investigation of money laundering and illicit
financial activity, including the financing of terrorism.
FinCEN is responsible for collecting, maintaining, analyzing
and disseminating financial information reported by financial
institutions as required by the Bank Secrecy Act, as amended.
The Bank Secrecy Act, as amended, is the Nation's regulatory
regime to address the problems of money laundering and other
illicit finance, including the financing of terrorism. FinCEN
adds value to the Bank Secrecy Act data it collects to support
law enforcement by providing investigatory leads, trends and
pattern information, and other tactical and strategic
analytical products and, by networking its information to
agencies with similar investigatory interests. FinCEN works
closely with the financial services community to ensure that
the regulations it crafts strike the appropriate balance
between meeting the needs of the government, the regulatory
burden placed upon the financial industry, and the privacy
interests of U.S. citizens. FinCEN's approach to assuring
industry compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act is predicated on
education and outreach. However, its regulatory enforcement
authorities provide for application of significant civil
monetary penalties against financial institutions that fail to
address serious compliance deficiencies.
Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act (The International Money
Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act of 2001)
recognized FinCEN's unique position as a focal point for
information relating to money laundering, the financing of
terrorism, and other financial crimes. To carry out these
responsibilities, the USA PATRIOT Act elevated FinCEN to a
bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The Act
directed FinCEN to carry out, in whole or in part, 23 of the 44
provisions in the Title, including accelerating the timetable
for expanding certain Bank Secrecy Act requirements to a broad
range of financial entities beyond depository institutions,
such as mutual fund operators, futures commission merchants,
the insurance industry, dealers in precious stones and metals
and others. Moreover, FinCEN serves as our Nation's financial
intelligence unit or FIU. FinCEN's network includes an
international community of other FIUs that, in 2004, grew to
over 90 countries.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $72,502,000
for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. This amount is
$8,000,000 above the administration's request and $15,271,000
over the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
FinCEN's BSA Direct Initiative.--The Committee understands
that the ``BSA Direct'' initiative will be the cornerstone of
FinCEN's technology architecture. BSA Direct will provide
FinCEN and its customers the ability to access and analyze
information collected under the Bank Secrecy Act in a user-
friendly, secure web-based platform. FinCEN receives over 13
million reports annually from financial institutions. This data
is currently housed in 12 separate databases at the IRS's
Detroit Computing Center and is accessed through an antiquated
dial-up system. The budget request provides $2,500,000 to
support this new Presidential initiative. The Department of the
Treasury has supplemented the budget request by an additional
$2,000,000 with monies from the Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund.
The Committee understands the importance of this system to
FinCEN's mission and, therefore, has provided the additional
$5,000,000 needed to complete this mission-critical project
that is expected to be operational by October 2005.
The Committee, while providing this necessary funding, is
concerned about duplication that may exist with systems being
developed at the IRS's Detroit Computing Center, which
currently houses the data collected under the Bank Secrecy Act
in an outdated legacy system. Therefore, the Committee directs
the Secretary to certify within 30 days of enactment to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that the system
and data warehouse being developed by the Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network relating to data collected under the Bank
Secrecy Act is the sole system being developed by Treasury or
any of its bureaus to house and provide general access to such
data. The Committee directs that none of the funds provided for
this system be expended prior to receipt of such certification.
The Director of FinCEN shall report to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations any significant delay, deviation
or change in costs associated with the contract to develop this
project. Further, the Committee is disappointed to learn that
the IRS has expended approximately $4,000,000 to build a
platform similar to BSA Direct with no prior consultation with
OMB, Treasury or the Congress. Given the IRS's troubled history
with developing computer systems, the Committee at a minimum,
expects the IRS to focus resources and attention on getting its
own BSM project to meet performance and delivery goals prior to
addressing the rest of the Government's information technology
needs.
FinCEN's Enhanced Administration of the Bank Secrecy Act.--
The Committee recommendation provides an additional $3,000,000
to hire no less than 18 FTEs to assist FinCEN in ensuring
compliance by all financial industries subject to the BSA. This
increase will provide FinCEN with the resources to acquire the
expertise necessary to ensure the protection of our Nation's
financial system from abuse by criminals and those seeking to
carry out acts of terror. The Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by
Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act, imposes a series of reporting
and recordkeeping requirements on a wide array of financial
institutions in order to detect and prevent money laundering
and the financing of terrorism. The Department of Treasury,
through FinCEN, administers the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN has
delegated the responsibility to examine financial institutions
for Bank Secrecy Act compliance to various Federal regulatory
agencies. The agencies examining for BSA compliance include the
Federal functional banking regulators, the Securities and
Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading
Commission, and the Internal Revenue Service. As the
administrator FinCEN has retained the sole authority to seek
civil enforcement remedies for violations of the Bank Secrecy
Act.
Recent events have exposed fundamental weaknesses in the
system for Bank Secrecy Act compliance examination. The
revelations of obvious, egregious, and possibly criminal
violations of the BSA within the Riggs National Bank were
nearly eclipsed by the fact that Riggs' regulator, the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency [OCC], knew of such problems
for years before taking any serious action to require Riggs to
address them. Most significantly, the OCC failed to advise
FinCEN, the administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, of any of
the problems within Riggs until shortly before OCC made the BSA
deficiencies public. FinCEN, because it did not have access to
examination information from the OCC, had no way of knowing
about Riggs' compliance deficiencies. In response, FinCEN has
created a new ``Office of Compliance'' in its Division of
Regulatory Policy, Compliance and Enforcement, which will be
dedicated to fulfilling FinCEN's role in more aggressively
administering and implementing the Bank Secrecy Act and
overseeing the examination activities of the agencies examining
for Bank Secrecy Act compliance. The Office of Compliance will
identify compliance problems within financial institutions at
an early stage and ensure that appropriate corrective action is
taken. The Committee understands that FinCEN has developed a
plan where agencies are now required to notify FinCEN's Office
of Compliance when they discover significant Bank Secrecy Act
violations within financial institutions and to provide to
FinCEN a copy of the relevant portion of the reports of
examination and other supporting material. The agencies will
also have to produce aggregate information on their Bank
Secrecy Act examinations and the deficiencies found.
Moreover, for the first time, FinCEN will devote
significant analytical resources to its regulatory programs.
FinCEN has created an Office of Regulatory Support in its
Division of Analytics to support FinCEN's regulatory programs,
including the Office of Compliance. FinCEN will analyze
examination information from all agencies, and combine that
data with the information from Bank Secrecy Act reports that
FinCEN already collects and maintains. Through this analysis,
FinCEN will be able to support the examination functions of the
regulators by helping to identify both strategic and tactical
examination targets, emerging compliance deficiencies, and
identify and target problem financial institutions for
examination. Identification of deficiencies and compliance
issues also allows FinCEN to provide guidance to the industry
on a more timely basis and aid the industry in focusing its
compliance resources.
The Committee directs that the new resources provided above
may only be used to supplement the Office of Compliance or to
add analysts in the Office of Regulatory Support, if those
analysts provide direct support to the Office of Compliance.
The Committee directs that these new resources shall not be
used for any purpose or expense without the express written
approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
Financial Management Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $227,210,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 230,930,000
Committee recommendation................................ 230,930,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,348,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
In 1940, the United States Department of the Treasury
established the Fiscal Service, which consisted of the Bureau
of Accounts, the Bureau of the Public Debt, and the Office of
the Treasurer. A 1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service
created the Bureau of Government Financial Operations, which
was formed from a merger of the Bureau of Accounts and most
functions of the Office of the Treasurer. In 1984, the Bureau
of Government Financial Operations was renamed the Financial
Management Service [FMS]; the new name reflected Treasury's
renewed emphasis on achieving greater efficiency and economy in
government financial management.
Payments.--FMS implements payment policy and procedures for
the Federal Government, issues and distributes payments,
promotes the use of electronics in the payment process, and
assists agencies in converting payments from paper checks to
electronic funds transfer [EFT]. The control and financial
integrity of the Federal payments and collections process
includes reconciliation, accounting, and claims activities. The
claims activity settles claims against the United States
resulting from Government checks which have been forged, lost,
stolen, or destroyed, and collects monies from those parties
liable for fraudulent or otherwise improper negotiation of
Government checks.
Collections.--FMS implements collections policy,
regulations, standards, and procedures for the Federal
Government, facilitates collections, promotes the use of
electronics in the collections process, and assists agencies in
converting collections from paper to electronic media.
Debt Collection.--FMS provides debt collection operational
services to client agencies which includes collection of
delinquent accounts, offset of Federal payments against debts
owed the Government, post-judgment enforcement, consolidation
of information reported to credit bureaus, reporting for
discharged debts or vendor payments, and disposition of
foreclosed property.
Government-wide Accounting and Reporting.--FMS also
provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing
services to the Federal Government and the Government's agents
who participate in the payments and collections process by
generating a series of daily, monthly, quarterly and annual
Government-wide reports. FMS also works directly with agencies
to help reconcile reporting differences.
The Committee recommends $230,930,000 for salaries and
expenses for FMS. This amount is the same as the budget request
and $3,720,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $79,528,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 81,942,000
Committee recommendation................................ 83,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $472,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the
Treasury and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting
the public.
TTB enforces the Federal laws and regulations relating to
alcohol and tobacco. Its responsibilities include maintaining a
sound revenue management and regulatory system that continues
to reduce the taxpayer burden, improve service, collect the
revenue due, prevent tax evasion and other criminal conduct,
and protecting the public and preventing consumer deception in
regulated commodities.
The Committee recommends $83,000,000 for TTB. This amount
is an increase of $3,472,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level and $1,058,000 above the President's budget request. The
Committee has included additional funds to initiate TTB's
transition to Treasury supported systems and standards from the
Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. The Committee directs
the Department of the Treasury and the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau to submit by March 1, 2005, to the Committees
on Appropriations a detailed spending plan for the money
provided over the budget request. The report shall identify all
costs paid by TTB to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms
for shared services, including but not limited to space, rent,
telephones, furniture, computer services and maintenance. The
report shall include the estimated cost of those same services
if provided by the Department of the Treasury, and a plan, cost
and time schedule for migration to the Department's shared
services.
Homeopathic Medicine.--The Committee is aware that until
2000, imported homeopathic medicines were consistently
classified by the Customs Service as medicaments and that
several letter rulings reflect this longstanding and uniform
practice. The Committee is also aware that starting in 2000,
the Customs Service reversed itself and began to classify these
medicaments as alcoholic beverages or as food. Although the
Customs Service has been transferred from the Treasury
Department to the Department of Homeland Security, the Treasury
Department retains the authority to overturn Customs'
classification decisions. The Committee urges the Treasury
Department to use its authority to review this matter and to
take appropriate action.
Bureau of the Public Debt
ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $172,627,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 175,166,000
Committee recommendation................................ 175,166,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,025,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the
appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The
Public Debt Service took general charge debt operations
including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement,
which had been conducted by several independent divisions
within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the
Reorganization Act of 1939, the President created the Bureau of
the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal
Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30,
1940, (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings Bonds Division, a
separate organization, was made part of the Bureau.
This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all
public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S.
savings-type securities.
Wholesale Securities Services.--This program ensures that
all primary and secondary markets for Treasury securities and
critical financing needs are maintained and met. It includes
all activities related to the regulation, auction, issue,
servicing and redemption of Treasury marketable securities that
are owned by institutional investors and their customers.
Government Agency Investment Services.--Within this
program, there are over 200 Federal trust and investment funds.
This program supports State, local and Federal Government
agencies' investments in non-marketable Treasury securities as
well as borrowings from the Treasury.
Retail Securities Services.--Marketable and non-marketable
securities held with Treasury are managed through this program.
In addition to issuance and redemption of securities,
processing customer service requests are also rendered through
this program.
Summary Debt Accounting.--This program involves the timely
and accurate accounting and reporting of the outstanding public
debt and related interest expense incurred to finance the
Federal Government.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $175,166,000
for the Bureau of the Public Debt in fiscal year 2005. This
amount is the same as the President's budget request and
$2,539,000 over the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
United States Mint
UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND
The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic
and investment products, and provides for security and asset
protection. Public Law 104-52 established the U.S. Mint Public
Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous
Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund,
and the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits
annual audited business-type financial statements to the
Secretary of the Treasury and to Congress in support of the
operations of the revolving fund.
The operations of the Mint are divided into three major
activities: Circulating Coinage; Numismatic and Investment
Products; and Protection. The Mint is credited with receipts
from its circulating coinage operations, equal to the full cost
of producing and distributing coins that are put into
circulation, including depreciation of the Mint's plant and
equipment on the basis of current replacement value. Those
receipts pay for the cost of the Mint's operations, which
includes the costs of production and distribution. The
difference between the face value of the coins and these costs
are profit, which is deposited as seigniorage to the general
fund. In fiscal year 2003, the Mint transferred $600,000,000 to
the general fund. Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint's
capital acquisitions is recorded as budget authority in the
year that funds are obligated for this purpose and as receipts
over the life of the asset.
Budget Justification.--In fiscal year 1996, the Committees
on Appropriations created the Public Enterprise Fund to assist
the Mint in responding to the variability of coinage demands
and to meet its ongoing capital equipment requirements. The
Committee reminds the Mint that the fund was created for its
benefit. The Committee is disappointed with the lack of budget
justification materials provided annually by the Mint. To
remedy this situation, the Committee directs that the Mint's
fiscal year 2006 budget justification materials, using fiscal
year 2005 as the baseline, include: (1) a current
organizational chart for the Mint headquarters; (2) a complete
FTE count by headquarters organizational business units; (3) a
complete cost accounting for all headquarters expenses,
including but not limited to, domestic travel, international
travel, rent, repairs, supplies, equipment, all advertising
costs, and the projected FTE's for the headquarters building
requested for fiscal year 2006; (4) a detailed cost breakout of
the construction costs, including sunk costs and new security
costs for the museum; (5) the annual operating costs to
maintain the museum after its construction; (6) an
organizational chart and FTE breakout, by job function, for the
Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the San Francisco Mint, the
West Point Mint and any other Mint facility; and (7) a detailed
breakout of all capital acquisitions and accompanying
obligation timetable. The Committee defines organizational
business units as the office of the director, deputy director,
executive secretary, legislative affairs, public affairs,
management, office of the general counsel, administration,
chief financial officer, chief information officer, sales and
marketing, production, and Mint police. Finally, the Committee
directs that the cost accounting include all functions and FTEs
(those on temporary duty, detailed, and those permanently
assigned) regardless of the funding source.
Mint-BEP Merger.--The Committee recognizes that efforts are
already underway in the Department for the study of a potential
merger of some or all activities of the United States Mint and
the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Given the multiple
jurisdictional issues of the two bureaus and the uniqueness of
many of their respective activities, the Committee has included
a general provision governing the implementation of any
recommendations resulting from the ongoing review by the
Department. Particularly unique are the financing arrangements
of the two bureaus, as well as the relationship of Public
Enterprise Fund balances to the financing of the Federal
Government public debt. For these and other reasons, the
Committee believes it is important that a full congressional
review take place on any recommendations by the committees with
oversight responsibility, and therefore, has included a general
provision to this effect.
Bureau of Engraving and Printing
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the
sole manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years.
The origin of the BEP is traced to an Act of Congress passed on
February 25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of
the Treasury to issue a new currency--United States notes.
While this law was the cornerstone authority for the operations
of the engraving and printing division of the Treasury for many
years, it was not until an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100,
that the Congress first referred to this division as the
``Bureau of Engraving and Printing.'' The Bureau's status as a
distinct bureau within the Department of the Treasury was
solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 30 Stat.
18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the
immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of
the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in
31 U.S.C. 303.
The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve
notes, various public debt instruments, as well as financial
characters issued by the United States, such as postage and
internal revenue stamps. The BEP executes certain printings for
various territories administered by the United States,
particularly postage and revenue stamps.
The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means
of a revolving fund established in accordance with the
provisions of Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181),
which requires the BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies
for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed.
The BEP is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital
equipment and provide for working capital needs.
No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities
of the BEP.
Mint-BEP Merger.--As noted previously, the Committee
recognizes that efforts are already underway in the Department
for the study of a potential merger of some or all activities
of the United States Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing. Given the multiple jurisdictional issues of the two
bureaus and the uniqueness of many of their respective
activities, the Committee has included a general provision
governing the implementation of any recommendations resulting
from the ongoing review by the Department. Particularly unique
are the financing arrangements of the two bureaus, as well as
the relationship of Public Enterprise Fund balances to the
financing of the Federal Government's public debt. For these
and other reasons, the Committee believes it is important that
a full Congressional review take place on any recommendations
by the Committees with oversight responsibility, and therefore,
has included a general provision to this effect.
Internal Revenue Service
The Internal Revenue Service history dates back to 1862. In
1953 following a reorganization of its function, its name
became the Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. The IRS mission is
to provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping
them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by
applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The
IRS deals directly with more Americans than any other
institution, public or private. In 2003, the IRS collected
nearly $2,000,000,000,000 in revenue and processed more than
222 million tax returns at a cost of 48 cents for each $100
collected by the IRS. Also, in 2003, the agency provided
assistance more than 97 million times through toll-free
telephone lines, correspondence or visits to its more than 400
offices nationwide. An important focus of recent years for the
IRS has been to undertake a major modernization of its systems
and business operations to better serve taxpayers and enforce
the law. A companion objective in fiscal year 2005 is to
strengthen overall compliance and enforcement designed to
address noncompliance with the tax code, thus making the total
tax administration fairer for all. The Committee has attempted
to balance those objectives with budget constraints.
The Committee recommends appropriations that provide a
total of $10,392,462,000 for the IRS in fiscal year 2005. This
amount is $281,078,000 less than the administration's request
and $208,720,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
The resources for this bill in fiscal year 2005 are very
constrained, requiring the Committee to make difficult
decisions on the appropriate allocations between accounts.
However, even with these limitations, the Committee's
recommendations maintain strong support for the operations of
the Internal Revenue Service, providing almost 98 percent of
the IRS's fiscal year 2005 budget request. For all areas other
than Business Systems Modernization, the increases provided are
more than 99 percent of the original request. The reductions
for Business System Modernization are discussed in more depth
under that account heading and support the important re-
focusing that the Committee views is necessary at this stage of
the development and implementation processes. In the Tax Law
Enforcement account, where an 8.3 percent increase is supported
for fiscal year 2005, the Committee supports the renewed focus
on compliance and enforcement activities, given the declines in
investments and performance in recent years. The Committee
views this area, along with the business modernization program,
as the highest priority investments for the Internal Revenue
Service for the coming year. The Processing, Administration and
Management appropriation is funded at 2.5 percent above the
fiscal year 2004 level and selected reductions have been
applied to the Information Systems appropriation to ensure that
new program increases are targeted to the high priority
compliance and enforcement activities.
IRS Reorganization Plans.--The Committee is disappointed
with the agency's performance with regard to the
reorganization. These plans have been announced piece-meal,
without an apparent overall structure or goal. The resulting
reductions in force [RIF], affecting nearly 5,000 employees and
subsequent new hires, are occurring despite the lack of
communication of a clear understanding of all the costs and
benefits. For this reason, the Committee directs the IRS to
submit a detailed report to the Committee, 30 days after
enactment of this Act, which shall include: (1) a detailed cost
analysis of the savings expected from the RIFs, the anticipated
increase in productivity resulting from the consolidations, the
administrative costs necessary to conduct the RIFs, and the
costs to modify the work and accommodate the new hires; (2) the
cost of hiring and training the new employees to do the same
work that is currently being performed by the current
employees, and a detailed qualitative description of the type
of training that will be given to the new hires; (3) an
analysis that demonstrates and explains how the IRS intends to
do the same amount of work with fewer employees and how this
will affect the taxpayers served by these employees both
directly and indirectly; (4) a description of any gap in work
productivity due to transition, hiring and training and the
effect this will have on delays to case processing and
insolvency cases; (5) an analysis that shows how greater
efficiency is achieved by moving employees out of the field,
away from the staff they support; this analysis should pay
particular attention to and include a description of how the
work of the revenue agents and officers will be affected by not
having support staff in the same proximity.
With regard to any RIF, the Committee directs the IRS to
use all available resources to minimize involuntary
separations, including: providing preference to those employees
targeted by the RIF to fill other vacancies for which they are
qualified within the IRS, Treasury Department or other Federal
agencies in the RIF location; implementing a hiring freeze for
IRS vacancies in locations undergoing a RIF for 90 days after
the RIF announcement to allow targeted employees to apply for
an appropriate vacancy; providing bump and retreat rights as
set out in 5 CFR 351, with competitive areas being defined
broadly; providing training or retraining for employees so they
can move into other positions within the IRS; actively seeking
authorization for voluntary early retirement authority and
voluntary separation incentive payments, which should be
offered as widely as possible in the geographic locations
affected so that employees who cannot afford to leave
voluntarily can move into positions vacated by those who can;
and making available the maximum 6 months of career transition
assistance program benefits to all IRS employees described in
the above paragraph affected by a RIF.
PROCESSING, ASSISTANCE, AND MANAGEMENT
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,009,205,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,148,403,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,107,325,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $23,795,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides for: processing tax returns and
related documents; assisting taxpayers in the filing of their
returns, paying taxes that are due, and complying with tax
laws; issuing technical rulings; revenue accounting; conducting
background investigations; and managing financial resources,
rent and utilities.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,107,325,000
for Processing, Assistance, and Management. This is a reduction
of $41,078,000 below the budget request and $98,120,000 above
the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee
recommendation provides the full level of funding necessary to
support current services as identified in the IRS budget
request. Although not all program increases requested were
funded (reduction of $41,000,000) the amount provided in this
appropriation represents a 2.5 percent increase over the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level.
The recommendation does include sufficient resources to
ensure that the IRS is able to fully reinvest into this
appropriation the projected savings identified through base
mining. The Committee is skeptical of the IRS's ability to
fully realize all the savings identified in this account and
wants to ensure that tax processing has the resources necessary
to meet tax responsibilities. The Committee looks forward to a
full report from the Service on the proposed resource
realignments, as well as results from the Plan Optimization
Study, for which an additional $19,000,000 in savings is
estimated.
IRS Staffing Plans.--The Committee continues to support
adequate staffing levels for effective tax administration and
supports the staffing plans for the Internal Revenue Service
facilities in the communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, WV.
Therefore, the Committee urges the IRS, within the constraints
of the fiscal year 2005 funding levels, to make no staffing
reductions at the Martinsburg National Computing Center and the
programmed level at the Administrative Services Center in
Beckley, WV. Further, the Committee directs the IRS to provide
an annual report to the Committee on its efforts to protect and
increase staffing levels at the Martinsburg and Beckley IRS
facilities.
Tax Counseling for the Elderly.--The Committee once again
believes that the Tax Counseling Program for the Elderly has
proven to be most successful. To meet the goals of this
program, $4,100,000 is included within the aggregate amount
recommended by the Committee for processing tax returns and
assistance in fiscal year 2005. To ensure that the full effect
of the program is accomplished, the IRS is directed to cover
administrative expenses within existing funds.
Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.--Given the remote
distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the
difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in
receiving needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line,
it is imperative that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in
each of these States is fully staffed and capable of resolving
taxpayer problems of the most complex nature. The Committee
directs the Internal Revenue Service to continue to staff each
Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in each of these States with a
Collection Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical
Advisor in addition to the current complement of office staff.
Staffing shall be increased if, as the result of the IRS
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, subsequent legislation,
or other factors, the number of cases or their complexity
increases.
Chicago, IL Tax Assistance Program.--The Committee is aware
of an innovative financial literacy and tax assistance project
in Chicago, Illinois--Tax Assistance Program--designed to
assist low income workers and their families with tax education
and filing, in cooperation with the State of Illinois and the
City of Chicago's Earned Income Tax Credit [EITC] outreach
efforts. The Committee encourages the IRS to continue to
provide appropriate technical and financial assistance for this
worthwhile initiative.
Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic.--The Committee once again
commends the IRS for the Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic [LITC]
program. With the growing complexity of tax laws, this program
has provided invaluable help for taxpayers who are seeking to
resolve disputes with the IRS. To ensure that the goals of the
LITC program are maintained, the Committee has provided a total
of $7,000,000 to be distributed and to assist low-income
taxpayer clinics across the Nation.
Need-based tax preparation assistance through LITC and
other programs such as VITA are imperative for many of our
Nation's taxpayers who cannot afford commercial preparers.
Without this assistance, many individuals may either not file a
return or will make errors and prepare their returns
improperly, ultimately leading to a dispute with the IRS. The
Committee believes that successfully helping taxpayers with
problems with the IRS begins with the accurate preparation and
filing of the return. Without this assistance, the limited
resources available to the LITC program will be insufficient to
meet the demand of taxpayers with controversies with the IRS.
Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.--The Committee notes that
the existing Volunteer Income Tax Assistance [VITA] program
provides an invaluable service by helping low income taxpayers
prepare and file their Federal income tax returns. However, the
Committee is troubled by a recent Tax Inspector General for Tax
Administration [TIGTA] audit report for the 2004 tax filing
season, stating that taxpayers were provided with inaccurate
answers to basic tax law questions and the accuracy of tax
returns prepared at the VITA sites. In light of TIGTA's recent
findings, the Committee directs the IRS to take immediate steps
to implement an improved taxpayer assistance training program
for its employees to ensure that taxpayers are given accurate
and complete answers to their tax questions and that tax
returns prepared on the taxpayer's behalf are done correctly.
The Committee also directs IRS to submit to both the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations its proposed method of
education and training to properly train the employees for this
task no later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act.
The Committee urges the IRS to continue to provide such
additional sums as may become available to the VITA program
outside of its in-kind contribution program. These additional
funds are intended to assist the IRS in expanding the VITA
program to hard-to-serve areas, such as Indian reservations.
Additionally, these funds are intended to increase the capacity
of VITA sites to file returns electronically and to cover some
operational expenses. The Committee expects that IRS will
continue its current level of in-kind contributions to the VITA
programs.
TAX LAW ENFORCEMENT
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,171,244,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,564,350,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,519,350,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $24,756,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199.
Tax Law Enforcement [TLE] provides equitable application
and enforcement of the laws, identifies possible non-filers,
investigates violations of criminal statutes, supports the
Statistics of Income program and conducts research to identify
compliance issues.
EITC.--The Committee is extremely troubled that the IRS has
not rendered a solution to the beleaguered earned income tax
compliance [EITC] program. It is apparent that the EITC
initiative continues to be plagued with deficiencies. A pilot
program for the EITC initiative was administered in 2004,
randomly selecting 25,000 taxpayers to certify their
eligibility. Only 65 percent of the taxpayers selected filed
with a qualifying child. The Committee directs the IRS to
continue to review this program and evaluate the information
received from the pilot project and determine the best method
to prevent fraud within this program and submit a report to the
Committees by March 1, 2005.
Compliance Services.--This activity funds services provided
to a taxpayer after a return is filed to identify and correct
possible errors or underpayment. Included in this activity are
staffing, training and support for: (1) compliance services
operational management; (2) centralized automated collection
system [ACS] and collection by correspondence in service
centers; (3) field investigations and collection efforts
associated with delinquent taxpayer and business entity
liabilities; (4) documents matching; (5) examination of
taxpayer returns at service centers; (6) field exams to
determine corresponding tax liabilities; (7) enforcement of
criminal statutes related to violations of internal revenue
laws and other financial crimes; (8) processing of reports for
currency transactions over $10,000,000; (9) case settlement
through the appeals process; (10) litigation; and (11) taxpayer
advocate case processing.
Research and Statistics of Income.--This activity funds
research and statistical analysis support for the IRS. It
provides annual income, financial, and tax data from tax
returns filed by individuals, corporations, and tax-exempt
organizations. Likewise it provides resources for market-based
research to identify compliance issues, for conducting tests of
treatments to address non-compliance, and for the
implementation of successful treatments of taxpayer non-
compliant behavior.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,519,350,000
for Tax Law Enforcement activities in fiscal year 2005. This is
a reduction of $45,000,000 from the administration's request
and a $348,106,000 increase from the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level.
New Compliance Funding for Fiscal Year 2005.--The Committee
supports plans by the Internal Revenue Service to expand its
focus in the Tax Law Enforcement area. This is an area where
results have declined in recent years along with the IRS's
ability to apply appropriate staff toward improvement. The
administration's fiscal year 2005 budget request for the IRS
recognized these deficiencies and has proposed significant new
resources to shore up the IRS's compliance and enforcement
programs. The budget for Treasury highlights key themes for the
Department, one of which is to deter tax evasion and fraud by
increasing criminal investigations and audits, ensure that the
Tax System is fair for all, and maintain world class service.
The Committee endorses the priority of improving compliance and
has provided $153,010,000 in new initiative funding in the Tax
Law Enforcement Appropriation to be dedicated exclusively to
the efforts set out in the IRS justification proposals. With
this initiative, the Committee has funded 99 percent of the
total amount requested by the IRS for Tax Law Enforcement. In
recent years, the IRS has consistently used the majority of its
new compliance funding for purposes other than those that
Congress intended. Specifically, funds have been used to cover
budget shortfalls in base operations. Maintaining funding for
targeted compliance efforts is critically important to
addressing the concerns and priorities identified by the IRS in
its fiscal year 2005 justifications to the Congress. The
Committee is concerned and disappointed about the IRS's
continued diversion of funds from enforcement activities to
other accounts. The Committee is hopeful that the IRS is as
committed as the Congress to ensuring proper resources are
dedicated to enforcement.
Therefore, to ensure that the IRS uses fiscal year 2005
funding for compliance programs, the Committee has restricted
the IRS's ability to use those funds and has limited the IRS
transfer authority for the Tax Law Enforcement appropriation
account to 3 percent. Beyond this amount, the IRS must receive
prior approval from both the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations.
Further, the Committee directs the Commissioner to submit
quarterly reports to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations that identify the IRS's progress, status, and
results in implementing its proposed compliance initiatives.
The report shall include: (1) baseline staffing levels and
resources for each of the programs proposed for new staffing in
fiscal year 2005, with the performance measures used by the IRS
as indicators for evaluating success of the program; (2)
initiative level staffing and resources for each program along
with related performance results compared to targets set out in
the IRS justification materials. The Committee expects that the
performance indicators reported and the performance results and
targets will be from the list provided in pages ``IRS, TLE-8 &
9'' of the IRS fiscal year 2005 budget justifications submitted
to the Congress in February 2004.
National Research Program.--The National Research Program
[NRP] is a comprehensive effort by the IRS to measure
reporting, filing and payment compliance for different types of
taxes and various sets of taxpayers. Data and compliance
measures resulting from NRP will help the IRS detect
noncompliance, reduce taxpayer burden, and support the IRS
strategic planning and budget process. The NRP is unlike other
earlier research programs. The current reporting compliance
study of individual income tax consists of approximately 46,000
randomly selected filed 1040 forms. These random returns will
represent most 1040 filers, and the sample will focus on
several high-income strata, including those with annual incomes
over $1,000,000. The NRP office, which is a small
organizational unit within the Research, Analysis and
Statistics Division, consists of about 13 full time equivalent
[FTE] positions with a base fiscal year 2005 operating budget
around $1,500,000. NRP operations include a wide range of IRS
activities which encompass the tax examiner and revenue agent
staff needed for the audits. In fiscal year 2004, the IRS
expects to devote about $89,500,000 (which includes 982 FTEs)
to the NRP effort. Most of this $89,500,000 reflects the
salaries and benefits of the examiners completing the bulk of
the face-to-face audits for the NRP (and related) tax returns
for the individual Form 1040 reporting compliance study.
The IRS estimated costs for NRP will drop noticeably for
fiscal year 2005, to $5,500,000 (including 39 FTEs). Fiscal
year 2005 is a transition year for NRP, with only a few
remaining individual returns left to examine for the individual
reporting compliance study 1040 study, and with a new reporting
compliance study just getting underway and involving
examinations for a very limited number of flow-through entity
returns. However, a comprehensive study of flow through entity
returns beginning in fiscal year 2006 would ramp up total NRP
costs significantly. The Committee understands the NRP office
expects to have an initial review of the ``final'' raw data set
by December 31, 2004. The Committee understands it will take a
fair amount of analysis to draw real conclusions from the data
and the best approaches to address them. The Committee is
interested in the IRS's ability to electronically verify and
audit capital gains information on schedule D filings.
Therefore, the Committee encourages the IRS, if the NRP data
shows the need for increased audit coverage, to explore all
existing software possibilities for electronically verifying
this data and developing the ability to incorporate the correct
cost basis of Schedule D transactions into the examination
process.
Bank Secrecy Act.--The Committee continues to be
discouraged by the IRS's repeated failure to incorporate the
recommendations of the Tax Inspector General for Tax
Administration as they relate to the IRS failures to improve
the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA] Compliance Program. This is the
second report in 3 years that documents the serious failure of
the IRS to administer and enforce its responsibilities under
the BSA. As a result, the Committee directs the Government
Accountability Office [GAO] to conduct a thorough review and
analysis of the IRS' management of the BSA compliance effort.
The Committee is concerned about the ambiguous missions and
responsibilities of the IRS and the Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network [FinCEN] with respect to the provisions of
the BSA. The dual administration of the Act by the IRS and
FinCEN undermines accountability and ultimate responsibility
over effective enforcement of the provisions of the BSA. As
part of the GAO review of IRS's specific management of the
compliance provisions of the BSA, the GAO should also review
and report on the effectiveness of the dual role played by IRS
and FinCEN in meeting the responsibilities of the BSA
legislation.
Motor Fuel Tax Evasion.--The Committee is concerned about
substantial revenue losses due to motor fuel tax evasion
[MFTE]. It is estimated that approximately $1,000,000,000
annually may be lost in receipts to the Highway Trust Fund as a
result of MFTE. These illegal activities are reducing the
Highway Trust Fund at a time when Federal, State, and local
transportation officials are increasingly concerned about the
number of highway and transit infrastructure projects that the
Trust Fund can sustain. It is clear that current Federal
efforts to prevent and reduce MFTE abuses must be strengthened
given the extent and complexity of the problem.
The surface transportation reauthorization legislation
proposes to substantially increase funding for IRS's MFTE
database programs and enforcement activities from $31,000,000
to $163,000,000. However, it is imperative to ensure that
taxpayers will be getting an appropriate return on their
investments given: (1) some of the problems IRS has experienced
upgrading and maintaining its computer and automated systems;
and (2) the continued existence of MFTE problems despite prior
Highway Trust Fund investments in IRS enforcement activities.
The Department of Transportation [DOT] has the responsibility
for the administration of the Highway Trust Fund, and for
improving the stewardship of trust fund resources as required
by both this and the transportation oversight committees. The
Committee believes the most effective governmental strategy for
reducing MFTE losses will require a sustained, expanded, and
robust effort supported by the resources and operational
capabilities of both DOT and Treasury, working in conjunction
with appropriate State and local authorities.
The Committee requests that the Secretary of Treasury
develop a strengthened MFTE compliance and enforcement strategy
in cooperation with the Secretary of Transportation to include
coordinating and conducting joint operational initiatives with
DOT to prevent, detect, and shut down MFTE schemes across the
country. The Committee is interested in knowing whether the
Secretaries of Treasury and Transportation have any joint
recommendations on legislative changes Congress may consider in
order to enhance the enforcement program. The Committee
requests the Secretary of Treasury to submit this strategy no
later than 6 months following enactment, with the concurrence
of the Secretary of Transportation. As part of such joint
initiatives, and to the extent permitted by law, the Secretary
of Treasury shall also, within 6 months after enactment, enter
into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of
Transportation, to provide DOT criminal investigators access to
petroleum products tax compliance information received by
Treasury. This information shall be limited to only business,
non-personal tax records, unless otherwise appropriate.
Given the concerns outlined above, the Committee requests
that Inspector General for Tax Administration conduct an audit
to evaluate prior and planned use of monies provided by DOT to
the IRS, in consultation with the DOT Inspector General.
Specifically, the Committee requests an audit of the IRS
management of Motor Fuel Tax Evasion Project funds provided
during fiscal years 1998 through 2004, and anticipated during
fiscal year 2005 through 2009 to determine whether: (1) Excise
Fuel Information Reporting System [ExFIRS] system requirements
were properly defined to meet stakeholder needs, the system
development was effectively managed to control costs, and the
system schedule development was implemented appropriately; (2)
Sufficient support is available for IRS' life-cycle cost
estimates for ExFIRS, and (3) IRS used the HTF funding in
accordance with TEA21 and other governing criteria.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,581,575,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 1,641,768,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,606,768,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $9,387,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides for Servicewide information
systems operations and maintenance, and investments to enhance
or develop business applications for the IRS Business Units.
The appropriation includes staffing, telecommunications,
hardware and software (including commercial-off-the-shelf), and
contractual services.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,606,768,000
for information systems activities in fiscal year 2005. This is
a reduction of $35,000,000 from the administration's request
and a $25,193,000 increase over the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level. The accompanying bill specifies that $200,000,000 of the
recommended funding level is available until September 30,
2006.
The Committee's recommendation also assesses selected
reductions to this account due to budget constraints. The
Committee recommendation does not approve the program
enhancement requested in order to devote resources toward what
we view as one of the highest priorities for fiscal year 2005,
improvement of compliance and enforcement activities. The IRS
has estimated over $33,000,000 in expected internal savings
from base mining, which will be available for realignment to
other areas within the appropriation during fiscal year 2005.
The Committee is skeptical of the IRS's ability to fully
realize all the savings identified in this appropriation
account and looks forward to a full report from the Service on
the proposed resource realignments, as well as results from
efficiency savings estimated at $2,000,000.
The Committee believes that funds provided under the
Information Systems account, particularly for development-
related activities, should be managed with the same diligence
and financial controls as those activities funded through the
Business Systems Modernization account. In addition, the
Committee expects that as the Business Systems Modernization
moves an increasing number of major projects into deployment,
the Service will realign development activities funded under
the Information Systems account so that they are managed and
integrated formally into Business Systems Modernization
activity.
BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $387,699,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 285,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 125,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $2,301,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This account provides for revamping business practices and
acquiring new technology. The agency is using a formal
methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, and evaluate its
portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This
methodology is designed to enforce a documented, repeatable,
and measurable process for managing investments throughout
their life cycle. The process is reviewed by the Government
Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of the
submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan
approval process prior to the use of appropriated funds
continues for fiscal year 2005.
The Committee continues to believe that there is no more
imperative requirement for the IRS than to modernize its
antiquated information system and agrees with the IRS that the
program is one of the largest, most visible, and most sensitive
modernization programs ever undertaken. However, the program
has experienced major problems with bringing to fruition the
program envisioned by the Congress to better manage
comprehensive tax filing, account management, and enforcement
information to better support the full range of tax
responsibilities for the American taxpayer. From the almost
$1,700,000,000 appropriated to date, the deliverables have not
been in the core tax system modernizations and database
requirements considered the highest priority and the most
critical to the ultimate success of the program. Significant
cost overruns and repeated schedule delays have plagued
critical projects, such as the Customer Account Data Engine
[CADE], the Integrated Financial System [IFS], and the
Custodial Accounting Project [CAP]. In testimony before the
Committee in support of the fiscal year 2005 budget, the
Committee learned the true status of deliverables for the
Business Systems Modernization effort. The IRS reported that,
``The IRS and PRIME have not delivered any BSM projects on time
and within the original budget estimates.''
The IRS has delayed the CADE program four times. It
originally planned to deliver the first release of CADE in
December 2001. The IRS then rescheduled it for August 2003, and
later rescheduled it for April 2004. The IRS recently finalized
the re-planning effort for CADE and set the latest delivery
date for September 2004. While CADE is farther along than the
earlier tax system modernization program in replacing a
component of the master file, there are still major hurdles to
overcome. These continued delays of critical systems central to
the success of BSM are of major concern to the Committee. The
Committee believes stronger focus needs to be directed to
completing these core systems and meeting original expectations
for the Business Systems Modernization effort.
In reviewing the current progress on key projects driving
the Business Systems Modernization, the Committee has noted the
cost and time milestone results for the major projects in the
BSM account. That information identifies key schedule slippages
and underscores the importance of re-focusing and dedicating
targeted efforts toward the most critical projects, with the
CADE project being first and foremost in that targeting. The
following chart sets out the results of the Committee's review
for major projects of the BSM program.
IRS/BSM COST INCREASES AND SCHEDULE OVERRUNS
[Dollars in thousands]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial
Initial Actual/ Cost Est. Actual/Revised Est.
Project Est. Cost Revised Increase Completion Completion Date Schedule Delay
Est. Cost Date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Communications [CC] 2001........ $41,110 $46,420 +$5,310 5/31/01 2/26/02 (Full Deployment)... +9 mo
Customer Relationship Management Exam 9,313 7,375 ........... 6/30/02 9/30/02 (Full Deployment)... +3 mo
[CRM Exam].
Security and Technology Infrastructure 33,734 41,287 +7,553 8/31/01 1/31/02 (Initial Operation). +5 mo
Release [STIR] Release.
Internet Refund/Fact of Filing [IR/FoF].. 13,509 26,432 +12,923 7/31/02 9/26/03 (Full Deployment)... +14 mo
Human Resources [HR] Connect Release..... 10,000 10,200 +200 12/31/02 12/31/02 (Initial Operation) N/A
E-Services............................... 44,045 130,281 +86,236 10/31/03 4/30/05 (Full Deployment)... +18 mo
Modernized e-File [MeF] Release.......... 29,246 46,303 +17,057 11/15/03 3/31/04 (Initial Operation). +4.5 mo
Customer Account Data Engine [CADE]-- 61,145 97,905 +36,760 12/31/02 6/30/05 (Full Deployment)... +30 mo
Individual Master File [IMF] Release.
Custodial Accounting Project [CAP] 47,161 119,219 +72,058 1/31/03 TBD (Full Deployment)....... TBD
Release.
Integrated Financial System [IFS] Release 99,870 153,786 +53,916 3/31/04 TBD (Full Deployment)....... TBD
Custom Account Mgmt [CAM] Release........ 57,578 TBD TBD 10/31/04 TBD (Initial Operation)..... TBD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A modernized IRS is the only way to substantially improve
service to the taxpayers and facilitate the collection of taxes
in an efficient manner. To this end, the Committee is pleased
with the tighter focus being brought to this program effort as
presented in the fiscal year 2005 budget request. However, the
continued delays for the high priority core projects suggests
that such focus needs to go even further to ensure delivery of
the most essential components that lead to success of the IRS
modernization program. The most critical of the delayed
projects is the CADE project. In testimony before the Committee
on the fiscal year 2005 budget request, the IRS stated:
``The delivery of the CADE project is particularly
important because--like the new online technical infrastructure
that the IRS deployed--CADE is a core fundamental component of
the modernized systems. As such, CADE is the IRS's highest
priority technology project.''
It is unfortunate that the IRS is not significantly further
along with the strategy to modernize its information systems,
particularly with the centralized database CADE project which
has been delayed several times beyond its original scheduled
delivery date. The Committee believes that the continued delay
in the implementation of the main CADE system has the potential
to further delay the eventual completion and expected benefits
in operations and service of the IRS total modernization
program. It is imperative that resources be focused on full
development of the CADE effort as a first priority and,
therefore, the Committee is recommending a resource level
consistent with that view.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $125,000,000
for business systems modernization. This is a reduction of
$160,000,000 from the administration's request and a
$262,669,000 decrease from the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
With the goal of focusing on the IRS BSM efforts even more
directly, the Committee recommendation provides fewer funds
overall than the initial request, and directs that the funding
provided be allocated to highest priorities. The Committee has
included the full $65,000,000 requested by the IRS for the
continued development of the CADE project in fiscal year 2005.
This is the IRS's highest priority technology project and needs
to be the first focus of new funding in 2005. To provide
continued support for other related BSM projects underway, the
Committee recommends an additional $60,000,000 above the CADE
requirements to fund on-going activities of other BSM
developmental projects. The top priority for the IRS in the
coming year should be for the continued development and
implementation of the CADE design, allocating further funding
to the CADE effort from other BSM available funds, if
necessary, in order to keep the centerpiece of BSM on schedule.
BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION
(RESCISSION)
Rescissions, 2004 \1\...................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ -$140,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $2,301,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Committee recommends a rescission of unobligated
balances from Business Systems Modernization of $140,000,000
out of funds appropriated in fiscal year 2004. The Committee
notes that these funds are available and a spending plan for
the release of these funds has not been provided to the
Congress.
HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $34,794,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 34,841,000
Committee recommendation................................ 34,841,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $207,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides operating funds to administer
the advance payment feature of a new Trade Adjustment
Assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist
dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The
tax credit program was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public
Law 107-210) and became effective in August 2003.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,841,000
for the Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration. This amount
is the same as the administration's request and a $47,000
increase from the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Section 201 authorizes the IRS to transfer up to 5 percent
of any appropriation made available to the agency in fiscal
year 2005 to any other IRS account, with the exception of the
Tax Enforcement account, which is limited to 3 percent. The IRS
is directed to follow the Committee's reprogramming procedures
outlined earlier in this report.
Section 202 maintains a training program in taxpayers'
rights and cross-cultural relations.
Section 203 requires the IRS to institute and enforce
policies and procedures which will safeguard the
confidentiality of taxpayer information.
Section 204 directs that funds shall be available for
improved facilities and increased manpower to provide
sufficient and effective 1-800 help line service for taxpayers.
The Commissioner shall continue to make this a priority.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
General Provisions
Section 210 authorizes certain basic services within the
Treasury Department in fiscal year 2005, including purchase of
uniforms; maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of
insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign
countries; and contracts with the Department of State for
health and medical services to employees and their dependents
serving in foreign countries.
Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Treasury
Inspector General for Tax Administration, Financial Management
Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the Public Debt
appropriations under certain circumstances.
Section 212 authorizes transfer, up to 2 percent, between
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration under certain circumstances.
Section 213 requires the purchase of law enforcement
vehicles is consistent with Departmental vehicle management
principles.
Section 214 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and
the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1
Federal Reserve Note.
Section 215 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to
transfer funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management
Service, to the Debt Services Account as necessary to cover the
costs of debt collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to
the Salaries and Expenses account from debt collections
received in the Debt Services Account.
Section 216 amends Section 122 of Public Law 105-119 (5
U.S.C. 3104 note), by striking ``6 years'' and inserting ``7
years''.
Section 217 requires prior approval for the construction
and operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
Section 218 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint
and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval
of the committees of jurisdiction.
Section 219 amends and makes permanent the Treasury
Franchise Fund.
Section 220 amends the Check Forgery Insurance Fund (31
U.S.C. 3343) to designate the fund as a funding source which
may be charged for losses Treasury incurs, including (1)
payments on counterfeit or altered Treasury checks and (2)
administrative errors in the check or electronic payment
processes. The provision also permits the Check Forgery
Insurance Fund to fund pre-existing uncollectible losses that
result from payments which Treasury made in the past in due
course and without negligence.
Section 221 requires a report from the Secretary of the
Treasury related to currency manipulation.
Section 222 provides for a prohibition on the use of funds
related to enforcement of the travel ban to Cuba.
Section 223 allows the Secretary to reprogram up to
$2,000,000 in unobligated balances under the heading
``Departmental Offices, Salaries and Expenses'' for the Office
of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence and establishes the
office.
TITLE III--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO
THE PRESIDENT
Compensation of the President
Appropriations, 2004.................................... $450,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 450,000
Committee recommendation................................ 450,000
This appropriation provides for the compensation of the
President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3
U.S.C. 102.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for
Compensation of the President, including an expense allowance
of $50,000. This is the same as the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level and the same as the budget estimate. The expense account
is for official use as authorized by Title 3 of U.S. Code and
is not considered taxable to the President. The bill specifies
that any unused amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent
with 31 U.S.C. 1552.
White House Office
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $68,760,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 63,698,000
Committee recommendation................................ 63,698,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $408,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Salaries and Expenses account of the White House Office
provides staff assistance and administrative services for the
direct support of the President. The office also serves as the
President's representative before the media. In accordance with
3 U.S.C. 105, the office also supports and assists the
activities of the First Lady.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,698,000
for White House Office Salaries and Expenses. The
recommendation is the same as the budget request and is
$5,062,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Executive Residence at the White House
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $12,427,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 12,760,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,760,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $74,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
These funds provide for the care, maintenance,
refurnishing, improvement, heating, and lighting, including
electrical power and fixtures, of the Executive Residence.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,760,000
for the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee
recommendation is $330,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level and the equal to the budget estimate. The
accompanying bill continues certain restrictions on
reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence that
were enacted for fiscal year 2004.
WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,200,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 1,900,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,900,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $25,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
To provide for the repair, alteration, and improvement of
the Executive Residence at the White House, a separate account
was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and track
expenditures for the capital improvement projects at the
Executive Residence at the White House.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,900,000 for
White House Repair and Restoration, the same amount as the
budget request and a reduction of $2,300,000 from the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level. The recommendation assumes funding of
$1,700,000 for replacement of the existing cooling towers and
associated electrical, mechanical, and control equipment;
$100,000 for moving and related expenses associated with the
possible change of administration; and $100,000 for the First
Family to redecorate the living quarters in the White House.
Council of Economic Advisers
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,475,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,040,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,040,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $27,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Council of Economic Advisors analyzes the national
economy and its various segments, advises the President on
economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth
and stability, appraises economic programs and policies of the
Federal government, and assists in the preparation of the
annual Economic Report of the President to Congress.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,040,000 for
salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This
amount is the same as the budget request and is $435,000 less
than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Office of Policy Development
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,085,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 3,592,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,392,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $24,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Policy Development supports the National
Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council, in carrying
out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President
in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of
economic and domestic policy. The Office of Policy Development
also provides support for other domestic policy development and
implementation activities as directed by the President.
The Committee recommends $2,392,000 for the Office of
Policy Development, which is $1,693,000 less than the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level and $1,200,000 less than budget
request. The Committee recommendation makes this adjustment
based on the amount of funding that has lapsed in this account
in recent years.
National Security Council
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $10,489,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 8,932,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,932,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $62,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The National Security Council advises the President in
integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies relating
to the national security.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,932,000 for
the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council
[NSC]. This amount is the same as the budget request and
$1,557,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Office of Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $82,337,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 85,676,000
Committee recommendation................................ 92,869,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $489,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Administration's mission is to provide high-
quality, cost-effective administrative services to the
Executive Office of the President. These services, defined by
Executive Order 12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel,
library and records services, information management systems
support, and general office services.
The Committee has provided $92,869,000 to the Office of
Administration for fiscal year 2005. In addition to the
recommended level of funding, the Office of Administration
receives reimbursements for information management support and
general office services.
Core Enterprise Services Program.--The Committee has
provided $18,530,000 for the core enterprise services program,
an increase of $7,193,000 above the budget request. The budget
request proposes to transfer non-discretionary GSA rent and
rent-related costs from White House Offices, Office of Policy
Development, Council of Economic Advisors, and National
Security Council to the Office of Administration to provide for
central management. To achieve greater administrative and cost
efficiencies, the Committee has included the Office of
Management and Budget in the core enterprise services program
and funding above the budget estimate represents OMB's costs
for rent, after-hours utilities, and prorated costs of heath
unit operations.
The White House
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004....................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... $181,048,000
Committee recommendation................................................
The budget request proposes a consolidation and financial
realignment of the Executive Office of the President [EOP]
accounts that directly support the President. The initiative
would consolidate annual appropriations for the Compensation of
the President and White House Office, Executive Residence,
White House Repair and Restoration, the Office of Policy
Development, the Council of Economic Advisers, the National
Security Council, and the Office of Administration, into a
single appropriation called ``The White House.''
The budget request also includes a related general
provision in the government-wide general provisions that would
provide for a 10 percent transfer authority among all
appropriations that comprise the EOP, except for certain
counterdrug accounts.
The Committee recommends funding for the offices that
directly support the President according to the existing
structure of accounts. This arrangement has served the
Committee's and the public's need for transparancy in the
funding and operation of these important functions while also
providing the executive branch with the flexibility it needs to
reprogram funds within accounts to address unforeseen budget
needs. As noted in discussions with administration officials in
past years, at no time has the Committee rejected an
administration's request to reprogram existing funds within
these accounts.
Office of Management and Budget
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $66,763,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 76,565,000
Committee recommendation................................ 68,411,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $396,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the
President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and
other executive responsibilities.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $68,411,000
for the Office of Management and Budget which is $1,648,000
more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
FASAB and JFMIP Contributions.--The Committee denies the
request to transfer funding to the Department of the Treasury
that supports the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
[FASAB] and the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program
[JFMIP]. The justification for consolidating OMB's annual
payments to FASAB and JFMIP in the Treasury Department is
exceptionally weak and rests on the desire to include the
expense in the organization where the services are contracted
rather than in the organization that initiates the expense.
This proposal is inconsistent with the manner in which similar
payments are treated in other agencies' budgets and leaves the
impression that the transfer of these payments is being
requested to mask the actual amount of resources for fiscal
year 2005. The recommendation assumes an adjustment of
$639,000.
Core Enterprise Services.--The Committee recommendation
transfers $7,193,000 back to the Office of Administration to
consolidate OMB's rent, after-hour utilities, and health unit
costs in the core enterprise services program. The Committee
believes it is important to include these funds in the core
enterprise services program to maximize the gains in cost
savings, administrative efficiencies, and improved fiscal
management. Keeping as many entities in the Core Enterprise
Services program reduces the number of individual bills that
have to be processed and reconciled, reduces the administrative
burden on preparing additional interagency agreements, and also
reduces the duplicate administrative structures inherent in a
decentralized environment. The Committee continues to believe
that this activity is best suited for the Office of
Administration, not the Office of Management and Budget.
Therefore, funds have been transferred out of the Office of
Administration, as proposed in the budget request.
Personnel Funding Increases.--The Committee defers
$1,600,000 of the requested increase to hire additional
personnel to reach the currently authorized level of full-time
equivalent positions. The recommendation is due to budget
constraints.
OMB Review of Water Resource Projects.--The Secretary of
the Army and the Chief of Engineers are responsible for
evaluating and determining if a water resources project or
study is in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and
requirements relevant to water resource planning. The Committee
believes, however, that it is appropriate for the Office of
Management and Budget [OMB] to examine each water resource
report, proposal, or plan for consistency with the budgetary
policy of the President.
Unfortunately, the Committee is aware that numerous water
resource projects that have been fully vetted through the
lengthy water resource planning process established by the
executive branch are being held up by the Office of Management
and Budget for technical reviews or other policy questions that
are unrelated to budgetary matters. The Committee has found
that OMB does not have the proper staffing or expertise to make
these types of decisions. In addition, the Committee is deeply
concerned that water resource matters are being unnecessarily
delayed for extended periods of time, sometimes without further
action ever being taken because of such obstinacy.
The Committee has included a provision to prohibit the use
of any funds by OMB for any review of a water resource project
other than for conformance with budgetary policies of the
executive branch. The Committee has also included language that
specifies that OMB shall have no more than 60 days to review
water resource reports for compliance with budgetary policies.
The bill directs OMB to notify Congress when the reports are
received for review, and the Committee will assume OMB
concurrence if the reports have not been transmitted to the
relevant committees 15 days after the end of the OMB review
period.
Harry S. Truman Memorial Scholarships.--The Committee
strongly supports the Truman Scholarship program and its
original intentions. The Committee is concerned, however, that
the regulations regarding awarding a scholarship to at least
one qualified applicant from each State has been violated
numerous times in recent years. The Committee directs the Board
of the Truman Scholarship program to strictly adhere to its
statutory mandate to ``assure that at least one Truman scholar
shall be selected each year from each State in which there is
at least one resident applicant who meets the minimum criteria
established by the Foundation.''
Office of National Drug Control Policy
The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP],
established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and
reauthorized by Public Law 105-277, is charged with developing
policies, objectives and priorities for the National Drug
Control Program. In addition, ONDCP administers the Counterdrug
Technology Assessment Center, the High Intensity Drug
Trafficking Areas program, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media
Campaign, the Drug Free Communities Program and several other
related initiatives.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $27,831,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 27,609,000
Committee recommendation................................ 27,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $165,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This account provides funding for personnel compensation,
travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for
general policy research to support the formulation of the
National Drug Control Strategy.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,000,000
for ONDCP's salaries and expenses. Within this amount the
Committee provides the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount FTEs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Director......................... $3,315,500 12
Office of the Deputy Director.................. 1,125,500 6
Office of Management and Administration........ 5,840,000 16
Office of General Counsel...................... 1,065,000 6
Office of Public Affairs....................... 2,130,000 7
Office of Legislative Affairs.................. 700,000 6
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center....... 760,000 4
Office of Planning and Budget.................. 2,700,000 16
Office of Demand Reduction..................... 1,550,000 9
Office of National Youth Anti-Drug Media 935,000 6
Campaign......................................
Office of State and Local Affairs.............. 2,554,000 15
Office of Supply Reduction..................... 2,310,000 13
Office of Intelligence......................... 665,000 4
Policy Research................................ 1,350,000 .......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rising Inhalant Abuse Among Young Adolescents.--The
Committee is concerned by the reported rise in inhalant abuse
by middle school-age youth, even as overall teenage drug use
has steadily declined. The partnership attitude tracking study
[PATS] recently conducted by the Partnership for a Drug Free
America [PDFA] indicates that low risk perception levels among
young adolescents has led to an 18 percent increase in the
abuse of inhalants by eighth graders and a 44 percent increase
among sixth graders. PATS attributes this decreased risk
perception to the shifting of educational efforts from
inhalants to emerging drug threats such as Ecstasy and
methamphetamine. The Committee directs ONDCP to utilize a
portion of its policy research funding to explore ways in which
to increase inhalant outreach activities without compromising
other ongoing educational efforts and to report its findings to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180
days of the enactment of this Act.
COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $41,752,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 40,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 42,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $248,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center [CTAC] serves
as the central counterdrug research and development
organization for the Federal Government pursuant to the Office
of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998
(Title VII of Division C of Public Law 105-277). CTAC
encompasses two separate functions: (1) the Research and
Development program [R&D;], which supports improvements to
counterdrug capabilities that transcend the need of any single
Federal agency; and (2) the Technology Transfer Program [TTP],
which provides state-of-the-art, affordable, easily integrated
and maintainable tools to enhance the capabilities of State and
local law enforcement agencies for counterdrug missions.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $42,000,000
for CTAC, which is $2,000,000 more than the requested amount
and $247,800 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. This
funding includes $18,000,000 for R&D; and $24,000,000 for the
TTP.
Prior to the obligation of any of these funds, the
Committee directs CTAC's chief scientist to submit to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations a detailed itemization
of anticipated expenditures. The Committee also directs the
chief scientist to continue to provide biannual reports on the
priority counterdrug enforcement research and development
requirements identified by CTAC and on the status of resulting
projects funded thereby. These reports should continue to
provide the same level of detail that was provided in the March
1, 2004, CTAC report to Congress.
Research and Development.--The Committee remains concerned
that a large proportion of CTAC's R&D; budget is devoted to
technology acquisition rather than actual research. This
concern is compounded by the fact that CTAC has already
committed more than $13,000,000 of future years' funding to
such purchases. The Committee therefore directs CTAC to
complete all ongoing technology acquisition R&D; projects with
the funding provided in fiscal year 2005. Thereafter, CTAC is
directed to adhere its R&D; spending to those research efforts
outlined in its demand reduction vision statement as well as
its supply reduction priorities listing included in appendices
E and F, respectively, of its March 1, 2004, CTAC report.
The Committee notes that CTAC's R&D; efforts may be too
heavily weighted in favor of demand reduction research
activities and against supply reduction research activities.
The Committee directs CTAC to consider more equally funding all
R&D; activities in the future and to report on its progress in
this regard in its next CTAC report.
The Committee notes that nearly $2,000,000 in fiscal year
2004 CTAC R&D; funding remains unobligated in spite of CTAC's
overcommittment of these resources and the unmet demand for
CTAC funding in this and other areas. The Committee therefore
directs CTAC to expeditiously obligate all of its R&D; funding
exclusively in pursuit of the functions for which it has been
appropriated. The Committee further directs CTAC to report to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30
days of enactment of this Act on the reasons for the delay in
obligating these funds.
Technology Transfer Program.--The Committee fully supports
the continuation of the TTP and provides $24,000,000 for its
operation in fiscal year 2005. The Committee believes that this
program is vital to State and local law enforcement in their
efforts to combat drug-related crimes and is encouraged by the
positive reception this program has received by State and local
law enforcement agencies. Current requests for technology
transfers continue to outpace resources by nearly three to one.
The Committee expects that CTAC will conduct further outreach
to State and local agencies to educate them about the TTP.
Finally, the Committee encourages CTAC to work with private
industry to make their developed technology available to State
and local law enforcement agencies and to report on the
progress of these efforts in its next CTAC report to Congress.
In order to maintain a clear understanding of CTAC's
ability to meet demand for the TTP, the Committee directs that
the fiscal year 2006 budget justification include a specific
accounting of the total number of grant applications received
and the number awarded in the previous year.
Funds Appropriated to the President
FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS
HIGH-INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $225,015,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 208,350,000
Committee recommendation................................ 228,350,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,335,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program
was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, as amended,
and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's
reauthorization (Public Law 105-277) to provide assistance to
Federal, State and local law enforcement entities operating in
those areas most adversely affected by drug trafficking.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $228,350,000
for the HIDTA program. The Committee directs that funding shall
be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the fiscal
year 2004 initial allocation level, unless the Director submits
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, and the
Committees approve, a request for reprogramming of the funds
based on clearly articulated priorities for the HIDTA program,
as well as published ONDCP performance measures of
effectiveness. Furthermore, the Committee directs the Director
to take appropriate steps to ensure that the HIDTA funds are
transferred to the appropriate drug control agencies
expeditiously.
In allocating HIDTA funds, the Committee expects the
Director of ONDCP to ensure that the entities receiving these
limited resources make use of them strictly for implementing
the strategy for each HIDTA, taking into consideration local
conditions and resource requirements. These funds should not be
used to supplant existing support for ongoing Federal, State,
or local drug control operations normally funded out of the
operating budgets of each agency.
Allocation of Additional Funds.--The Committee is
disappointed that ONDCP continues to seek to distribute those
limited HIDTA funds available beyond the initial allocation in
support of pursuing drug trafficking organizations [DTOs]
included on the Federal consolidated priority organizational
target [CPOT] list. Such efforts, which target a small number
of the largest international DTOs, already receive a
substantial commitment of resources from Federal counterdrug
enforcement agencies. While there may be some correlation
between the methods and goals of the HIDTA program and Federal
CPOT efforts, the Committee remains unconvinced that use of
HIDTA resources in support of CPOT enforcement is an
appropriate expenditure of these funds. HIDTAs are designated
to address regional and local problems with illegal drug
trafficking and use. Most HIDTAs face drug threats that are, at
most, tangentially international in nature. Accordingly, the
Committee has included a provision in the bill prohibiting the
expenditure of HIDTA funds in support of CPOT activities.
The Committee directs ONDCP to refocus its distribution of
HIDTA funding in excess of the initial allocation on enhancing
the domestic interdiction of illegal drugs by launching
additional investigations, by disrupting and dismantling local
mid-level drug trafficking organizations through a systematic
and coordinated effort and by supporting the various HIDTA
Intelligence Support Centers throughout the country.
APPALACHIA HIDTA
The Committee remains concerned that the three Appalachia
HIDTA States, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee,
comprising approximately 4 percent of the total U.S.
population, produce some of the most potent marijuana available
and over 34.5 percent of the marijuana eradicated in the United
States in 2003. For 2003, the West Virginia National Guard,
which has mounted a vigorous counterdrug program in cooperation
with the Appalachia HIDTA, estimates that the value of the
eradicated marijuana crop in the 12 West Virginia HIDTA
counties is over $155,000,000. Therefore, the Committee directs
ONDCP to maintain funding at no less than fiscal year 2004
initial allocation to continue to combat this threat.
NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY HIDTA
The Committee is concerned about the increased level of
drug trafficking and distribution in upstate New York. The
geography of the New York region has bred a drug trafficking
problem that is international, national and regional in scope.
Drug investigations have revealed a number of links between
CPOT/RPOTs and the upstate New York region. The success of the
downstate New York/New Jersey HIDTA has led to a significant
increase in trafficking of cocaine and heroin from the New York
City area north and west to Albany, Syracuse, Rochester and
Buffalo, fueling a growth in gang related crime. There is a
significant rise in shipments of potent Canadian produced
hydroponic marijuana into the United States through Buffalo and
other northern ports of entry. There is also an increase in
domestic marijuana production and trafficking in upstate New
York, as well as the growth of local methamphetamine
laboratories. Additional funding would allow New York to combat
these threats and would enable ONDCP to designate additional
counties, including counties in upstate New York, as part of
the New York/New Jersey HIDTA where appropriate. The Committee
directs ONDCP to work with the affected counties to determine
whether they meet the statutory criteria required for
designation as a HIDTA. The Committee directs ONDCP to ensure
that funding for the New York/New Jersey HIDTA is provided at a
level no less than the fiscal year 2004 initial allocation and
to work with the Executive Board of the New York/New Jersey
HIDTA to assess the needs of the HIDTA and to provide
additional resources if necessary.
NORTHWEST HIDTA
Methampetamine is the primary illicit drug threat to the
State of Washington. Its widespread use and resulting
addiction, combined with the overwhelming availability of high
purity, low cost methamphetamine, is cause for serious concern.
Moreover, the spread of ICE methamphetamine with increased
purity levels has increased throughout Washington State and the
seizures of Ephedrine--a meth precursor--continue to increase
at the Canadian border.
Marijuana is the most readily available and widely abused
illicit drug in Washington State. Canada-produced marijuana,
commonly known as ``BC Bud'' is more readily available than
Mexico-produced marijuana. Cocaine and heroin also represent
significant threats.
Northwest HIDTA is having an impact in these areas. The
Committee directs ONDCP to provide adequate resources to combat
these threats. In addition, the Committee notes the value of
State and local task forces in addressing these issues and
encourages the continued incorporation of such entities in this
and other HIDTAs.
OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $227,649,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 235,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 195,500,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,351,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690), as
amended, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's
reauthorization (Public Law 105-277) established the Special
Forfeiture Fund to be administered by the Director of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy in support of high
priority drug control programs. The account's name was changed
to Other Federal Drug Control Programs in fiscal year 2004 to
reflect the fact that it is now wholly funded by direct
appropriations.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $185,500,000
for Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $39,500,000
less than the requested amount and $32,149,000 less than the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Within this amount, the
Committee provides the following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign................. $100,000,000
Drug-Free Communities Support Program................... 80,000,000
Counterdrug Executive Secretariat....................... 3,050,000
National Drug Court Institute........................... 1,000,000
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws............. 1,500,000
United States Anti-Doping Agency Grant.................. 7,500,000
World Anti-Doping Agency Dues........................... 1,450,000
Performance Measures Development........................ 1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.--The Committee has
provided consistent monetary support for the National Youth
Anti-Drug Media Campaign since it was initially funded by
Congress in fiscal year 1998. While overall youth illicit drug
use has trended downward since 1997, the Committee is concerned
with the most recent results of the media campaign evaluation
study commissioned by the National Institute on Drug Abuse
[NIDA]. The evaluation study indicates, not only that marijuana
use has trended steadily upward among 14- to 16-year olds--the
Media Campaign's target audience--since 2000, but also that the
Media Campaign has had no measurable positive effect on youth
attitudes toward marijuana nor their use thereof. The
Evaluation Study's conclusions are particularly troubling in
light of the fact that, since the fall of 2002, the Media
Campaign has chosen to focus its efforts on a ``marijuana
initiative'' aimed at curbing youth marijuana use on the basis
that marijuana serves as a ``gateway'' drug to other more
potent controlled substances. Because of its concern about the
direction and efficacy of the Media Campaign as it is currently
structured, the Committee provides $100,000,000 for its
continuation.
The Committee is troubled that the evaluation study
indicates the Media Campaign has been so ineffective in
reaching and influencing its targeted youth audience. In order
to ensure that Media Campaign resources are most effectively
allocated to prevent youth from using illicit narcotics, ONDCP
must evaluate the effectiveness of its efforts on the basis of
quantifiable scientific research. The Committee therefore
directs ONDCP to utilize the individual ad and overall Campaign
assessments provided by the evaluation study to measure the
effectiveness of its advertisements and to focus and shape the
Media Campaign for the future.
Media Campaign Non-Advertising Services.--While print and
broadcast advertising is the primary focus of the Media
Campaign, it also provides non-advertising services such as the
production and dissemination of printed educational materials,
maintaining an internet presence targeted to both parents and
youth, multicultural outreach, entertainment and media outreach
and strategic partnerships that assist in distributing the
Media Campaign's anti-drug materials and message. Among the
most successful of these non-advertising services has been the
Media Campaign's now-discontinued corporate outreach program,
through which the Media Campaign developed partnerships with
corporations who provided in-kind contributions of access to
their employees and customers through which the Media Campaign
could disseminate its message and materials. This program
provided the Media Campaign with tremendous opportunity to
access youth and is estimated to have leveraged twelve in-kind
private sector dollars for every dollar committed from the
Media Campaign.
The Committee is disappointed that ONDCP has chosen to
decrease its non-advertising services, and particularly its
Corporate Outreach Program, in response to the provision of
Public Law 108-199 requiring that no less than 78 percent of
Media Campaign funding be spent on advertising time and space.
This requirement was included for the purpose of reducing the
administrative costs associated with the Media Campaign, which
now consume approximately 15 percent of the total amount,
rather than eliminating effective outreach efforts. The
Committee therefore directs ONDCP to maintain funding for its
non-advertising services at no less than the fiscal year 2003
level and to re-institute the corporate outreach program as it
operated prior to its cancellation.
The Committee remains concerned with the large proportion
of Media Campaign resources devoted to administrative costs.
The accompanying bill therefore directs that no more than 10
percent of the funding provided for the Media Campaign be used
for administrative costs.
Drug-Free Communities Support Program.--ONDCP has directed
the Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in
partnership with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention since it was created by the Drug-Free Communities
Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-20). DFCSP provides matching grants
of up to $100,000 to local coalitions that mobilize their
communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug,
and inhalant abuse. Such grants support coalitions of youth;
parents; media; law enforcement; school officials; faith-based
organizations; fraternal organizations; State, local, and
tribal government agencies; healthcare professionals; and other
community representatives. The DCSP enables these coalitions to
strengthen their coordination and prevention efforts, encourage
citizen participation in substance abuse reduction efforts, and
disseminate information about effective programs. The Committee
provides $80,000,000 for the continuation of the DFCSP.
The Committee has also included a provision in the bill
directing ONDCP to provide $2,000,000 of the DFSCP funding as a
direct grant to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America
in order to sustain the National Community Anti-Drug Coalition
Institute.
Counterdrug Intelligence Executive Secretariat.--The
Counterdrug Intelligence Executive Secretariat [CDX] provides
staff support to the Counterdrug Intelligence Coordinating
Group, an interagency body established to oversee and improve
coordination of Federal counterdrug intelligence programs. The
Committee provides $3,050,000 for CDX.
United States Anti-Doping Agency.--The United States Anti-
Doping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for
Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for
managing the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic,
Pan Am and Paralympic athletes. As a non-profit corporation
under the leadership of an independent Board of Directors,
USADA has the authority to set forth guiding principles in
anti-doping policy and to enforce any doping violations. In
addition to managing collection and testing procedures, USADA
is also responsible for enhancing research efforts and
promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules
governing the use of performance enhancing substances, the
ethics of doping and its harmful health effects.
The Committee provides $7,500,000 for USADA, which is
$6,000,000 more than the requested amount. The Committee urges
USADA to maintain appropriate standards of fairness and due
process in pursuing its mission of promoting and enforcing the
integrity of American athletic competition.
World Anti-Doping Agency.--ONDCP is a full participant in
the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA], which promotes and
coordinates international activities against doping in all
forms of sports. The Committee provides $1,450,000 for
membership dues to the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA],
consistent with the commitment into which the United States has
entered for support of WADA. In providing these funds, the
Committee directs ONDCP to use its voice and vote as the United
States' representative in this world body to ensure that all
countries' athletes are subject to fair and equal standards and
treatment so as to establish and maintain the objectivity and
integrity of this fledgling international athletic regulatory
organization.
National Drug Court Institute.--The National Drug Court
Institute facilitates the growth of the drug court movement by
promoting and disseminating education, research, and
scholarship concerning drug court programs and providing a
comprehensive drug court training series for practitioners. The
Committee is aware of the extraordinary growth in drug courts
across the country and the important training of new drug
courts that the Institute provides. Drug courts provide an
effective means to fight drug-related crime through the
cooperative efforts of State and local law enforcement, the
judicial system, and the public health treatment network. The
Committee provides $1,000,000 for the National Drug Court
Institute.
National Alliance For Model State Drug Laws.--The National
Alliance for Model State Drug Laws [NAMSDL] is a national
organization that drafts, researches, and analyzes model drug
and alcohol laws and related State statutes, provides access to
a national network of drug and alcohol experts, and facilitates
working relationships among State and community leaders and
drug and alcohol professionals. In doing so, NAMSDL encourages
States to adopt and implement laws, policies, and regulations
to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related
consequences. The Committee provides $1,500,000 NAMSDL and
directs ONDCP to provide the entire amount directly to NAMSDL
within 30 days after enactment of this Act.
Performance Measures Development.--Performance Measures
Development [PMD] funding is used to conduct evaluation
research for assessing the effectiveness of the National Drug
Control Strategy. For this function, the Committee provides
$1,000,000, which is $1,000,000 less than the requested amount.
Projects undertaken with these resources are to entail
efforts to encourage and work with selected programs to develop
and improve needed data sources. The Committee is concerned
that most of the initiatives proposed for funding under PMD
would be more appropriately funded via CTAC's R&D; Program or
ONDCP Policy Research. The Committee believes that funding
research projects under PMD crowds out legitimate performance
measures initiatives and thereby reduces ONDCP's ability to
properly evaluate Federal counterdrug efforts. Accordingly, the
Committee directs ONDCP to submit its planned PMD activities to
CTAC's chief scientist for review and then to report to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of
enactment of this Act providing the chief scientist's findings
and explaining why these anticipated PMD functions are most
properly funded within PMD.
Unanticipated Needs
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $994,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $6,000 pursuant to Division H, section
168 of Public Law 108-199.
These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated
exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or
defense.
The Committee recommends $1,000,000, which is $6,000 more
than appropriated in fiscal year 2004 and the same as the
budget estimate.
Special Assistance to the President
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,435,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,571,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,571,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $26,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to
enable the Vice President to provide assistance to the
President in connection with the performance of executive
duties and responsibilities. The Vice President also has a
staff funded by the Senate to assist him in the performance of
his legislative duties. These funds also support the official
activities of the spouse of the Vice President.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,571,000 for
special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as
the budget request and $136,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level.
Official Residence of the Vice President
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $329,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 333,000
Committee recommendation................................ 333,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $2,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
This account supports the care and operation of the Vice
President's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory.
These funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining
facilities, and services required to perform and discharge the
Vice President's official duties, functions and obligations.
Funds to renovate the residence are provided through the
Department of the Navy budget. The Committee has had a
longstanding interest in the condition of the residence and
expects to be kept fully apprised by the Vice President's
office of any and all renovations and alterations made to the
residence by the Navy.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $333,000 for
the official residence of the Vice President. This amount is
the same as the budget request and $4,000 more than the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level.
TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $5,369,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 5,686,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,686,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $32,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board (the Access Board) is the lead Federal Agency promoting
accessibility for all handicapped persons. The Access Board was
reauthorized in the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992,
Public Law 102-569. Under this authorization, the Access
Board's functions are to ensure compliance with the
Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and to develop guidelines
for and technical assistance to individuals and entities with
rights or duties under titles II and III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum
accessibility guidelines and requirements for public
accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities
and vehicles, State and local government facilities, children's
environments, and recreational facilities. The Access Board
also provides technical assistance to Government agencies,
public and private organizations, individuals, and businesses
on the removal of accessibility barriers.
The Committee recommends $5,686,000 for the operations of
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board,
the funding level requested by the administration.
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $4,697,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 4,672,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,672,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $28,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The CPPBSD administers the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act [JWOD]
of 1971, as amended. Its primary objective is to use the
purchasing power of the Federal Government to provide people
who are blind or have other severe disabilities with employment
and training that will develop and improve job skills as well
as prepare them for employment options outside the JWOD
program. In fiscal year 2004, the Committee's goal is to employ
approximately 50,000 people who are blind or have other severe
disabilities in 600 producing nonprofit agencies. The
Committee's duties include promoting the program; determining
which products and services are suitable for Government
procurement from qualified nonprofit agencies serving people
who are blind or have other severe disabilities; maintaining a
procurement list of such products and services; determining the
fair market price for products and services on the procurement
list; and making rules and regulations necessary to carry out
the purposes of the Act. In fiscal year 2005, the Committee's
goal is to have sales of $2,000,000,000.
The Committee recommends $4,672,000 for the Committee for
Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.
Election Assistance Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,193,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $7,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the
Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA]. Under HAVA, the EAC's
role is to promulgate voluntary State guidelines for election
systems, develop a national certification program for voting
equipment, and provide related guidance. The EAC is also
charged with awarding grants to improve election administration
and enhancing election equipment.
The Committee provides $10,000,000 for EAC's administrative
expenses, which is $8,807,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
level. Included in this amount is $200,000 to award grants to
the national student parent mock election as authorized under
HAVA section 295. The accompanying bill provides $2,800,000 of
these funds for transfer to the National Institute for
Standards and Technology for technical assistance related to
the development of voluntary State voting systems guidelines.
Election Reform Programs
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,491,150,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 30,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\ Reflects reduction of $8,850,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation finances grants for requirements
payments to State and local governments to meet minimum voting
standards established under title III of HAVA and other grant
programs authorized by the Act.
The Committee does not provide funding for election reform
programs. The Committee notes that approximately $1,200,000,000
of the $2,321,150,000 previously appropriated for election
reform programs, more than half of these funds, remain
unobligated to date. The Committee believes that the
unobligated balance will be sufficient for requirements
payments obligations in fiscal year 2005 and encourages the EAC
to continue working with the States in order to disburse these
funds as expeditiously and efficiently as possible. The
Committee further encourages the EAC to continue to work
diligently to promulgate voluntary State voting system
guidelines so that this grant program will be implemented as
Congress intended.
Federal Election Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $50,938,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 52,159,000
Committee recommendation................................ 52,159,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $302,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through
the 1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 [FECA]. Consistent with its duty of executing our Nation's
Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of its mission of
maintaining public faith in the integrity of the Federal
campaign finance system, FEC conducts three major regulatory
programs: (1) providing public disclosure of funds raised and
spent to influence Federal elections; (2) enforcing compliance
with restrictions on contributions and expenditures made to
influence Federal elections; and (3) administering public
financing of Presidential campaigns.
The Committee recommends $52,159,000 for the Federal
Election Commission, which is the same as the budget request
and $1,221,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Federal Labor Relations Authority
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $29,436,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 29,673,000
Committee recommendation................................ 25,673,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $175,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] pursuant to
Reorganization Plan Numbered 2 of 1978, and the Civil Service
Reform Act of 1978, serves as a neutral party in the settlement
of disputes that arise between unions, employees, and agencies
on matters outlined in the Federal Service Labor Management
Relations statute, decides major policy issues, prescribes
regulations, and disseminates information appropriate to the
needs of agencies, labor organizations, and the public.
Establishment of the FLRA gives full recognition to the role of
the Federal Government as an employer.
In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related
interventions and training and facilitation of labor-management
partnerships and in resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-
management cooperation by providing training and assistance to
labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes,
facilitates the creation of partnerships, and trains the
parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal
Relations Labor Relations Management statute.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,673,000
for the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is
$4,000,000 below the President's budget request and is
$3,763,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The
Committee recommendation reflects the decline in caseload and
the reduction of the FTE level from 215 to 210.
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, 2004........................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ -$3,000,000
The Committee recommends a rescission of $3,000,000 of
prior appropriations for the salaries and expenses of the
Federal Labor Relations Authority. The Committee notes that
significant amounts of annual appropriations have lapsed at the
end of fiscal year 2002 and 2003 which reflect salary and
benefit surpluses related to the decline in caseload and actual
FTE usage over the same period.
Federal Maritime Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations 2004 \1\................................. $18,362,000
Budget estimate 2005.................................... 19,496,000
Committee recommendation................................ 19,496,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $109,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Federal Maritime Commission [FMC] is an independent
regulatory agency which administers the Shipping Act of 1984 as
amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998; section 19 of
the Merchant Marine Act, 1920; the Foreign Shipping Practices
Act of 1988; and Public Law 89-777.
FMC regulates the international waterborne commerce of the
United States. In addition, the FMC has responsibility for
licensing and bonding ocean transportation intermediaries and
assuring that vessel owners or operators establish financial
responsibility to pay judgments for death or injury to
passengers, or nonperformance of a cruise, on voyages from U.S.
ports. Major program areas for 2005 are: carrying out
investigations of foreign trade practices under the Foreign
Shipping Practices Act; maintaining equitable trading
conditions in U.S. ocean commerce; ensuring compliance with
applicable shipping statutes; pursuing an active enforcement
program designed to identify and prosecute violators of the
shipping statutes; and reviewing ocean carrier operational and
pricing agreements to guard against excessively anticompetitive
effects.
The Committee includes $19,496,000 for the salaries and
expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal year
2005. This amount is the same as the President's request and
$1,134,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
General Services Administration
The General Services Administration [GSA] was established
by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949
when Congress mandated the consolidation of the Federal
Government's real property and administrative services. GSA is
organized into the Public Buildings Service, the Federal Supply
Service, the Federal Technology Service, the Office of
Governmentwide Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services and
Communications.
FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND--LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the
following activities financed from rent charges:
Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.--Space is
acquired through the construction or purchase of facilities and
prospectus-level extensions to existing buildings. All costs
directly attributable to site acquisition, construction, and
the full range of design and construction services, and
management and inspection of construction projects are funded
under this activity.
Repairs and Alterations.--Repairs and alterations of public
buildings as well as associated design and construction
services are funded under this activity. Protection of the
Government's investment, health and safety of building
occupants, transfer of agencies from leased space, and cost
effectiveness are the principal criteria used in establishing
priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to
prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support
systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides
for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus
extensions.
Installment Acquisition Payments.--Payments are made for
liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and
lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover
principal, interest, and other requirements.
Rental of Space.--Space is acquired through the leasing of
buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S.
Postal Service facilities, 153 million rentable square feet in
fiscal year 2003, and 157 million rentable square feet in
fiscal year 2004.
Building Operations.--Services are provided for Government-
owned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and
fuel, maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving,
evaluation of new materials and equipment, and field
supervision), and general management and administration of all
real property related programs including salaries and benefits
paid from the Federal Buildings Fund.
Other Programs.--When requested by Federal agencies, the
Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as
tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and
protection services which are in excess of those services
provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation
purposes, the balances of the Unconditional Gifts of Real,
Personal, or Other Property trust fund have been combined with
the Federal Buildings Fund.
CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
Limitation on availability, 2004 \1\.................... $721,648,000
Limitation on availability, 2005........................ 650,223,000
Committee recommendation................................ 710,823,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $289,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
Funds provided for construction and acquisition in fiscal
year 2005 shall be available for the following projects in the
corresponding amounts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandria Bay, New York Border Station................. $8,884,000
Calais, Maine Border Station............................ 5,550,000
Chicago, Illinois 10 West Jackson Place (Purchase)...... 53,170,000
Derby Line, Vermont Border Station...................... 3,190,000
District of Columbia Southwest Federal Center side 2,650,000
remediation............................................
Dunseith, North Dakota Border Station................... 2,301,000
El Paso, Texas Paso Del Norte Border Station............ 26,191,000
El Paso, Texas United States Courthouse................. 63,462,000
El Paso, Ysleta Border Station.......................... 2,491,000
Las Cruces Courthouse................................... 60,600,000
Los Angeles, California Federal Bureau of Investigation 14,054,000
Facility...............................................
Los Angeles, California United States Courthouse........ 314,385,000
Madawaska, Maine Border Station......................... 1,760,000
Massena, New York, Border Station....................... 15,000,000
Montgomery County, Maryland FDA Consolidation........... 88,710,000
Norton, Vermont Border Station.......................... 580,000
Portal, North Dakota Border Station..................... 22,351,000
Richford, Vermont Border Station........................ 589,000
San Diego, California United States Courthouse.......... 3,068,000
Warroad, Minnesota Border Station....................... 1,837,000
Nonprospectus Construction.............................. 10,000,000
Judgment Fund repayment................................. 10,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends $710,823,000 for the construction
and acquisition account. The Committee recommendation is
$60,600,000 above the President's request.
Risk Assessments.--The Committee is aware of the
Interagency Security Committee criteria requiring the General
Services Administration [GSA], prior to new construction or
major renovations, to perform a project specific risk
assessment that takes into account threat, vulnerability,
consequences, and probability of an attack on the facility.
However, the Committee is concerned that existing physical
security risk methodology is not specifically designed to
support structural upgrades and hazard mitigation that should
be addressed in new construction or major renovations.
Therefore, the Committee expects the GSA Office of the Chief
Architect to work with the Applied Research Associates'
Security Engineering and Applied Sciences Sector to enhance the
Federal Security Risk Manager methodology to facilitate the
application of the process and the software throughout the GSA
regions and in consultation with the Department of Homeland
Security's Federal Protective Service.
Courthouse Construction.--The Committee encourages the
General Services Administration [GSA], the administration, and
the judiciary to continue to work cooperatively to develop a
single comprehensive plan upon which courthouse construction
will be based. The Committee continues to believe that a model
should incorporate utilization rates, courtroom sharing, and
safety considerations. The use of cost savings measures and
careful planning will result in a program that can be
consistently supported. The Committee notes that it has been
extremely supportive of addressing the courthouse construction
backlog. Further, the Committee would again remind the
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts [AOC] and other
organizations that the Committee has adhered to the jointly
agreed to priority list and that the Congress is constrained by
overall budget resolutions and spending caps from accommodating
every request.
The Committee is concerned that in spite of the strict
budgetary pressures facing the Federal Government, AOC fails to
pursue a policy of fiscal restraint and approaches the Congress
for increases in courthouse construction funding above the
Administration's request. The Congress and the Administration
have worked diligently to reign in court construction costs and
the Committee will continue to pursue all avenues with respect
to cost containment with or without the support of the Courts.
REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS
Limitation on availability, 2004 \1\.................... $990,903,000
Limitation on availability, 2005........................ 980,222,000
Committee recommendation................................ 980,222,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $397,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
Under this activity, the General Services Administration
[GSA] executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations
[R&A;] of both Government-owned and leased facilities under the
control of GSA. The primary goal of this activity is to provide
commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. Safety,
quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given
primary consideration in carrying out this responsibility.
R&A; workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite
inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and
building managers. The work identified through these
inspections is programmed in order of priority into the repairs
and alterations construction automated tracking system [RACATS]
and incorporated into a 5-year plan for accomplishment, based
upon funding availability, urgency, and the volume of R&A; work
that GSA has the capability to execute annually. Since fiscal
year 1995, design and construction services activities
associated with repair and alteration projects have been funded
in this account.
The Committee recommends new obligational authority of
$980,222,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2005.
This amount is the same as the President's request.
Funds provided for repairs and alterations in fiscal year
2005 shall be available for the following projects in the
corresponding amounts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlanta, Georgia Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal $14,800,000
Building...............................................
Atlanta, Georgia United States Court of Appeals......... 32,004,000
Baltimore, Maryland George H. Fallon Federal Building... 46,163,000
Cincinnati, Ohio Potter Stewart Courthouse.............. 37,975,000
Cleveland, Ohio Celebreeze Federal Building............. 37,375,000
District of Columbia Eisenhower Executive Office 5,000,000
Building...............................................
District of Columbia Federal Office Building............ 8,267,000
District of Columbia Hoover FBI Building................ 10,242,000
District of Columbia Mary E. Switzer Building........... 80,335,000
District of Columbia New Executive Office Building...... 6,262,000
District of Columbia Theodore Roosevelt Building........ 9,730,000
Hilo, Hawaii Federal Building........................... 5,133,000
Kansas City, Missouri Richard Bolling Federal Building.. 40,048,000
New Orleans, Louisiana Boggs Federal Building........... 22,581,000
New Orleans, Louisiana Wisdom Courthouse of Appeals..... 8,005,000
New York, New York Foley Square Courthouse.............. 2,505,000
Queens, New York Joseph P. Addabbo Federal Building..... 5,455,000
Seattle, Washington William Nakamura Courthouse......... 50,210,000
St. Paul, Minnesota Warren E. Burger Federal Building... 36,644,000
Suitland, Maryland National Record Center............... 7,989,000
Woodlawn, Maryland SSA Altmeyer Building................ 6,300,000
Special Emphasis Programs:
Chlorofluorocarbons Program......................... 13,000,000
Energy Program...................................... 30,000,000
Glass Fragment Retention............................ 20,000,000
Design Program...................................... 49,699,000
Basic Repairs and Alterations....................... 394,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS
Limitation on availability, 2004 \1\.................... $169,677,000
Limitation on availability, 2005........................ 161,442,000
Committee recommendation................................ 161,442,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $68,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enables GSA to
enter into contractual arrangements for the construction of a
backlog of approved but unfunded projects. The purchase
contracts require the Federal Government to make periodic
payments on these facilities over varying periods until title
is transferred to the Government. This activity provides for
the payment of principal, interest, taxes, and other required
obligations related to facilities acquired pursuant to the
Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 602a).
The Committee recommends a limitation of $161,442,000 for
installment acquisition payments. The Committee recommendation
equals the budget estimate.
RENTAL OF SPACE
Limitation on availability, 2004 \1\.................... $3,278,873,000
Limitation on availability, 2005........................ 3,672,315,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,597,315,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,314,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and
land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except cases where
GSA has delegated its leasing authority. GSA's policy is to
lease privately owned buildings and land only when: (1) Federal
space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated satisfactorily in
existing Government-owned or leased space; (2) leasing proves
to be more efficient than the construction or alteration of a
Federal building; (3) construction or alteration is not
warranted because requirements in the community are
insufficient or are indefinite in scope or duration; or (4)
completion of a new Federal building within a reasonable time
cannot be assured.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $3,597,315,000 for
rental of space. The Committee recommendation is $75,000,000
below the President's budget request and $318,442,000 above the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
BUILDING OPERATIONS
Limitation on availability, 2004 \1\.................... $1,608,064,000
Limitation on availability, 2005........................ 1,709,522,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,709,522,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $644,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This activity provides for the operation of all Government-
owned facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building
services in GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do
not require the lessor to furnish such services. Services
included in building operations are cleaning, protection,
maintenance, payments for utilities and fuel, grounds
maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting
services include various real property management and staff
support activities such as space acquisition and assignment;
the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations
in order to provide better space utilization in existing
buildings; onsite inspection of building services and
operations accomplished by private contractors; and various
highly specialized contract administration support functions.
The space, operations, and services referred to above are
furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment
of rent. Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA
also provides varying levels of above-standard services in
agency headquarter facilities, including those occupied by the
Executive Office of the President, such as the east and west
wings of the White House.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,709,522,000 for
building operations. This amount is the same as the President's
budget request and $101,458,000 above the fiscal year 2004
enacted level.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $56,050,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 62,100,000
Committee recommendation................................ 62,100,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $333,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Government-wide Policy provides for
Government-wide policy development, support, and evaluation
functions associated with real and personal property, supplies,
vehicles, aircraft, information technology, acquisition,
transportation and travel management. This office also provides
for the Federal Procurement Data Center, Workplace Initiatives,
Regulatory Information Service Center, the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance, and the Committee Management Secretariat.
The Office of Governmentwide Policy, working cooperatively with
other agencies, provides the leadership needed to develop and
evaluate the implementation of policies designed to achieve the
most cost-effective solutions for the delivery of
administrative services and sound workplace practices, while
reducing regulations and empowering employees.
The Office of Citizen Services provides leadership and
support for electronic government initiatives and operates the
official Federal portal through which citizens may access
Federal information services electronically. The Federal
Consumer Information Center is part of this office, though
funded under a separate appropriation.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,100,000
for Government-wide Policy. This amount is the same as the
President's budget request and also includes funds transferred
from the Federal Technology Service's portion of the Operating
Expenses account to cover the Federal identity management and
e-authentication management functions.
Child Care Centers.--The Committee recommends that funds
provided to the Office of Policy and Operations continue to be
used to issue and enforce regulations requiring any entity
operating a child care center in a facility owned or leased by
an executive agency to: (1) comply with applicable State and
local licensing requirements related to the provision of child
care and (2) comply with center-based accreditation standards
specified by the Administrator, if such a regulatory program is
authorized.
Computers to Schools Program.--The Committee continues to
be aware that Indian tribal colleges and Alaska Native and
Native Hawaiian serving institutions are being asked to
undertake an increasing number of activities in Native
communities related to education, employment and other training
as part of the ongoing ``welfare to work'' transition mandated
by the 1996 welfare reform law. To complement recent private
sector donations of computers and related equipment to Indian
tribes and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving
institutions, as part of its existing ``Computers to Schools''
program, the General Services Administration [GSA] is
encouraged to continue to work with the 31 Indian tribal
colleges and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving
institutions to provide assistance to them in developing and
upgrading the colleges' electronic capabilities. As part of
this effort, GSA should utilize the 31 tribal colleges and
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving institutions as a
discrete evaluation point as it works to meet these equipment
needs. GSA's technical assistance will further enable the
tribal colleges and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving
institutions to provide a higher quality of education to their
students.
Telecommuting Centers.--The Committee encourages GSA to
continue to promote telecommuting centers within the Federal
Government in the Washington, DC metropolitan area as an
effective means to provide an alternative workplace.
OPERATING EXPENSES
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $87,590,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 82,175,000
Committee recommendation................................ 85,175,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $520,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
Operating Expenses provides funding for Government-wide
activities associated with the utilization and donation of
surplus personal property; disposal of real property;
telecommunications, information technology management, and
related technology activities; agency-wide policy direction and
management; ancillary accounting, records management, and other
support services; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and
other related operational expenses.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $85,175,000
for the Operating Expenses. This amount is an increase of
$3,000,000 above the administration's request and $2,415,000
below the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The Committee
includes the following increases: $500,000 for the Ruffner
Mountain Educational Facility in Alabama; $500,000 for the
Center for the Living Arts in Alabama; $250,000 for the State
of Alaska to assist in preparation for its Statehood
celebration; $200,000 for the Way of a Champion Foundation in
Chesapeake, Virginia; $450,000 for the City of Maryville,
Missouri for airport improvements; $1,000,000 for Washington
State Border Communities Prosecution Initiative; $300,000 for
the UND Government Services Rural Outreach Initiative and
$250,000 for the Walla Walla economic development study of
potentially surplus property at the Wainwright VA Medical
Center.
Washington State Border Communities Prosecution Initiative,
Washington.--Enforcement activities on the border between
Washington State and Canada has increased dramatically. Funding
is provided to compensate those local communities along the
border that have had to bear increasing costs associated with
jailing, prosecuting, and defending suspected criminals for
crimes at the border. Such expenses may include costs
associated with an investigation or arrest initiated by Federal
law enforcement or any case that involves a violation of
Federal law that has been referred for prosecution by Federal
authorities. Costs that would be eligible for reimbursement
include the costs of prosecution, investigation, detention of
suspects, court costs, and construction of holding spaces.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $38,938,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 42,351,000
Committee recommendation................................ 42,351,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $231,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and
investigative functions to identify and correct management and
administrative deficiencies within the General Services
Administration [GSA], creating conditions for existing or
potential instances of fraud, waste and mismanagement. This
audit function provides internal audit and contract audit
services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters
relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing,
and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and
evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test
internal control systems, and develop information to improve
operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The
investigative function provides for the detection and
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving GSA
programs, personnel, and operations.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $42,351,000
for the Office of Inspector General. This amount is the same as
the President's budget request and $3,413,000 above the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level.
ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $2,982,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $18,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
This program supports interagency ``electronic government''
or ``e-gov'' initiatives, i.e., projects that use the Internet
or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses,
and other government agencies with simpler and more timely
access to Federal information, benefits, services, and business
opportunities.
Proposals for funding must meet capital planning guidelines
and include adequate documentation to demonstrate a sound
business case, attention to security and privacy, and a way to
measure performance against planned results. In addition, a
small portion of the money could be used for awards to those
project management teams that delivered the best product to
meet customer needs.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for
the Electronic Government Fund. This amount is $2,000,000 below
the President's request.
ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $3,373,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 3,449,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,106,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $20,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
This appropriation provides support consisting of pensions,
office staffs, and related expenses for former Presidents
Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, George Bush, and Bill Clinton, a
pension for the widow of former President Lyndon B. Johnson,
and postal franking privileges for the widows of former
Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Ronald Reagan. Also, this
appropriation is authorized to provide funding for security and
travel related expenses for each former President and the
spouse of a former President pursuant to Section 531 of Public
Law 103-329.
The Committee recommends $3,106,000 for allowances and
office staff for former Presidents. The Committee
recommendation provides for the office staff and related
expenses associated with the closing of the Office of Former
President Ronald Reagan through December 31, 2004.
Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee's
recommendation for fiscal year 2005 funding:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Presidents
-------------------------------------------------- Widows Total
Ford Carter Reagan Bush Clinton
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation.................... 96 96 96 96 96 ........ 480
Personnel Benefits........................ 22 2 33 51 78 ........ 186
Benefits for Former Presidents............ 182 182 ........ 182 189 20 755
Travel.................................... 44 2 10 54 44 ........ 154
Rental Payments to GSA.................... 105 102 37 175 460 ........ 879
Communications, Utilities and
Miscellaneous charges:
Telephone............................. 15 10 4 14 54 ........ 97
Postage............................... 9 15 2 13 10 4 53
Printing.................................. 5 5 4 14 8 ........ 36
Other Services............................ 38 79 11 66 146 ........ 340
Supplies & Materials...................... 17 5 2 14 15 ........ 53
Equipment................................. 6 7 1 34 5 ........ 53
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Obligations................ 539 505 200 713 1,105 24 3,086
=====================================================================
Infrastructure Contingency................ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 20
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Obligations................... 539 505 200 713 1,105 22 3,106
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXPENSES, PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION
Appropriations, 2004....................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... $7,700,000
Committee recommendation................................ 7,700,000
The appropriation provides funds to provide for an orderly
transfer of executive leadership, in accordance with the
Presidential Transition Act of 1963. Funds are also authorized
to finance the costs of briefings and training for personnel
associated with the incoming administration. Funds are only
requested during a presidential election year and are not
available for obligation by the incumbent administration.
The Committee recommends $7,700,000 for presidential
transition expenses, an amount equal to the budget estimate.
The Committee denies the request to amend the Presidential
Transition Act to allow $1,000,000 for training and briefings
for incoming appointees associated with the second term of an
incumbent President. The Committee has no objection to funding
training and briefings for incoming appointees associated with
the second term of an incumbent President, but believe that it
should be properly budgeted for and requested by the
appropriate agencies.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Section 401 authorizes GSA to credit accounts with certain
funds received from Government corporations.
Section 402 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of
passenger motor vehicles.
Section 403 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the
Federal buildings fund for meeting program requirements.
Section 404 limits funding for courthouse construction
which does not meet certain standards of a capital improvement
plan.
Section 405 provides that no funds may be used to increase
the amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning
services, security enhancements, or any other service usually
provided, to any agency which does not pay the requested rate.
Section 406 authorizes GSA to pay claims up to $250,000
from construction projects and acquisition of buildings.
Section 407 authorizes GSA to sell the Middle River Depot
at Middle River, Maryland and the proceeds to be credited to
the Federal Building Fund to be appropriated as the GSA
Administrator may deem appropriate.
Section 408 amends 40 U.S.C. 572 in subsection (a)(2)(ii)
by inserting the following before the period: ``, highest and
best use of property studies, utilization of property studies,
deed compliance inspection, and the expenses incurred in a
relocation''.
Section 409 makes adjustments from the Federal Building
Fund for new construction and repairs and alterations projects
based on cost and schedule changes.
Section 410 allows GSA to use previously appropriated funds
to redesign the proposed courthouse expansion at the corner of
400 South Street and West Temple in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Section 411 amends Section 3712 of title 22, United States
Code by adding a new subsection to provide for the termination
of the Panama Canal Commission and authorizes GSA to administer
the Revolving Fund.
Section 412 requires the Postal Service to convey property
in Baton Rouge to GSA, for which GSA shall compensate the
Postal Service. GSA shall then convey the property to the
Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton
Rouge, Louisiana.
Section 413 prohibits the use of funds after July 1, 2005
for any telecommunications service for Federal Government owned
buildings unless the building is in compliance with a
regulation or Executive Order related to redundant
telecommunications services.
Merit Systems Protection Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $32,683,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 37,303,000
Committee recommendation................................ 34,677,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $194,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Merit System Protection Board [MSPB] was established by
the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent
quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merits
systems against partisan political and other prohibited
personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for
employees against abuses by agency management.
MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based
civil service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case
basis through hearing and deciding employee appeals, and on a
systemic basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations
of the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting
studies of the civil service and other merit systems. These
actions are designed to assure that personnel actions taken
against employees are processed within the law, and that
actions taken by OPM and other agencies support and enhance
Federal merit principles.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,677,000
for the Merit Systems Protection Board, this is an increase of
$1,994,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level and a
decrease of $2,626,000 below the President's budget request.
The decrease from the President's request reflects the
Committee's decision to continue the practice of appropriating
funds to MSPB from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability
Fund rather than discontinuing this practice as requested by
the President; this request has not been adequately justified.
The Committee instead makes available no more than $2,626,000
for adjudicated appeals through an appropriation from the trust
fund consistent with past practice.
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Foundation
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOUNDATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,984,000
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,996,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $12,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is
invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the
needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments are
used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall
Foundation. The Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships and
grants, and funds activities of the Udall Center.
Public Law 106-568 authorized the Morris K. Udall
Foundation to establish training programs for professionals in
health care policy and public policy, such as the Native
Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, based at the University of
Arizona, will provide Native Americans with leadership and
management training and analyze policies relevant to tribes.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,996,000 for
these activities of the Morris K. Udall Foundation. The
Committee includes language to allow up to 60 percent of the
appropriation to be used for the expenses of the Native Nations
Institute. The Committee also includes language requiring the
Foundation to report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations on the amount of funding, if any, transferred
from the Trust Fund for the Native Nations Institute and
justification for such transfers. This report should include an
itemization of planned Native Nations Institute expenditures
for fiscal year 2004. Future budget justifications submitted to
Congress regarding this effort are to contain detailed
information on the actual expenditures in past years as well as
detailed information on planned expenditures for the current
and future budget years.
MORRIS K. UDALL ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,301,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 700,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,309,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $8,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is
a Federal program established by Public Law 105-156 to assist
parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and
public lands conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K.
Udall Foundation, and serves as an impartial, non-partisan
institution providing professional expertise, services, and
resources to all parties involved in such disputes. The
Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem
solving is appropriate for specific environmental conflicts,
how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion,
and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator might be
helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to each
consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the
Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and
mediators with substantial experience in environmental conflict
resolution, and can help parties in selecting an appropriate
neutral.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,309,000 for
the Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This
amount is $8,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level and
$609,000 above the administration's request.
National Archives and Records Administration
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $255,185,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 266,945,000
Committee recommendation................................ 266,945,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,515,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is
the national recordkeeper. NARA is an independent agency
created by statute in 1934 to safeguard the records of all
three branches of the Federal Government. NARA administers the
Information Security Oversight Office [ISOO], is the publisher
of the Federal Register and makes grants for historical
documentation through the National Historical Publications and
Records Commission [NHPRC]. NARA provides for basic operations
dealing with management of the Federal Government's archives
and records, operation of Presidential Libraries, and for the
review for declassification of classified security information.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $266,945,000
for Operating Expenses of the National Archives and archived
Federal records and related activities.
ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $35,702,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 35,914,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,914,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $212,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is
developing an Electronic Records Archives [ERA] that will
ensure the preservation of and access to Government electronic
records. With the rapid changes in technology today, the
formats in which records are stored become obsolete within a
few years, making records inaccessible even if they are
preserved intact with the most modern technology. ERA will
preserve electronic records generated in a manner that enables
requesters to access them on computer systems now and in the
future.
Given both the importance and obvious magnitude of ERA, the
Committee intends to continue to monitor NARA's acquisition
plans, staffing levels and ability to meet established
deadlines. In that regard, the Committee directs GAO to
continue to provide progress reports on NARA's development of
ERA and to report its findings to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations by May 25, 2005.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,914,000
for the Electronic Records Archives. The funding request for
fiscal year 2005 will continue to support the initial work on
development of the first increment of the electronic records
system.
ARCHIVES FACILITIES REPAIRS AND RESTORATION
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $13,627,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 6,182,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,182,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $81,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
This account provides for the repair, alteration, and
improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential Libraries
nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will
better enable NARA to maintain its facilities in proper
condition for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees,
and also maintain the structural integrity of the buildings.
These funds will determine appropriate options for preserving
and providing access to 20th century military service records.
These funds will allow NARA to complete preliminary design
studies and analysis, including workflow and cost estimates,
for housing and access options for these massive and valuable
records. Technology and facility approaches will also be
examined.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,182,000.
The Committee has included $3,000,000 for site preparation and
construction management for the construction of a new Pacific
Alaska Regional Archives Facility in Anchorage, Alaska. The
recommendation also provides $2,000,000 for the repair and
restoration of the plaza that surrounds the Lyndon Baines
Johnson Presidential Library at the University of Texas. The
Committee is concerned by the lack of progress on this project
and directs NARA and the University of Texas to keep the
Committee fully apprised of steps to commence the repair of the
plaza this fiscal year. Further, the Committee encourages the
parties to realign their memorandum of understanding in a
timely fashion to reflect their agreement as to ongoing
responsibilities for repair and maintenance of this shared
facility. The Committee has also included $1,000,000 to design
an addition and renovation for the John F. Kennedy Library.
This appropriation is $6,000,000 above the President's budget
request and $1,445,000 below the fiscal year 2004 enacted
level.
National Historical Publications and Records Commission
GRANTS PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $9,941,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $59,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The National Historical Publications and Records Commission
[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish
records that document American history. Administered within the
National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps
State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal
records, helps publish the papers of major figures in American
history, and helps archivists and records managers improve
their techniques, training, and ability to serve a range of
information users.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,000,000.
This amount is $2,000,000 above the President's budget request
and $4,941,000 less than the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
National Transportation Safety Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $73,065,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 74,425,000
Committee recommendation................................ 76,425,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $434,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
Initially established along with the Department of
Transportation [DOT], the National Transportation Safety Board
[NTSB] commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent
Federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every
civil aviation accident in the United States as well as
significant accidents in the other modes of transportation--
railroad, highway, marine and pipeline--and issuing safety
recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents. Although
it has always operated independently, NTSB relied on DOT for
funding and administrative support until the Independent Safety
Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-633) severed all ties between
the two organizations starting in 1975.
In addition to its investigatory duties, NTSB is
responsible for maintaining the Government's database of civil
aviation accidents and also conducts special studies of
transportation safety issues of national significance.
Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international
treaties, NTSB supplies investigators to serve as U.S.
Accredited Representatives for aviation accidents overseas
involving U.S-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or
major components of U.S. manufacture. NTSB also serves as the
``court of appeals'' for any airman, mechanic or mariner
whenever certificate action is taken by the Federal Aviation
Administration [FAA] or the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant, or
when civil penalties are assessed by FAA.
The Committee recommends $76,425,000 for the National
Transportation Safety Board, which is $2,000,000 more than the
budget request and is $3,360,000 more than the fiscal year 2004
enacted level. The Committee has provided this additional
funding above the budget request in order to allow NTSB to
maintain its critical staffing infrastructure and to add those
new staff necessary to further its safety mission. Accordingly,
and consistent with the staffing plan that NTSB has developed,
the Committee directs NTSB to fund its Academy at no more than
the requested level and to utilize these additional funds to
hire accident investigation personnel.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, 2004........................................................
Budget estimate, 2005................................... -$8,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -8,000,000
The fiscal year 2004 Supplemental Appropriations bill
(Public Law 106-246) provided $19,739,000 to NTSB for emergency
expenses associated with its investigation of the Egypt Air
Flight 990 and Alaska Air Flight 261 accidents. These funds
were used for wreckage location and recovery facilities,
technical support, testing, and wreckage mock-up. All of these
activities have been completed and an unobligated balance of
$8,000,000 remains. The Committee recommends the requested
rescission of this amount.
Office of Government Ethics
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $10,675,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 11,238,000
Committee recommendation................................ 11,238,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $63,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a small agency
within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978. Originally part of the Office of
Personnel Management, OGE became a separate agency on October
1, 1989 as part of the Office of Government Ethics
Reauthorization Act of 1988.
OGE is charged by law to provide overall direction of
Executive Branch policies designed to prevent conflicts of
interest and ensure high ethical standards. OGE carries out
these responsibilities by developing rules and regulations
pertaining to conflicts of interest, post employment
restrictions, standards of conduct, and public and confidential
financial disclosure in the Executive Branch; by monitoring
compliance with the public and confidential disclosure
requirements of the Ethics Reform Act of 1978 and the Ethics
Reform Act of 1989 to determine possible violations of
applicable laws or regulations and recommending appropriate
corrective action; by consulting with and assisting various
officials in evaluating the effectiveness of applicable laws
and the resolution of individual problems; and by preparing
formal advisory opinions, informal letter opinions, policy
memoranda, and Federal Register entries on how to interpret and
comply with the requirements on conflicts of interest, post
employment, standards of conduct, and financial disclosure.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,238,000
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics in
fiscal year 2005. This amount is the same as the President's
budget request.
Office of Personnel Management
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $118,793,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 131,291,000
Committee recommendation................................ 130,600,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $705,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by
Public Law 95-454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,
enacted on October 13, 1978. In that Act, the Office of
Personnel Management was established in section 1101 of title
5, United States Code. Subsequent sections of Chapter 11
provide for the principal officials of the agency and the
functions of the Director, which are really the functions of
the Agency, as well as providing for the delegation of
authority for personnel management from the President and,
subsequently, by the Director.
OPM is the Federal Government agency responsible for
management of Federal human resources policy and oversight of
the merit civil service system. Although individual agencies
are increasingly responsible for personnel operations, OPM
provides a Governmentwide policy framework for personnel
matters, advises and assists agencies (often on a reimbursable
basis), and ensures that agency operations are consistent with
requirements of law on issues such as veterans preference. OPM
oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues
regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay,
training, investigations, other aspects of personnel
management, and operates a reimbursable training program for
the Federal Government's managers and executives. OPM is also
responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits
and life insurance programs affecting most Federal employees,
retired Federal employees, and their survivors.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $130,600,000
for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel
Management. Of the amount provided no more than $10,724,000 is
to be used for e-Government projects. This amount is $691,000
less than the President's request and $11,807,000 above the
fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
Child Care.--In fiscal year 2003, the Senate report
directed OPM to conduct a study of child care needs for Federal
employees. The resulting report provided some valuable
information but further examination is necessary for a more
accurate assessment of Federal employee child care needs. The
Committee directs the Government Accountability Office [GAO],
in consultation with OPM and the General Service Administration
[GSA], to further study the child care needs of Federal
employees of all Federal agencies, including the Legislative
and Judicial branches. In addition to using the OPM data, the
Committee expects GAO to provide guidance and recommendations
of possible options to develop and evaluate additional child
care facility needs and how best to serve the needs of all
Federal employees.
In recent years, GSA and OPM have implemented programs that
agencies can use to subsidize a substantial portion of child
care expenses for lower income employees. While these
supplemental programs are available, the Committee notes that
only one in five agencies is offering the subsidy at this time.
The Committee directs OPM to reevaluate its efforts to provide
information and education to agencies on promoting this
valuable program.
Retirement Systems Modernization.--The Committee is aware
that the Office of Personnel Management initiated a Retirement
Systems Modernization Program in 1997 to automate and
streamline the manual and paper-intensive business processes
used to administer the Federal employee retirement program. The
Committee recommends that OPM continue to reach out to GAO for
guidance and support because OPM could definitely benefit from
the experiences that GAO has documented with other Federal
agency modernization projects. The Committee is not confident
that this multi-year effort is free of problems. The Committee
therefore directs GAO to do a comprehensive audit on the
problems and any mismanagement of the modernization project.
limitation
(TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)
Limitation, 2004........................................ $135,112,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 128,462,000
Committee recommendation................................ 128,462,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $801,900 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust
funds of the Office of Personnel Management to cover
administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance
programs.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $128,462,000. This
amount is the same as the President's request.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $1,489,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 1,627,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,627,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $8,800 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Office of Inspector General is charged with
establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts
which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office
of Personnel Management's activities which prevent and detect
fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency's programs.
Contract audits provide professional advice to agency
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters
regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing,
and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and
evaluate all facets of agency operations, including financial
statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide detailed
technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits
review the operations of health and life insurance carriers,
health care providers, and insurance subscribers. The
investigative function provides for the detection and
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving
programs, personnel, and operations. Administrative sanctions
debar from participation in the health insurance program those
health care providers whose conduct may pose a threat to the
financial integrity of the program itself or to the well-being
of insurance program enrollees.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,627,000 for
salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in
fiscal year 2005. This amount is the same as the President's
request and $138,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
(LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)
Limitation, 2004........................................ $14,342,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 16,461,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,461,000
The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the
trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General
activities totaling $16,461,000 for fiscal year 2005 and
$2,119,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
government payment for annuitants, employees health benefits
Appropriations, 2004.................................... $7,219,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 8,135,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,135,000,000
This appropriation covers the Government's share of the
cost of health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal
Employees Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as
administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,135,000,000
for Government payments for annuitants, employees health
benefits.
government payment for annuitants, employee life insurance
Appropriations, 2004.................................... $35,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 35,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,000,000
Public Law 96-427, the Federal Employees' Group Life
Insurance Act of 1980 requires that all employees under the age
of 65 who separate from the Federal Government for purposes of
retirement on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make
contributions toward their basic life insurance coverage after
retirement until they reach the age of 65. These retirees will
contribute two-thirds of the cost of the basic life insurance
premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal
employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active
Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute
one-third of the cost of the premium for basic coverage. OPM,
acting as the payroll office on behalf of Federal retirees, has
requested, and the Committee has provided, the funding
necessary to make the required Government contribution
associated with annuitants' postretirement life insurance
coverage.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,000,000
for the Government payment for annuitants, employee life
insurance. This amount equals the budget request.
payment to civil service retirement and disability fund
Appropriations, 2004.................................... $9,987,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 9,772,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,772,000,000
The civil service retirement and disability fund was
established in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of
annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The
fund covers the operation of the Civil Service Retirement
System and the Federal Employees' Retirement System.
This appropriation provides for the Government's share of
retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded
liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military
service, and survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of
some annuitants who did not elect survivor coverage.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,772,000,000
for payment to the civil service retirement and disability
fund. The Committee recommendation equals the budget estimate.
HUMAN CAPITAL PERFORMANCE FUND
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $994,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 300,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\ Reflects reduction of $5,900 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Human Capital Performance Fund is designed to create
performance-driven pay systems for employees and reinforce the
value of employee performance management systems. The
administration proposes providing additional pay over and above
any annual, across-the-board pay raise to certain civilian
employees based on individual or organizational performance
and/or other critical agency human capital needs. Under the
proposal the current GS system would remain unchanged.
Individual employees would remain at their existing GS levels
and on schedule for all routine pay raises such as a within-
grade increase. Any pay increase received from the Fund would
be treated as increases to base pay for retirement and other
purposes and would stay with an employee throughout his/her
career.
The Committee supports the concept of a performance-based
pay system, but continues to be concerned about the creation of
the Human Capital Performance Fund. The Committee believes that
an initiative of this type should be budgeted and administered
within the salaries and expenses of each individual agency and
denies funding for fiscal year 2005.
Office of Special Counsel
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $13,424,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 15,449,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,449,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $80,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] was first
established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 until 1989, it
operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm
of the Merit Systems Protection Board (the Board). In 1989,
Congress enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act, which made
OSC an independent agency within the Executive Branch. In 1994,
the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
became law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in
connection with military service, prohibited discrimination
against them because of that service, and gave OSC new
authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal
agencies.
OSC investigates Federal employee allegations of prohibited
personnel practices and, when appropriate, prosecutes cases
before the Merit Systems Protection Board and enforces the
Hatch Act. OSC also provides a channel for whistleblowing by
Federal employees, and may transmit whistleblowing allegations
to the agency head concerned and require an agency
investigation and a report to Congress and the President when
appropriate.
The Committee is aware that OSC has a critical need for
additional personnel to address its more than 3 years of case
backlog. Rather than hiring only attorneys, the Committee
expects OSC to acquire an appropriate mix of new staff that
will maximize its ability to reduce this backlog. The Committee
therefore directs OSC to report to the Committees on
Appropriations, no later than March 31, 2005, regarding the
status of its staffing efforts, particularly describing those
new positions hired and how the reduction of OSC's case backlog
has benefited as a result of the new personnel.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,449,000
for the Office of Special Counsel. This amount is the same as
the President's budget request and $2,025,000 above the fiscal
year 2004 enacted level.
United States Postal Service
PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $59,660,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 61,709,000
Committee recommendation................................ 90,709,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $354,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal
Service in 1971 as an independent establishment of the
executive branch of the United States Government. The Postal
Service basic function and obligation is to provide postal
services to bind the nation together through the personal,
educational, literary, and business correspondence of the
people. It shall provide prompt, reliable and efficient
services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal
services to all communities.
The Committee recommends a total of $90,709,000 in fiscal
year 2005 funding and advanced appropriations for payments to
the Postal Service Fund. The increase of $29,000,000 above the
President's request is to provide funds in the amount of
$29,000,000 for overseas voting for prior years' liability
under the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 1993.
This amount includes: $55,631,000 requested for free mail
for the blind and overseas voting; $6,078,000 as a
reconciliation adjustment for 2002 actual mail volume of free
mail for the blind and overseas voting; and $29,000,000 for
prior years' liability under the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of
1993. In addition to these funds, $36,521,000 (an advance
appropriation from 2004 for the 2004 costs and the 2001
reconciliation adjustment for free mail for the blind and
overseas voting) will become available to the U.S. Postal
Service in fiscal year 2005.
Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables
postage rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized rates
for certain categories of mail as authorized by subsections (c)
and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code. Free
mail for the blind and overseas voters will continue to be
provided at the funding level recommended by the Committee.
The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would
assure that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind
shall continue to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural
delivery of mail shall continue at the 1983 level; and that
none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close
small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 2005.
These are services that must be maintained in fiscal year 2005
and beyond.
The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of
the most important services provided by the Federal Government
to its citizens. Especially in rural and small town America,
this critical postal service is the linchpin that serves to
bind the Nation together.
Post Office Hours of Operation.--The Committee continues to
be informed of the U.S. Postal Service efforts to promote
efficiency by reducing the hours of operation at certain Post
Offices across the Nation. The Committee is concerned that the
Postal Service has reduced customer service hours without
adequate consideration of peak hour public use. The Committee
directs the Postal Service to continue to work with the various
communities to review the hours of operation that will best
serve the community.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Appropriations, 2004....................................................
Budget estimate, 2005...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $507,000,000
The Emergency Preparedness Account was implemented November
2001, to protect postal employees and postal customers from
exposure to biohazardous materials.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $507,000,000
for Postal Service fiscal year 2005 Emergency Preparedness
activities. This funding level will afford the Postal Service
the expenditure of: $116,000,000 to complete the biohazardous
detection system [BDS] system nationwide; $7,000,000 to
construct a mail irradiation facility in Washington, DC to
irradiate Government mail; and to reimburse the Postal Service
$384,000,000 in prior years spending on BDS system, ventilation
and filtration equipment, the irradiation facility, and other
related expenses. The entire amount appropriated has been
designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 402
of S. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress), as made applicable to the
House of Representatives by H. Res. 649 (108th Congress) and
applicable to the Senate by section 14007 of Public Law 108-
287.
The Committee is concerned that the deployed Biohazardous
Detection System and Ventilation Filtration System equipment's
inability to detect the full array of chemical and biological
agents will pose a threat to the Nation's current and future
mail streams. Therefore, the Committee directs the Postal
Service to provide a report to the congressional committees of
jurisdiction no later than March 1, 2005, regarding the use of
these funds. The report should include: (1) a description
specifying the equipment that has been or is planned to be
purchased; (2) the status and timetable of this equipment's
deployment; (3) itemization of actual and planned expenses by
fiscal year; (4) results on the effectiveness of the
biodetection equipment in detecting anthrax and other hazardous
chemical and biological substances, including the sensitivity
and specificity of the biodetection system; and (5) an
assessment of the progress being made in the development of
technological and nontechnological approaches to enhancing mail
security and safety.
United States Tax Court
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $39,950,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 41,180,000
Committee recommendation................................ 41,180,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $237,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168
of Public Law 108-199.
The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the
legislative branch under article I of the Constitution of the
United States. The court is composed of a chief judge and 18
judges. Decisions by the court are reviewable by the U.S.
Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is granted, by the Supreme
Court.
In their judicial duties the judges are assisted by senior
judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases,
and by special trial judges, who hear small tax cases and
certain regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge.
The court conducts trial sessions throughout the United
States, including Hawaii and Alaska. The matters over which the
Court has jurisdiction are set forth in various sections of
title 26 of the United States Code.
Tax Court Independent Counsel Fund.--This fund is
established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7475. The fund is used by the
Tax Court to employ independent counsel to pursue disciplinary
matters involving practitioners admitted to practice before the
Court.
Tax Court Judges Survivors Annuity Fund.--This fund
established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7448, is used to pay
survivorship benefits to eligible surviving spouses and
dependent children of deceased judges of the U.S. Tax Court.
Participating judges pay 3.5 percent of their salaries or
retired pay into the fund to cover creditable service for which
payment is required. Additional funds, as are needed, are
provided through the annual appropriation to the U.S. Tax
Court.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,180,000
for the U.S. Tax Court.
White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance
Appropriations, 2004 \1\................................ $249,000
Budget estimate, 2005................................... 250,000
Committee recommendation................................ 250,000
\1\ Reflects reduction of $1,000 pursuant to Division H, section 168 of
Public Law 108-199.
The Commission was established and authorized by Public Law
106-579. The Commission will also accept gifts and generate
product royalty revenue in order to revitalize the national
understanding and commemoration of Memorial Day.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $250,000 for
the White House Commission on the National Moment of
Remembrance. This is the same as the President's request.
STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Transportation, Treasury and General Government
appropriation bill includes general provisions which govern
both the activities of the agencies covered by the bill, and,
in some cases, activities of agencies, programs, and general
government activities that are not covered by the bill. General
provisions that are governmentwide in scope are contained in
title VI of this bill.
The bill contains a number of general provisions that have
been carried in this bill for years and which are routine in
nature and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained
under this section of the report. Those general provisions that
deal with a single agency only are shown immediately following
that particular agency's or department's appropriation accounts
in the bill. Those general provisions that address activities
or directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this
bill are contained in title V.
TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS THIS ACT
Section 501 requires pay raises to be absorbed within
appropriated levels in this Act or previous appropriations
Acts.
Section 502 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-
Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings
funded in this Act.
Section 503 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal
year and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so
provided herein.
Section 504 limits expenditures for consulting service
through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a
matter of public record and available for public inspection.
Section 505 prohibits funds in this Act to be transferred
without express authority.
Section 506 prohibits the use of funds to engage in
activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307
of the 1930 Tariff Act.
Section 507 protects employment rights of Federal employees
who return to their civilian jobs after assignment with the
Armed Forces.
Section 508 prohibits the use of funds in compliance with
the Buy American Act.
Section 509 expresses the sense of the Congress to purchase
only American-made equipment and products.
Section 510 ensures that 50 percent of unobligated balances
may remain available for certain purposes.
Section 511 authorizes the reprogramming of funds and
specifies the reprogramming procedures for agencies funded by
this Act.
Section 512 restricts the use of funds for the White House
to request official background reports without the written
consent of the individual who is the subject of the report.
Section 513 ensures that the cost accounting standard shall
not apply with respect to a contract under the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program.
Section 514 references non-foreign area cost of living
allowances.
Section 515 waives restrictions on the purchase of non-
domestic articles, materials, and supplies in the case of
acquisition by the Federal Government of information
technology.
Section 516 extends the consultation requirement beyond the
Office of Management and Budget to all other Federal agencies
to the extent it applies to Indian tribes.
Section 517 prohibits the use of funds for a proposed rule
relating to the determination that real estate brokerage is a
financial activity.
Section 518 requires the Tennessee Valley Authority to
register with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Section 519 amends the Denali Commission Act to include
docks, waterfront transportation development, and related
infrastructure projects.
Section 520 directs each agency to acquire a Chief Privacy
Officer to assume primary responsibility for privacy and data
protection policy.
Section 521 allows donations to State and local candidates
as a permissible use of Federal campaign funds.
Section 522 amends section 432 of title 2, United States
Code, so that the term ``support'' will not include a
contribution by any authorized committee in amounts of $2,000
or less (rather than the current $1,000 or less) to an
authorized committee of any other candidate.
TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS
Section 601 authorizes agencies to pay travel costs of the
families of Federal employees on foreign duty to return to the
United States in the event of death or a life threatening
illness of an employee.
Section 602 requires agencies to administer a policy
designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free from the
illegal use of controlled substances.
Section 603 limits the price on vehicles to be purchased by
the Federal Government.
Section 604 allows funds made available to agencies for
travel to also be used for quarters allowances and cost-of-
living allowances.
Section 605 prohibits the Government, with certain
specified exceptions, from employing non-U.S. citizens whose
posts of duty would be in the continental United States.
Section 606 ensures that agencies will have authority to
pay the General Services Administration bills for space
renovation and other services.
Section 607 allows agencies to finance the costs of
recycling and waste prevention programs with proceeds from the
sale of materials recovered through such programs.
Section 608 provides that funds may be used to pay rent and
other service costs in the District of Columbia.
Section 609 prohibits the use of appropriated funds to pay
the salary of any nominee after the Senate voted not to approve
the nomination.
Section 610 precludes interagency financing of groups
absent prior statutory approval.
Section 611 authorizes the Postal Service to employ guards.
Section 612 prohibits the use of appropriated funds for
enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance with the
applicable law of the United States.
Section 613 limits the pay increases of certain prevailing
rate employees.
Section 614 limits the amount that can be used for
redecoration of offices under certain circumstances.
Section 615 permits interagency funding of national
security and emergency preparedness telecommunications
initiatives, which benefit multiple Federal departments,
agencies, and entities.
Section 616 requires agencies to certify that a schedule C
appointment was not created solely or primarily to detail the
employee to the White House.
Section 617 requires agencies to administer a policy
designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free from
discrimination and sexual harassment.
Section 618 prohibits the use of funds to prevent Federal
employees from communicating with Congress or to take
disciplinary or personnel actions against employees for such
communication.
Section 619 prohibits training not directly related to the
performance of official duties.
Section 620 prohibits the expenditure of funds for the
implementation of agreements in certain nondisclosure policies
unless certain provisions are included in the policies.
Section 621 prohibits use of appropriated funds for
publicity or propaganda designed to support or defeat
legislation pending before Congress.
Section 622 prohibits use of appropriated funds by an
agency to provide Federal employees home address to labor
organizations.
Section 623 prohibits the use of appropriated funds to
provide nonpublic information such as mailing or telephone
lists to any person or organization outside of the Government.
Section 624 prohibits the use of appropriated funds for
publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not
authorized by Congress.
Section 625 directs agencies employees to use official time
in an honest effort to perform official duties.
Section 626 authorizes the use of current fiscal year funds
to finance an appropriate share of the Joint Financial
Management Improvement Program.
Section 627 authorizes agencies to transfer funds to or
reimburse the Policy and Operations account of GSA to finance
an appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management
Improvement Program.
Section 628 prohibits the use of funds in this or any other
Act to restrict any agency from using appropriated funds as
they see fit to independently contract with private companies
to provide online employment applications and processing
services.
Section 629 authorizes breastfeeding at any location in a
Federal building or on Federal property.
Section 630 permits interagency funding of the National
Science and Technology Council.
Section 631 requires identification of the Federal agencies
providing Federal funds and the amount provided for all
proposals, solicitations, grant applications, forms,
notifications, press releases, or other publications related to
the distribution of funding to a State.
Section 632 continues a provision which extends the
authorization for franchise fund pilots for 1 year with
modification.
Section 633 continues a provision prohibiting the use of
funds to monitor personal information relating to the use of
Federal internet sites; the conferees apply this provision
government-wide.
Section 634 continues a provision regarding contraceptive
coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.
Section 635 clarifies that the United States Anti-Doping
Agency is the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan
American, and Paralympic sport in the United States.
Section 636 prohibits the purchase of a product or service
offered by the Federal Prison Industries, Inc., unless the
Agency making such purchase determines that such product or
service provides the best value.
Section 637 requires each Department and Agency to evaluate
the creditworthiness of an individual before issuing the
individual a government purchase charge card or travel card.
Section 638 allows the use of appropriated funds for
official travel by Federal departments and agencies to
participate in the fractional aircraft ownership pilot program.
Section 639 continues a provision requiring the head of
each Federal agency to submit a report to Congress on the
amount of acquisitions made by the agency from entities that
manufacture the articles, materials, or supplies outside of the
United States.
Section 640 adjusts the rate of basic pay for Federal
employees.
Sections 641 prohibits the expenditure of funds for the
acquisition of additional Federal Law Enforcement Training
facilities.
Section 642 eliminates the 10-year limitations period
applicable to the offset of Federal non-tax payments.
Section 643 permits the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to match information, provided by the Secretary of the
Treasury with respect to persons owing delinquent debt to the
Federal Government, with information contained in the HHS
National Directory of New Hires.
Section 644 allows for the offset of Federal tax refunds to
collect delinquent State unemployment compensation
overpayments.
Section 645 provides for the funding of airport operations
at Midway Atoll Airfield.
Section 646 prohibits the use of funds related to the 2003
version of A-76.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.''
The Committee recommends the following appropriations which
lack authorization:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary of Transportation: Payments to air
carriers
Federal Highway Administration:
Federal-aid highways
Appalachian development highway system
Motor Carrier Safety Administration:
Motor carrier safety
National motor carrier safety program
Border enforcement program
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
Operations and research
Highway traffic safety grants
National driver register
Federal Railroad Administration:
Safety and operations
Alaska railroad rehabilitation
Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Federal Transit Administration:
Administrative expenses
Formula grants
University transportation centers
Transit planning and research
Capitol investment grants
Job access and reverse commute grants
Research and Special Programs Administration:
Research and Special Programs (Hazardous Materials Safety)
Emergency Preparedness Grants
Bureau of Transportation Statistics (drawdown from Federal-
aid highways)
Surface Transportation Board
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices:
Salaries and expenses
Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Program
Air Transportation Stabilization Program
Treasury Building and annex, repair and restoration
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
The White House Office, salaries and expenses
Executive Residence at the White House, operating expenses
Special Assistance to the President, salaries and expenses
Council of Economic Advisers
National Security Council
Office of Administration
Office of Management and Budget
Office of National Drug Control Policy:
Salaries and expenses
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
High-intensity drug trafficking areas
Other Federal Drug Control (except Drug-Free Communities)
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Federal Election Commission, salaries and expenses
General Services Administration:
Federal buildings fund
Repairs and Alterations Construction and Acquisition of
Facilities
National Transportation Safety Board
Office of Government Ethics, salaries and expenses
Office of Personnel Management, Human Capital Performance
Fund
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on September 14,
2004, the Committee ordered reported en bloc S. 2803, an
original bill making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, S.
2804, an original bill making appropriations for the Department
of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2005; and S. 2806, an original bill making
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation and
Treasury, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2005, each subject to amendment and each subject
to the budget allocations, by a recorded vote of 29-0, a quorum
being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. DeWine
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the committee.''
In compliance with this rule, the following changes in
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the
Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these
requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.
BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
---------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount of Committee Amount of
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
for 2005: Subcommittee on Transportation and Treasury:
Discretionary........................................... 25,439 25,439 69,605 \1\ 69,601
Mandatory............................................... 18,261 18,261 18,262 18,262
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
2005.................................................... ........... ........... ........... \2\ 49,823
2006.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 23,488
2007.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 9,191
2008.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,978
2009 and future years................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,312
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 697 NA 11,775
2005.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2005
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+ or
-)
Item 2004 Budget House allowance Committee -----------------------------------------------------
appropriation estimate deg. recommendation 2004 Budget House
appropriation estimate allowance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF
Office of the Secretary
Salaries and expenses......... 80,426 102,689 86,000 +5,574 -16,689
Immediate Office of the (2,179) (2,738) (2,400) (+221) (-338)
Secretary................
Immediate Office of the (690) (1,070) (725) (+35) (-345)
Deputy Secretary.........
Immediate Office of the ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
Secretary and Deputy
Secretary................
Office of the General (14,985) (16,920) (15,700) (+715) (-1,220)
Counsel..................
Office of the Under (12,141) (12,918) (12,627) (+486) (-291)
Secretary for
Transportation Policy....
Office of the Assistant (8,418) (8,889) (8,600) (+182) (-289)
Secretary for Budget and
Programs.................
Office of the Assistant (2,268) (2,587) (2,500) (+232) (-87)
Secretary for
Governmental Affairs.....
Office of the Assistant (22,984) (32,935) (24,364) (+1,380) (-8,571)
Secretary for
Administration...........
Office of Public Affairs.. (1,889) (2,034) (1,968) (+79) (-66)
Executive Secretariat..... (1,426) (1,500) (1,484) (+58) (-16)
Board of Contract Appeals. (690) (801) (750) (+60) (-51)
Office of Small and (1,261) (1,295) (1,290) (+29) (-5)
Disadvantaged Business
Utilization..............
Office of Intelligence and (1,972) (2,260) (2,200) (+228) (-60)
Security.................
Office of the Chief (7,396) (16,742) (11,392) (+3,996) (-5,350)
Information Officer......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ (78,299) (102,689) (86,000) (+7,701) (-16,689)
Office of Civil Rights........ 8,518 8,700 8,700 +182 ................
Rescission of excess ................ ................. -235,000 -235,000 -235,000
compensation for air carriers
Transportation planning, 20,741 10,800 15,000 -5,741 +4,200
research, and development....
Working capital fund.......... (116,026) ................. (151,054) (+35,028) (+151,054)
Minority business resource 895 900 900 +5 ................
center program...............
(Limitation on guaranteed (18,367) (18,367) (18,367) ................ ................
loans)...................
Minority business outreach.... 2,982 3,000 3,000 +18 ................
New headquarters building..... ................ 160,000 ................ ................ -160,000
Payments to air carriers 51,693 50,000 52,000 +307 +2,000
(Airport & Airway Trust Fund)
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Office of the 165,255 336,089 165,600 +345 -170,489
Secretary..............
Federal Aviation
Administration
Operations.................... 7,486,493 7,849,000 7,784,000 +297,507 -65,000
Facilities & equipment 2,892,831 2,500,000 2,500,000 -392,831 ................
(Airport & Airway Trust Fund)
Rescission (Airport and -30,000 ................. -50,000 -20,000 -50,000
Airway Trust Fund).......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, F&E...........; 2,862,831 2,500,000 2,450,000 -412,831 -50,000
Research, engineering, and 118,734 117,000 129,427 +10,693 +12,427
development (Airport and
Airway Trust Fund)...........
Grants-in-aid for airports
(Airport and Airway Trust
Fund):
(Liquidation of contract (3,379,940) (2,800,000) (2,800,000) (-579,940) ................
authorization)...........
(Limitation on (3,379,940) (3,500,000) (3,500,000) (+120,060) ................
obligations).............
(Small community air (20,000) ................. (20,000) ................ (+20,000)
service pilot
program).............
Alliance Airport, TX (Sec. 1,988 ................. ................ -1,988 ................
167).....................
Rescission of contract ................ ................. -265,000 -265,000 -265,000
authorization............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Grants-in-aid. (3,381,928) (3,500,000) (3,235,000) (-146,928) (-265,000)
War risk insurance (Sec. 105). ................ ................. -50,000 -50,000 -50,000
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Federal Aviation 10,500,046 10,466,000 10,363,427 -136,619 -102,573
Administration.........
(Limitations on (3,379,940) (3,500,000) (3,500,000) (+120,060) ................
obligations).......
Rescissions......... -30,000 ................. -50,000 -20,000 -50,000
Rescissions of ................ ................. -265,000 -265,000 -265,000
contract authority.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ (13,849,986) (13,966,000) (13,548,427) (-301,559) (-417,573)
Federal Highway Administration
Limitation on administrative (335,612) (349,594) (349,594) (+13,982) ................
expenses.....................
Federal-aid highways (Highway
Trust Fund):
(Limitation on (33,643,326) (33,643,326) (34,900,000) (+1,256,674) (+1,256,674)
obligations).............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal (limitations on (33,643,326) (33,643,326) (34,900,000) (+1,256,674) (+1,256,674)
obligations) (HTF).....
(Exempt obligations).......... (931,297) (834,632) (834,632) (-96,665) ................
(Liquidation of contract (34,000,000) (34,000,000) (35,000,000) (+1,000,000) (+1,000,000)
authorization)...............
Miscellaneous rescission of -207,000 -300,000 -300,000 -93,000 ................
contract authority...........
Appalachian development 124,263 ................. 100,000 -24,263 +100,000
highway system...............
TFIA (rescission)............. ................ ................. -100,000 -100,000 -100,000
Miscellaneous projects 49,705 ................. ................ -49,705 ................
(Highway trust fund) (Sec.
162).........................
Rock County road, Jamesville, 994 ................. ................ -994 ................
WI (Sec. 167)................
I-75 improvements, Lee County, 2,485 ................. ................ -2,485 ................
FL (Sec. 167)................
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Federal Highway 177,447 ................. 100,000 -77,447 +100,000
Administration.........
(Limitations on (33,643,326) (33,643,326) (34,900,000) (+1,256,674) (+1,256,674)
obligations).......
(Exempt obligations) (931,297) (834,632) (834,632) (-96,665) ................
Rescissions......... ................ ................. -100,000 -100,000 -100,000
Rescissions of -207,000 -300,000 -300,000 -93,000 ................
contract authority.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net total, FHWA... (34,545,070) (34,177,958) (35,434,632) (+889,562) (+1,256,674)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
Motor carrier safety (175,031) (228,000) (260,000) (+84,969) (+32,000)
(limitation on administrative
expenses) (limitation on
obligations).................
National motor carrier safety
program (Highway Trust Fund):
(Liquidation of contract (190,000) (227,000) (190,000) ................ (-37,000)
authorization)...........
(Limitation on (188,879) (227,000) (190,000) (+1,121) (-37,000)
obligations).............
RABA transfer from FHWA... ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
E-Gov (Highway trust fund) ................ 450 ................ ................ -450
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Federal Motor ................ 450 ................ ................ -450
Carrier Safety Admin...
(Limitations on (363,910) (455,000) (450,000) (+86,090) (-5,000)
obligations).......
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration
Operations and research....... ................ 139,300 ................ ................ -139,300
Operations and research (HTF). (149,657) ................. (152,300) (+2,643) (+152,300)
Operations and research
(Highway trust fund):
(Liquidation of contract (72,000) (90,000) (72,000) ................ (-18,000)
authorization)...........
(Limitation on (71,575) (90,000) (72,000) (+425) (-18,000)
obligations).............
National Driver Register (3,558) (4,000) (4,000) (+442) ................
(Highway trust fund).........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operations and (224,790) (233,300) (228,300) (+3,510) (-5,000)
research...............
Highway traffic safety grants
(Highway Trust Fund):
(Liquidation of contract (223,673) (456,000) (225,000) (+1,327) (-231,000)
authorization)...........
(Limitation on
obligations):
Highway safety (164,027) (296,000) (165,000) (+973) (-131,000)
programs (Sec. 402)..
Occupant protection (19,882) ................. (20,000) (+118) (+20,000)
incentive grants
(Sec. 405)...........
Alcohol-impaired (39,764) ................. (40,000) (+236) (+40,000)
driving
countermeasures
grants (Sec. 410)....
Emergency medical services ................ (10,000) ................ ................ (-10,000)
grants (Sec. 407)........
State traffic safety info ................ (50,000) ................ ................ (-50,000)
system improvement grants
(Sec. 412)...............
Safety Incentive Grants ................ (100,000) ................ ................ (-100,000)
for primary seat belt
laws.....................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, limitation on (223,673) (456,000) (225,000) (+1,327) (-231,000)
obligations............
=========================================================================================================================
Total, National Highway ................ 139,300 ................ ................ -139,300
Traffic Safety Admin...
(Limitations on (448,463) (550,000) (453,300) (+4,837) (-96,700)
obligations).......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total budgetary (448,463) (689,300) (453,300) (+4,837) (-236,000)
resources........
Federal Railroad
Administration
Safety and operations......... 130,053 142,396 139,849 +9,796 -2,547
Railroad research and 33,824 36,025 35,225 +1,401 -800
development..................
Amtrak RRIF repayment 2,982 ................. ................ -2,982 ................
deferment....................
Pennsylvania Station ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
Redevelopment project
(advance appropriation)......
Next generation high-speed 37,179 10,000 20,000 -17,179 +10,000
rail.........................
Alaska Railroad rehabilitation 24,853 ................. 25,000 +147 +25,000
Grants to the National 1,217,773 900,000 1,217,000 -773 +317,000
Railroad Passenger
Corporation..................
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Federal Railroad 1,446,664 1,088,421 1,437,074 -9,590 +348,653
Administration.........
Federal Transit Administration
Administrative expenses....... 15,011 ................. 9,984 -5,027 +9,984
Administrative expenses (60,044) ................. (68,016) (+7,972) (+68,016)
(Highway Trust Fund, Mass
Transit Account) (limitation
on obligations)..............
Office of the (965) ................. (900) (-65) (+900)
Administrator............
Office of Cheif Counsel... (3,870) ................. (4,050) (+180) (+4,050)
Office of Civil Rights.... (2,701) ................. (2,750) (+49) (+2,750)
Office of Communications (1,162) ................. (1,210) (+48) (+1,210)
and Congressional Affairs
Office of Budget and (6,195) ................. (6,700) (+505) (+6,700)
Policy...................
Office of of Planning..... (3,646) ................. (4,000) (+354) (+4,000)
Office of of Program (7,115) ................. (7,120) (+5) (+7,120)
Management...............
Office of Research, (4,826) ................. (4,830) (+4) (+4,830)
Demonstration and
Innovation...............
Office of Administration.. (6,716) ................. (6,725) (+9) (+6,725)
Central Account........... (16,734) ................. (18,015) (+1,281) (+18,015)
Regional offices.......... (18,938) ................. (19,200) (+262) (+19,200)
National Transit database. (2,187) ................. (2,500) (+313) (+2,500)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ (75,055) ................. (78,000) (+2,945) (+78,000)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Administrative (75,055) ................. (78,000) (+2,945) (+78,000)
expenses...............
Administrative expenses per ................ 79,931 ................ ................ -79,931
President's request..........
Formula grants................ 763,270 ................. 512,918 -250,352 +512,918
Formula grants (Highway Trust (3,053,080) (5,622,871) (3,494,257) (+441,177) (-2,128,614)
Fund) (limitation on
obligations).................
Formula grants (rescission)... ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Formula grants (3,816,350) (5,622,871) (4,007,175) (+190,825) (-1,615,696)
University transportation 1,193 ................. 768 -425 +768
research.....................
University transportation (4,772) ................. (5,232) (+460) (+5,232)
research (Highway Trust Fund,
Mass Transit Acct)
(limitation on obligations)..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, University (5,965) ................. (6,000) (+35) (+6,000)
transportation research
Transit planning and research. 25,051 ................. 16,384 -8,667 +16,384
Transit planning and research (100,205) ................. (111,616) (+11,411) (+111,616)
(Highway Trust Fund, Mass
Transit Account) (limitation
on obligations)..............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Transit (125,256) ................. (128,000) (+2,744) (+128,000)
planning and research..
Rural transportation (5,219) ................. (5,250) (+31) (+5,250)
assistance...............
National Transit Institute (3,976) ................. (4,000) (+24) (+4,000)
Transit cooperative (8,201) ................. (8,250) (+49) (+8,250)
research.................
Metropolitan planning..... (60,030) ................. (60,386) (+356) (+60,386)
State planning............ (12,540) ................. (12,614) (+74) (+12,614)
National planning and (35,291) ................. (37,500) (+2,209) (+37,500)
research.................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Transit (125,257) ................. (128,000) (+2,743) (+128,000)
planning and research..
Trust fund share of expenses (5,812,702) (329,006) (6,764,976) (+952,274) (+6,435,970)
(Highway Trust Fund)
(liquidation of contract
authorization)...............
Capital investment grants..... 623,798 ................. 436,970 -186,828 +436,970
Capital investment grants (2,495,191) ................. (2,976,855) (+481,664) (+2,976,855)
(Highway Trust Fund, Mass
Transit Account) (limitation
on obligations)..............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Capital (3,118,989) ................. (3,413,825) (+294,836) (+3,413,825)
investment grants......
Major capital investment ................ 1,234,192 ................ ................ -1,234,192
grants.......................
Major capital investment ................ (329,006) ................ ................ (-329,006)
grants (Highway Trust Fund,
Mass Transit Account)
(Limitation on obligations)..
Fixed guideway (1,199,388) ................. (1,214,400) (+15,012) (+1,214,400)
modernization............
Buses and bus-related (603,618) ................. (725,000) (+121,382) (+725,000)
facilities...............
New starts................ (1,315,984) ................. (1,474,425) (+158,441) (+1,474,425)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ (3,118,990) ................. (3,413,825) (+294,835) (+3,413,825)
Job access and reverse commute 24,853 ................. 16,000 -8,853 +16,000
grants.......................
(Highway Trust Fund, Mass (99,410) ................. (109,000) (+9,590) (+109,000)
Transit Account)
(limitation on
obligations).............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Job access and (124,263) ................. (125,000) (+737) (+125,000)
reverse commute grants.
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Federal Transit 1,453,176 ................. 993,024 -460,152 +993,024
Administration.........
FTA per President's ................ 1,314,123 ................ ................ -1,314,123
request............
(Limitations on (5,812,702) (5,951,877) (6,764,976) (+952,274) (+813,099)
obligations).......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total budgetary (7,265,878) (7,266,000) (7,758,000) (+492,122) (+492,000)
resources, FTA...
Saint Lawrence Seaway
Development Corporation
Operations and maintenance 14,315 15,900 15,900 +1,585 ................
(Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund)........................
Maritime Administration
Maritime security program..... 98,118 98,700 98,700 +582 ................
Operations and training....... 106,366 109,300 110,910 +4,544 +1,610
Ship disposal................. 16,115 21,616 21,616 +5,501 ................
Maritime Guaranteed Loan
(Title XI) Program Account:
Administrative expenses... 4,471 4,764 4,764 +293 ................
National defense tank vessel ................ ................. 150,000 +150,000 +150,000
construction program.........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Maritime 225,070 234,380 385,990 +160,920 +151,610
Administration.........
Rescissions......... -4,107 ................. -1,900 +2,207 -1,900
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net total, 220,963 234,380 384,090 +163,127 +149,710
Maritime
Administration...
Research and Special Programs
Administration
Research and special programs. 46,167 52,936 49,000 +2,833 -3,936
Pipeline safety:
Pipeline Safety Fund...... 52,991 51,073 52,073 -918 +1,000
Oil Spill Liability Trust 12,923 19,000 19,000 +6,077 ................
Fund.....................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Pipeline 65,914 70,073 71,073 +5,159 +1,000
safety program (incl
reserve)...............
Emergency preparedness grants:
Emergency preparedness 199 200 200 +1 ................
fund.....................
Limitation on emergency (14,300) (14,300) (14,300) ................ ................
preparedness fund........
=========================================================================================================================
Total, Research and 112,280 123,209 120,273 +7,993 -2,936
Special Programs Admin.
Office of Inspector General
Salaries and expenses......... 55,670 59,000 59,000 +3,330 ................
Surface Transportation Board
Salaries and expenses......... 19,406 20,521 21,250 +1,844 +729
Offsetting collections.... -1,050 -1,050 -1,050 ................ ................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Surface 18,356 19,471 20,200 +1,844 +729
Transportation Board...
=========================================================================================================================
Net total, title I, 13,927,172 13,496,343 12,708,588 -1,218,584 -787,755
Department of
Transportation.........
Appropriations...... (14,168,279) (13,796,343) (13,660,488) (-507,791) (-135,855)
Rescissions......... (-34,107) ................. (-386,900) (-352,793) (-386,900)
Rescission of (-207,000) (-300,000) (-565,000) (-358,000) (-265,000)
contract authority.
(Limitations on (43,648,341) (44,100,203) (46,068,276) (+2,419,935) (+1,968,073)
obligations).......
(Exempt obligations) (931,297) (834,632) (834,632) (-96,665) ................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net total (58,506,810) (58,431,178) (59,611,496) (+1,104,686) (+1,180,318)
budgetary
resources........
=========================================================================================================================
Transportation discretionary 13,927,172 13,496,343 12,708,588 -1,218,584 -787,755
total........................
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE
TREASURY
Departmental Offices.......... 175,070 185,041 161,313 -13,757 -23,728
Executive direction....... ................ ................. (10,020) (+10,020) (+10,020)
General Counsel........... ................ ................. (7,532) (+7,532) (+7,532)
Economic policies and and ................ ................. (33,186) (+33,186) (+33,186)
programs.................
Financial policies and ................ ................. (26,914) (+26,914) (+26,914)
programs.................
Financial crimes.......... ................ ................. (5,912) (+5,912) (+5,912)
Treasury wide management.. ................ ................. (17,569) (+17,569) (+17,569)
Administration............ ................ ................. (60,180) (+60,180) (+60,180)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ ................ ................. (161,313) (+161,313) (+161,313)
Office of Foreign Asset ................ ................. 22,291 +22,291 +22,291
Control......................
Department-wide systems and 36,185 36,072 30,260 -5,925 -5,812
capital investments programs.
Office of Inspector General... 12,923 14,158 16,158 +3,235 +2,000
Treasury Inspector General for 127,279 129,126 129,126 +1,847 ................
Tax Administration...........
Treasury Inspector General.... ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
Air Transportation 2,523 2,800 2,000 -523 -800
Stabilization Program Account
Treasury Building and Annex 24,853 20,316 12,316 -12,537 -8,000
Repair and Restoration.......
Expanded Access to Financial ................ -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 ................
Services (rescission)........
Violent crime reduction ................ -1,000 -1,200 -1,200 -200
program (rescission).........
Financial Crimes Enforcement 57,231 64,502 72,502 +15,271 +8,000
Network......................
Financial Management Service.. 227,210 230,930 230,930 +3,720 ................
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 79,528 81,942 83,000 +3,472 +1,058
Trade Bureau.................
Bureau of the Public Debt..... 172,627 175,166 175,166 +2,539 ................
Payment of government losses 500 1,000 1,000 +500 ................
in shipment..................
Internal Revenue Service:
Processing, Assistance, 4,009,205 4,148,403 4,107,325 +98,120 -41,078
and Management...........
Tax Law Enforcement....... 4,171,244 4,564,350 4,519,350 +348,106 -45,000
Information Systems....... 1,581,575 1,641,768 1,606,768 +25,193 -35,000
Business systems 387,699 285,000 125,000 -262,699 -160,000
modernization............
BSM (rescission of ................ ................. -140,000 -140,000 -140,000
unapproved funds)........
Health Insurance Tax 34,794 34,841 34,841 +47 ................
Credit Administration....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ 10,184,517 10,674,362 10,253,284 +68,767 -421,078
=========================================================================================================================
Total, title II, 11,100,446 11,610,415 11,184,146 +83,700 -426,269
Department of the
Treasury...............
Appropriations...... 11,100,446 11,615,415 11,329,346 +228,900 -286,069
Rescissions......... ................ -5,000 -145,200 -145,200 -140,200
=========================================================================================================================
TITLE III--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF
THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS
APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
Compensation of the President
and the White House Office:
Compensation of the 450 ................. 450 ................ +450
President................
Salaries and Expenses..... 68,760 ................. 63,698 -5,062 +63,698
Homeland Security Council..... ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
Executive Residence at the
White House:
Operating Expenses........ 12,427 ................. 12,760 +333 +12,760
White House Repair and 4,200 ................. 1,900 -2,300 +1,900
Restoration..............
Council of Economic Advisers.. 4,475 ................. 4,040 -435 +4,040
Office of Policy Development.. 4,085 ................. 2,392 -1,693 +2,392
National Security Council..... 10,489 ................. 8,932 -1,557 +8,932
Office of Administration...... 82,337 ................. 92,869 +10,532 +92,869
The White House salaries and ................ 181,048 ................ ................ -181,048
expenses.....................
Office of Management and 66,763 76,565 68,411 +1,648 -8,154
Budget.......................
Office of National Drug
Control Policy:
Salaries and expenses..... 27,832 27,609 27,000 -832 -609
Counterdrug Technology 41,752 40,000 42,000 +248 +2,000
Assessment Center........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................ 69,584 67,609 69,000 -584 +1,391
Federal Drug Control Programs:
High Intensity Drug 225,015 208,350 228,350 +3,335 +20,000
Trafficking Areas Program
Other Federal Drug Control 227,649 235,000 195,500 -32,149 -39,500
Programs.................
Unanticipated Needs........... 994 1,000 1,000 +6 ................
Special Assistance to the
President and the Official
Residence of the Vice
President:
Salaries and expenses..... 4,435 4,571 4,571 +136 ................
Operating expenses........ 329 333 333 +4 ................
=========================================================================================================================
Total, title III, 781,992 774,476 754,206 -27,786 -20,270
Executive Office of the
President and Funds
Appropriated to the
President..............
TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Architectural and
Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board:
Salaries and expenses..... 5,369 5,686 5,686 +317 ................
National Transportation Safety
Board:
Salaries and expenses..... 73,065 74,425 76,425 +3,360 +2,000
Rescission of prior ................ -8,000 -8,000 -8,000 ................
year funds...........
Emergency fund............ 596 ................. ................ -596 ................
Committee for Purchase From 4,697 4,672 4,672 -25 ................
People Who Are Blind or
Severely Disabled............
Federal Election Commission... 50,938 52,159 52,159 +1,221 ................
Election Assistance
Commission:
Salaries and expenses..... 1,193 20,000 10,000 +8,807 -10,000
Election reform programs.. 1,491,150 30,000 ................ -1,491,150 -30,000
Federal Labor Relations 29,436 29,673 25,673 -3,763 -4,000
Authority....................
FLRA (rescission)......... ................ ................. -3,000 -3,000 -3,000
Federal Maritime Commission... 18,362 19,496 19,496 +1,134 ................
General Services
Administration:
Federal Buildings Fund:
Appropriations........ 443,369 ................. ................ -443,369 ................
Limitations on
availability of
revenue:
Construction and (708,268) (650,223) (710,823) (+2,555) (+60,600)
acquisition of
facilities.......
Repairs and (991,300) (980,222) (980,222) (-11,078) ................
alterations......
Installment (169,745) (161,442) (161,442) (-8,303) ................
acquisition
payments.........
Rental of space... (3,280,187) (3,672,315) (3,597,315) (+317,128) (-75,000)
Building (1,608,708) (1,709,522) (1,709,522) (+100,814) ................
Operations.......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, (6,758,208) (7,173,724) (7,159,324) (+401,116) (-14,400)
limitations....
Repayment of Debt..... (54,256) (41,000) (41,000) (-13,256) ................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal 443,369 ................. ................ -443,369 ................
Buildings Fund.....
(Limitations)... (6,812,464) (7,214,724) (7,200,324) (+387,860) (-14,400)
=========================================================================================================================
Governmentwide policy..... 56,050 62,100 62,100 +6,050 ................
Operating Expenses........ 87,590 82,175 85,175 -2,415 +3,000
Office of Inspector 38,938 42,351 42,351 +3,413 ................
General..................
Electronic Government (E- 2,982 5,000 3,000 +18 -2,000
Gov) Fund................
General supply fund for E- ................ 40,000 ................ ................ -40,000
Gov (fiscal year 2005
Sec. 409)................
Allowances and Office 3,373 3,449 3,106 -267 -343
Staff for Former
Presidents...............
Expenses, Presidential ................ 7,700 7,700 +7,700 ................
transition...............
Federal building project 13,917 ................. ................ -13,917 ................
(fiscal year 2004 Sec.
408).....................
San Joaquin conveyance -1,000 ................. ................ +1,000 ................
(fiscal year 2004 Sec.
412).....................
Middle River Depot sale ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
(fiscal year 2005 Sec.
407).....................
Federal building ................ ................. -106,000 -106,000 -106,000
construction schedule
adjustments (Sec. 409)...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, General Services 645,219 242,775 97,432 -547,787 -145,343
Administration.........
=========================================================================================================================
Merit Systems Protection
Board:
Salaries and Expenses..... 32,683 37,303 34,677 +1,994 -2,626
Limitation on 2,611 ................. ................ -2,611 ................
administrative expenses..
Morris K. Udall Foundation:
Morris K. Udall Trust Fund 1,984 ................. 1,996 +12 +1,996
Environmental Dispute 1,301 700 1,309 +8 +609
Resolution Fund..........
National Archives and Records
Administration:
Operating expenses........ 255,185 266,945 266,945 +11,760 ................
Electronic records archive 35,702 35,914 35,914 +212 ................
Reduction of debt......... -7,810 -8,000 -8,000 -190 ................
Repairs and Restoration... 13,627 6,182 12,182 -1,445 +6,000
National Historical 9,941 3,000 5,000 -4,941 +2,000
Publications and Records
Commission: Grants
program..................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Archives 306,645 304,041 312,041 +5,396 +8,000
and Records Admin......
=========================================================================================================================
Office of Government Ethics... 10,675 11,238 11,238 +563 ................
Office of Personnel
Management:
Salaries and Expenses..... 118,793 131,291 130,600 +11,807 -691
Limitation on 135,112 128,462 128,462 -6,650 ................
administrative
expenses.............
Office of Inspector 1,489 1,627 1,627 +138 ................
General..................
Limitation on 14,342 16,461 16,461 +2,119 ................
administrative
expenses.............
Government Payment for 7,219,000 8,135,000 8,135,000 +916,000 ................
Annuitants, Employees
Health Benefits..........
Government Payment for 35,000 35,000 35,000 ................ ................
Annuitants, Employee Life
Insurance................
Payment to Civil Service 9,987,000 9,772,000 9,772,000 -215,000 ................
Retirement and Disability
Fund.....................
Human Capital Performance 994 300,000 ................ -994 -300,000
Fund.....................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of 17,511,730 18,519,841 18,219,150 +707,420 -300,691
Personnel Management...
Office of Special Counsel..... 13,424 15,449 15,449 +2,025 ................
Postal Service:
Payment to the Postal 28,829 ................. 29,000 +171 +29,000
Service Fund.............
Advance appropriation 30,831 36,521 36,521 +5,690 ................
provided in previous
act for fiscal year
2005.................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total available for 59,660 36,521 65,521 +5,861 +29,000
fiscal year 2005...
Advance appropriation 36,306 61,709 61,709 +25,403 ................
for fiscal year 2006.
Emergency preparedness ................ ................. 507,000 +507,000 +507,000
plan (emergency
appropriations)..........
United States Tax Court....... 39,950 41,180 41,180 +1,230 ................
White House Commission on the 249 250 250 +1 ................
National Moment of
Remembrance..................
=========================================================================================================================
Total, title IV, 20,337,243 19,499,118 19,552,063 -785,180 +52,945
Independent Agencies...
=========================================================================================================================
Title V--General Provisions,
This Act
Continued dumping/subsidy ................ -1,450,000 ................ ................ +1,450,000
offset (fiscal year 2005 Sec.
635).........................
Eliminate 10 year limit on ................ -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 ................
debt collection (fiscal year
2005 Sec. 636)...............
HHS info match--new hires ................ -125,000 -125,000 -125,000 ................
(fiscal year 2005 Sec. 637)..
Collect unemployment ................ -20,000 -20,000 -20,000 ................
overpayment (fiscal year 2005
Sec. 638)....................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, General ................ -1,597,000 -147,000 -147,000 +1,450,000
provisions.............
=========================================================================================================================
Grand total............. 46,146,853 43,783,352 44,052,003 -2,094,850 +268,651
Appropriations...... (46,320,823) (43,998,122) (44,554,873) (-1,765,950) (+556,751)
(Emergency ................ ................. (507,000) (+507,000) (+507,000)
appropriations)....
Rescissions......... (-34,107) (-13,000) (-543,100) (-508,993) (-530,100)
Rescission of (-207,000) (-300,000) (-565,000) (-358,000) (-265,000)
contract authority.
Advance (30,831) (36,521) (36,521) (+5,690) ................
appropriation
provided in
previous act for
fiscal year 2005...
Advance (36,306) (61,709) (61,709) (+25,403) ................
appropriation......
(Limitation on (43,648,341) (44,100,203) (46,068,276) (+2,419,935) (+1,968,073)
obligations).......
(Rescissions of ................ ................. ................ ................ ................
limitations on
obligations).......
(Exempt obligations) (931,297) (834,632) (834,632) (-96,665) ................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net total (90,726,491) (88,718,187) (90,954,911) (+228,420) (+2,236,724)
budgetary
resources........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
