H. Rept. 112-541 - 112th Congress (2011-2012)
June 20, 2012, As Reported by the Appropriations Committee

Report text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this legislative text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.




House Report 112-541 - DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013




[House Report 112-541]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     112-541

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



 
 DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013

                                _______
                                

 June 20, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5972]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and 
Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2013.

                        INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT

_______________________________________________________________________


                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
Title I--Department of Transportation......................     2
                                                                      5
Title II--Department of Housing and Urban Development......    71
                                                                     71
Title III--Related Agencies................................   134
                                                                    106
Title IV--General Provisions...............................   142
                                                                    111

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2013, for the purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained 
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and 
activity'' (PPA) shall mean any item for which a dollar amount 
is contained in appropriations acts (including joint 
resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or 
accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint 
explanatory statements of the committee of conference. This 
definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 
(obligational) authority is provided, as well as to 
discretionary grants and discretionary grant allocations made 
through either bill or report language. In addition, the 
percentage reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to 
funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal 
Aviation Administration, shall be applied equally to each 
budget item that is listed under said account in the budget 
justifications submitted to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations as modified by subsequent appropriations acts 
and accompanying committee reports, conference reports, or 
joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference.

              OPERATING PLANS AND REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

    The Committee includes a provision (Sec. 405) 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 advance approval of the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal 
to reprogram funds that:
  --creates a new program;
  --eliminates a program, project, or activity (PPA);
  --increases funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds 
        have been denied or restricted by the Congress;
  --redirects funds that were directed in such reports for a 
        specific activity to a different purpose;
  --augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 
        percent, whichever is less;
  --reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, 
        whichever is less; or
  --creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different 
        from the congressional budget justifications or the 
        table at the end of the Committee report, whichever is 
        more detailed.
    The Committee retains the requirement that each agency 
submit an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this 
Act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming 
and transfer authorities provided in this act. Specifically, 
each agency must 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 also 
must identify items of special Congressional interest. In 
certain instances, the Committee may direct the agency to 
submit a revised operating plan for approval or may direct 
changes to the operating plan if the plan is not consistent 
with the directives of the conference report and statement of 
the managers.
    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 of proposed changes on the budget request for 
the following fiscal year. Any reprogramming request shall 
include any out-year budgetary impacts and a separate 
accounting of program or mission impacts on estimated carryover 
funds. Reprogramming procedures shall apply to funds provided 
in this bill, unobligated balances from previous appropriations 
Acts that are available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal 
year 2013, and non-appropriated resources such as fee 
collections that are used to meet program requirements in 
fiscal year 2013.
    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. 
Except in emergency situations, reprogramming requests should 
be submitted no later than June 28, 2013. 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 that no funds may be 
obligated from working capital fund accounts to augment 
programs, projects or activities for which appropriations have 
been specifically rejected by the Congress, or to increase 
funds or personnel for any PPA above the amounts appropriated 
by this act.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

    Budget justifications are the primary tool used by the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the 
resource requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The 
Committee is aware that the format and presentation of budget 
materials is largely left to the agency within presentation 
objectives set forth by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB). In fact, OMB Circular A-11, part 6 specifically 
instructs agencies to ``consult with your congressional 
committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your plans 
to modify the format of agency budget documents.'' The 
Committee expects that all agencies funded under this act will 
heed this directive. The Committee expects all of the budget 
justifications to provide the data needed to make appropriate 
and meaningful funding decisions.
    While the Committee values the inclusion of performance 
data and presentations, it is important to ensure that vital 
budget information that the Committee needs is not lost. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that justifications submitted 
with the fiscal year 2014 budget request by agencies funded 
under this act 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 this 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, detailed data on all programs, and comprehensive 
information on any office or agency restructurings. At a 
minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification 
for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and 
materials that compare programs, projects, and activities that 
are proposed for fiscal year 2014 to the fiscal year 2013 
enacted levels.
    The Committee is aware that the analytical materials 
required for review by the Committee are unique to each agency 
in this act. Therefore, the Committee expects that the each 
agency will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its 
budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 
2014 budget request.

                    SURFACE AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION

    There are no words to adequately describe the absolute 
necessity for the enactment of a multi-year surface 
authorization bill in the immediate future. For years, 
stakeholders, the Congress, the committees of jurisdiction and 
the Department of Transportation have sounded the alarm on the 
status of the Highway Trust Fund and the need to decide on a 
meaningful reauthorization package. We are literally at the end 
of the road. While some may say both the House and Senate 
proposals are far from perfect, at least the Congress is making 
a serious attempt to address the problem, albeit only through 
fiscal year 2013. Every president since Eisenhower has formally 
submitted to the Congress a highway bill, except the current 
Administration. The Congress and the public have seen ideas and 
concepts, but never a complete package with a serious method of 
funding the programs. The Committee has made recommendations 
for all of the transportation programs in this bill, and is 
optimistic that serious and rational people will come together 
to find a resolution in time for the funding levels in this 
bill to take effect.
    In order to be aware of how funds are allocated and spent, 
the Committee directs the Department of Transportation to 
report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate within 45 days of enactment of 
any surface extension or reauthorization on how the Department 
will enact the provisions of such extension or reauthorization, 
the allocations by state, and the effects on the accounts in 
the Highway Trust Fund.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        Office of the Secretary

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $102,481,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       110,450,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       108,277,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +5,796,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        -2,173,000


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The bill provides $108,277,000 for the salaries and 
expenses of the offices comprising the Office of the Secretary 
of Transportation (OST). The Committee's recommendation is 
$5,796,000 greater than the appropriation provided in fiscal 
year 2012, and $2,173,000 below the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation includes individual funding for each 
of these offices as has been done in prior years. Increases are 
primarily due to inflation, an extra compensable workday, and 
increases in rent and working capital fund expenses. The 
following table (dollars in thousands) compares the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level to the fiscal year 2013 budget request and 
the Committee's recommendation by office.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Fiscal year--
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       2013
                                                                 2012 enacted     2013 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary......................................           $2,618           $2,635           $2,635
Deputy Secretary.............................................              984              992              992
Executive Secretariat........................................            1,595            1,701            1,701
Policy.......................................................           10,107           11,248           11,248
Small Business...............................................            1,369            1,539            1,539
Intelligence and Security....................................           10,778           10,875           10,875
Chief Information Officer....................................           14,988           15,117           15,117
General Counsel..............................................           19,515           19,615           19,615
Government Affairs...........................................            2,500            2,601            2,601
Budget.......................................................           10,538           13,201           12,825
Administration...............................................           25,469           28,672           27,095
Public Affairs...............................................            2,020            2,254            2,034
      Total Salaries and Expenses............................          102,481          110,450          108,277
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Immediate Office of the Secretary.--The immediate Office of 
the Secretary has primary responsibility to provide overall 
planning, direction, and control of departmental affairs.
    Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary.--The Office of 
the Deputy Secretary has primary responsibility to assist the 
Secretary in the overall planning, direction, and control of 
departmental affairs. The Deputy Secretary serves as the chief 
operating officer of the Department of Transportation.
    Executive Secretariat.--The Executive Secretariat assists 
the Secretary and Deputy Secretary in carrying out their 
responsibilities by controlling and coordinating internal and 
external documents.
    Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for 
Policy.--The Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation 
for Policy serves as the Department's chief policy officer, and 
is responsible for the coordination and development of 
departmental policy and legislative initiatives; international 
standards development and harmonization; aviation and other 
transportation-related trade negotiations; the performance of 
policy and economic analysis; and the execution of the 
Essential Air Service program.
    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.--
The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization is 
responsible for promoting small and disadvantaged business 
participation in the Department's procurement and grants 
programs.
    Office of the Chief Information Officer.--The Office of the 
Chief Information Officer serves as the principal advisor to 
the Secretary on information resources and information systems 
management.
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental 
Affairs.--The Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Governmental Affairs is responsible for coordinating all 
Congressional, intergovernmental, and consumer activities of 
the Department.
    In addition, the bill continues a provision (Sec. 185) that 
requires the Department to notify the Committees on 
Appropriations no fewer than three business days before any 
discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding 
grant agreement in excess of $1,000,000 is announced by the 
Department or its modal administrations from: (1) any 
discretionary program of the Federal Highway Administration 
other than the emergency relief program; (2) the airport 
improvement program of the Federal Aviation Administration; (3) 
any grant from the Federal Railroad Administration; and (4) any 
program of the Federal Transit Administration other than the 
formula grants and fixed guideway modernization programs. Such 
notification shall include the date on which the official 
announcement of the grant is to be made and no such 
announcement shall involve funds that are not available for 
obligation.
    Office of the General Counsel.--The Office of the General 
Counsel provides legal services to the Office of the Secretary 
and coordinates and reviews the legal work of the chief 
counsels' offices of the operating administrations.
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and 
Programs.--The Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is 
responsible for developing, reviewing, and presenting budget 
resource requirements for the Department to the Secretary, 
Congress, and the Office of Management and Budget. Of the funds 
provided, $2,300,000 is for the establishment of a credit 
office to evaluate the applications for the Department's 
various credit accounts and oversee the vast loan portfolio. 
The Committee's recommendation does not include funding for 
additional contractual services.
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.--The 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration serves as 
the principal advisor to the Secretary on department-wide 
administrative matters and her responsibilities include 
leadership in acquisition reform and human capital. The 
Committee's recommendation includes funding for adjustments to 
the base and the proposed procurement reviews.
    Office of Public Affairs.--The Office of Public Affairs is 
responsible for the Department's press releases, articles, 
briefing materials, publications, and audio-visual materials. 
The Committee's recommendation does not include additional 
funds for speechwriting contracts, social media services and 
news clipping services.
    Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response.--
The Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response 
was established in fiscal year 2005 by merging the Secretary's 
Office of Intelligence and Security with the Research and 
Special Program Administration's Office of Emergency 
Transportation. This office is responsible for intelligence, 
security policy, preparedness, training and exercises, national 
security, and operations.
    Congressional Budget Justifications.--The Committee will 
give serious consideration to the fiscal year 2014 budget 
proposal only if proposed legislation, including a method for 
paying for any program changes, is transmitted concurrently 
with the budget in February 2013. The Department is directed to 
include in the budget justification funding levels for the 
prior year, current year, and budget year for all programs, 
activities, initiatives, and program elements. Each budget 
submitted by the Department must also include a detailed 
justification for the incremental funding increases and 
additional FTEs being requested above the enacted level, by 
program, activity, or program element.
    OST must include a discussion in its justification of 
changes from the current year to the request, plus a crosswalk 
of all accounts, existing and proposed, from one year to the 
next. To ensure that each adjustment is identified, the 
Committee directs OST in future congressional justifications to 
include detailed information in tabular format, which 
identifies specific changes in funding from the current year to 
the budget year for each office, including each office within 
OST, and every mode and office within the Department.
    Operating Plan.--The Committee directs the Department to 
submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2013 signed by the 
Secretary for review by the Committees on Appropriations within 
60 days of the bill's enactment. The operating plan should 
include funding levels for the various offices, programs, and 
initiatives detailed down to the object class or program 
element covered in the budget justification and supporting 
documents, documents referenced in the House and Senate 
appropriations reports, and the statement of the managers. 
Further, should the Department create, alter, discontinue, or 
otherwise change any program as described in the Department's 
budget justification, those changes must be a part of the 
Department's operating plan. Further, the Department is 
directed the introduction of the report regarding reporting 
requirements after enactment of surface authorizations.
    General Provisions.--The Committee continues to direct DOT 
to justify each general provision proposed either in its 
relevant modal congressional justification or in the OST 
congressional justification. If the budget proposes to drop or 
delete a general provision, the Department is directed to 
explain the change as well.
    Bill Language.--The bill continues language that permits up 
to $2,500,000 of fees to be credited to the Office of the 
Secretary for salaries and expenses.

                          LIVABLE COMMUNITIES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        $5,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -5,000,000


    The goal of the livable communities program is to promote 
livable communities through investment in transportation 
infrastructure to decrease transportation costs; improve access 
to jobs and services; promote healthy communities; improve air 
quality; protect the natural environment; and enhance the 
unique characteristics of communities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation does not include funding for 
the Livable Communities Office in fiscal year 2013, just as no 
funds have been provided in any prior fiscal year. The budget 
proposed $5,000,000 for this purpose. Zoning and planning 
activities are best and currently conducted at the local level. 
Various existing grant programs within the Department allow for 
planning activities and localities are free to utilize already 
available funds as they see fit.

                   NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $500,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       500,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -500,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -500,000,000


    The National Infrastructure Investment program was created 
in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to provide 
grants to state and local governments to improve the Nation's 
transportation infrastructure. The infrastructure investment 
program awards funds on a competitive basis to grantees 
selected because of the significant impact they will have on 
the Nation, a metropolitan area, or region.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend additional funds for the 
national infrastructure investment program (also known as 
``TIGER grants'') as proposed by the budget request. The 
Congress appropriated $500,000,000 for this purpose in fiscal 
year 2012. While the Committee agrees that the Nation is in 
desperate need for infrastructure investment and improvements, 
the Administration has yet to demonstrate or define the 
process, priority or criteria for how these grants are awarded.

                      FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CAPITAL




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $4,990,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        10,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        10,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +5,010,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Financial Management Capital program continues funding 
for a multi-year project to upgrade DOT's financial systems and 
processes. The project will implement Treasury Department and 
Office of Management and Budget requirements. Deployment of the 
new system is anticipated in 2014.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    This Committee recommends the budget request of $10,000,000 
for financial management capital program, which is $5,010,000 
above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                       CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE




Appropriations, fiscal year 2012......................       $10,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         6,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         6,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -4,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Cyber Security Initiative is a new effort to close 
performance gaps in the Department's cybersecurity. The 
initiative includes support for essential program enhancements, 
infrastructure improvements and contractual resources to 
enhance the security of the Department's computer network and 
reduce the risk of security breaches.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $6,000,000 to support 
the Secretary's Cyber Security Initiative, which is equal to 
the budget request and $4,000,000 less than the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level.

                         OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $9,384,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         9,773,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         9,773,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +389,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the 
Secretary on civil rights and equal opportunity issues, and 
ensuring the full implementation of the civil rights laws and 
departmental civil rights policies in all official actions and 
programs. This office is responsible for enforcing laws and 
regulations that prohibit discrimination in federally operated 
and federally assisted transportation programs and enabling 
access to transportation providers. The Office of Civil Rights 
also handles all civil rights cases affecting Department of 
Transportation employees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $9,773,000 
for the office of civil rights, which is $389,000 over the 
fiscal year 2012 appropriation.

           TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $9,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        10,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         8,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -1,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -2,000,000


    This appropriation finances research activities and studies 
related to the planning, analysis, and information development 
used in the formulation of national transportation policies and 
plans. It also finances the staff necessary to conduct these 
efforts. The overall program is carried out primarily through 
contracts with other federal agencies, educational 
institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private 
firms.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,000,000 for 
transportation planning, research and development, which is 
$1,000,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and 
$2,000,000 below the level proposed in the fiscal year 2013 
budget.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND




Limitation, fiscal year 2012..........................      $172,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       174,128,000
Bill compared with:
    Limitation, fiscal year 2012......................        +2,128,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      +174,128,000


    The working capital fund was created to provide common 
administrative services to the operating administrations and 
outside entities that contract for the fund's services. The 
working capital fund operates on a fee-for-service basis and 
receives no direct appropriations; it is fully self-sustaining 
and must achieve full cost recovery.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $174,128,000 on 
the Working Capital Fund (WCF), the same level as proposed in 
the budget if all of the WCF expenditures were added up. WCF 
costs are anticipated to increase $2,128,000 over fiscal year 
2012. The Administration did not propose a WCF legislative 
limitation. The Committee continues to stipulate that the 
limitation is only for services provided to the Department of 
Transportation, not other entities. Further, the Committee 
directs that, as much as possible, services shall be provided 
on a competitive basis.
    The Committee continues the direction to update the WCF 
``transparency paper'' in the fiscal year 2014 budget 
justification. The Committee finds the information contained in 
the annual paper to be extremely useful when evaluating the 
needs and proposals of the various offices.

               MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Limitation on
                                         Appropriation      guaranteed
                                                              loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......         $922,000    ($18,367,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......        1,285,000     (21,955,000)
Recommended in the bill...............        1,285,000     (21,955,000)
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...         +363,000      (+3,588,00)
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..            - - -            - - -
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through the Short Term Lending Program, the minority 
business resource center assists disadvantaged, minority, and 
women-owned businesses with obtaining short-term working 
capital for DOT and DOT-funded transportation-related 
contracts. The program enables qualified businesses to obtain 
loans at two percentage points above the prime interest rate 
with DOT guaranteeing up to 75 percent of the loan.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $418,000 to 
cover the subsidy costs of guaranteed loans and $867,000 for 
administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan 
program for a total appropriation of $1,285,000, which is 
$363,000 more than the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The 
Committee recommends a limitation on guaranteed loans of 
$21,955,000, the same as the budget request, and $3,588,000 
over fiscal year 2012.

                       MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $3,068,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         3,234,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         3,234,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +166,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The minority business outreach program provides contractual 
support to small and disadvantaged businesses by providing 
information dissemination and technical and financial 
assistance to empower those businesses to compete for 
contracting opportunities with DOT and DOT-funded contracts or 
grants for transportation-related projects.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $3,234,000 
for the minority business outreach program, which is $166,000 
greater than fiscal year 2012. The Committee directs the 
Department to expand its outreach efforts in rural areas.

                        PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $143,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       114,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       114,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -29,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Essential Air Service program (EAS) was created by the 
Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a ten-year measure to 
continue air service to communities that had received air 
service prior to deregulation. The program currently provides 
subsidies to air carriers serving small communities that meet 
certain criteria.
    The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 
1996 authorized the collection of ``overflight fees''. 
Overflight fees are a type of user fee collected by the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) from aircraft that neither take 
off from, nor land in, the United States. The FAA Modernization 
and Reform Act of 2012 increased the authorized level of 
overflight fee collection, and increased the amount that the 
Department can apply to the EAS program. The budget request 
estimates that this would increase the mandatory funding for 
this program from $50 million in FY 2012 to at least $100 
million in FY 2013.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends a total EAS 
program funding level of $214,000,000. This consists of a 
general fund appropriation of $114,000,000, and $100,000,000 to 
be derived from overflight fee collections. The Committee's 
recommendation for the EAS program is $71,000,000 above the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level and equal to the fiscal year 
2013 request.
    The following table shows the discretionary, mandatory, and 
total program levels for the EAS program:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Appropriation     Mandatory     Total Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2012 appropriation...........................................    $143,000,000     $50,000,000    $193,000,000
FY 2013 request.................................................     114,000,000     100,000,000     214,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................     114,000,000     100,000,000     214,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee believes the funding level provided is 
sufficient to serve all eligible EAS communities. However, the 
Committee recommendation includes language allowing a transfer 
of funds into this program from funds provided to the Office of 
the Secretary.
    The Committee includes the Department's proposal to limit 
the EAS program to only those communities being served between 
September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2011. The Committee 
remains concerned about the growing costs associated with the 
EAS program. While limiting the program to current sites and 
eliminating the requirement that EAS carriers utilize 15-
passenger aircraft have helped mitigate some of the cost 
growth, the Committee believes that the Department should 
continue to explore reforms to the program that will create 
greater competition among carriers and control overall costs. 
The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a letter report 
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 
15, 2013 that describes measures that could increase 
competition for EAS providers and help contain additional cost 
growth. For example, the Department should explore whether the 
EAS requirement that carriers utilize twin engine aircraft 
should be modified to allow single engine aircraft as long as 
safety is not compromised. The Committee understands that some 
communities have requested a waiver from the twin engine 
requirement and is interested to learn whether these waivers 
have helped preserve service and keep overall costs under 
control.

  Administrative Provisions--Office of the Secretary of Transportation

    Section 101. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from 
approving assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to 
funds appropriated to the operating administrations in this 
Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the 
normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification.
    Section 102. The Committee continues the provision allowing 
the Secretary or his designee to work with States and State 
legislators to consider proposals related to the reduction of 
motorcycle fatalities.
    Section 103. The Committee continues the provision allowing 
the Department to use the Working Capital Fund to provide 
transit benefits to Federal employees.
    Section 104. The Committee continues the provision 
regarding administrative requirements of DOT's Credit Council.

                    FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible 
for the safety and development of civil aviation and for the 
evolution of a national system of airports. The Federal 
Government's regulatory role in civil aviation began with the 
creation of an Aeronautics Branch within the Department of 
Commerce pursuant to the Air Commerce Act of 1926. This Act 
instructed the Secretary of Commerce to foster air commerce; 
designate and establish airways; establish, operate, and 
maintain aids to navigation; arrange for research and 
development to improve such aids; issue airworthiness 
certificates for aircraft and major aircraft components; and 
investigate civil aviation accidents. In the Civil Aeronautics 
Act of 1938, these activities were subsumed into a new, 
independent agency named the Civil Aeronautics Authority.
    After further administrative reorganizations, Congress 
streamlined regulatory oversight in 1957 with the creation of 
two separate agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency and the 
Civil Aeronautics Board. When the Department of Transportation 
began its operations on April 1, 1967, the Federal Aviation 
Agency was renamed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
and became one of several modal administrations within the 
department. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out 
with enactment of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and 
ceased to exist at the end of 1984. FAA's mission expanded in 
1995 with the transfer of the Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation from the Office of the Secretary and contracted 
in December 2001 with the transfer of civil aviation security 
activities to the new Transportation Security Administration.
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorized FAA 
programs through 2015 with several new mandates to improve the 
National Airspace System (NAS), including provisions regarding 
the NextGen program for Air Traffic Control and provisions 
regarding the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in civilian 
airspace.

                               OPERATIONS

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $9,653,395,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     9,718,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     9,718,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        64,605,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    This appropriation provides funds for the operation, 
maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air 
traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers 
administrative and managerial costs for the FAA's regulatory, 
international, medical, engineering and development programs as 
well as policy oversight and overall management functions.
    The operations appropriation includes the following major 
activities: (1) operation on a 24-hour daily basis of a 
national air traffic system; (2) establishment and maintenance 
of a national system of aids to navigation; (3) establishment 
and surveillance of civil air regulations to ensure safety in 
aviation; (4) development of standards, rules and regulations 
governing the physical fitness of airmen as well as the 
administration of an aviation medical research program; (5) 
administration of the acquisition, and research and development 
programs; (6) headquarters, administration and other staff 
offices; and (7) development, printing, and distribution of 
aeronautical charts used by the flying public.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $9,718,000,000 for FAA operations, 
which is the same as the budget request and $64,605,000 above 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    A comparison of the fiscal year 2012 enacted level, the 
budget request, and the Committee recommendation by budget 
activity is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    FY 2013
                                                          FY 2012  enacted   FY 2013  request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic organization...............................     $7,442,738,000     $7,513,850,000     $7,513,850,000
Aviation safety........................................      1,252,991,000      1,255,000,000      1,255,000,000
Commercial space transportation........................         16,271,000         16,700,000         16,700,000
Finance and management.................................        582,117,000        573,591,000        573,591,000
NextGen and operations planning........................         60,134,000         60,064,000         60,064,000
Staff offices..........................................        299,144,000        298,795,000        298,795,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................      9,653,395,000      9,718,000,000      9,718,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Justification of general provisions.--The Committee 
continues its direction to provide a justification for each 
general provision proposed in the FAA budget and therefore 
expects the fiscal year 2014 budget to include adequate 
information on each proposed general provision.

                     TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET

    The bill derives $4,682,500,000 of the total operations 
appropriation from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The 
balance of the appropriation, $5,035,500,000, will be drawn 
from the general fund of the Treasury.

                        AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

    The bill provides $7,513,850,000 for air traffic services, 
which is the same as the budget request and $71,112,000 above 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    Organizational Structure.--In September 2011, the Committee 
approved FAA's reprogramming request to implement 
organizational changes as part of the ``Foundation for 
Success'' initiative. The reorganization was intended to better 
execute the Next Generation of Air Traffic Control program 
(NextGen) and allow the Agency to operate in a more effective 
and efficient manner.
    Since the inception of the Air Traffic Organization in 
2003, there have been several reorganizations intended to 
streamline operations, improve performance, and produce cost 
savings and efficiencies. Past efforts have met with limited 
success in controlling operating costs and executing major 
acquisitions. The Committee recognizes that it will take time 
for the most recent reorganization to mature and have the 
desired impacts. This reorganization will be hollow unless FAA 
builds the necessary expertise and strengthens program and 
contract management to manage NextGen. The Committee needs 
assurances that the Foundation for Success initiative will 
achieve the desired outcomes in managing major acquisitions and 
cost savings. The Committee requests that 180 days after 
enactment of this bill, the FAA provide the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations with a report on progress to-date 
and to what extent goals for the reorganization are being met.
    This is a longstanding issue that directly affects FAA's 
ability to provide effective and proactive oversight of the 
aviation industry. Section 606 of the FAA Modernization and 
Reform Act of 2012 requires FAA to implement, in as cost-
effective manner possible, an improved aviation safety 
inspector model by October 1, 2012. The Committee fully expects 
FAA to comply with these requirements, and requests that 
results of the staffing model also be provided to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations at the same time it is 
provided to the appropriate authorizing Committees.
    Air Traffic Controller Training.--A key issue moving 
forward will be ensuring that FAA has a sufficient, well-
trained controller workforce. Currently, FAA has about 15,200 
controllers onboard--25% of whom are controllers in training. 
FAA is planning to hire as many as 980 new controllers in FY 
2012 and another 1,200 in FY 2013 but may revisit the matter 
given the decline in traffic from peak levels in 2000. A recent 
report by the DOT Office of Inspector General on staffing and 
training issues at FAA's most critical facilities found an 
alarmingly high attrition rate for new controllers. One reason 
for this high attrition is inadequate training resources 
available to these facilities. FAA's Air Traffic Control 
Optimum Training Solution Program is a key vehicle for 
delivering controller training. This program, however, has not 
met expectations for training new and existing controllers or 
for transforming the paradigm for training. It appears that 
problems are directly traceable to poor FAA planning and the 
Agency's inability to establish firm requirements. Moreover, 
FAA has made downward adjustments in contract funding over the 
last 2 years and instructed its contractor in April to reduce 
support for various training efforts. It is becoming 
increasingly clear that FAA needs to rethink its overall 
approach to controller training.
    These problems come at a time when the number of fully 
certified controllers who are eligible to retire is increasing, 
and the Committee is concerned that FAA does not have an 
effective or executable plan for training the next generation 
of air traffic controllers. The Committee will continue to 
closely watch this issue, and requests that FAA forward to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations the studies 
called for in Section 609 of the FAA Modernization and Reform 
Act of 2012 regarding the adequacy of FAA's air traffic 
controller training programs.
    Contract tower program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $140,350,000 for the contract tower program, including 
$10,350,000 to continue the contract tower cost-sharing 
program. The Committee includes language that limits 
contributions in the contract tower cost share program to 20 
percent of total costs.
    The Committee is concerned that the current effort by FAA 
to update cost-benefit information may not fully take into 
account the broad array of benefits the program provides to 
individual communities, including enhanced safety, cost 
savings, and economic development. The Committee notes that 
FAA's updated cost-benefit calculations could reduce federal 
funding obligations and shift significant costs to local 
communities that have little if any ability to absorb 
additional costs. The Committee directs, prior to releasing or 
acting upon updated cost-benefit data, the FAA to seek input 
from affected local airports. The FAA should also provide a 
report to the Committees on Appropriations on the rationale for 
the cost-benefit changes, and the economic impact to affected 
airports prior to acting on any updated calculations.
    Aeronautical Navigation Products.--The Committee is 
concerned that Aeronautical Navigation Products (AeroNav) 
removed publicly available aeronautical data from its website 
without notice and is implementing a per-subscriber user fee 
for this information. Further, AeroNav's product availability 
has been sharply reduced from seventeen days to twenty-four 
hours in advance of the effective date of the chart. This 
change appears to be in conflict with the FAA mission of 
providing timely and accurate information for pilots in the 
interest of safe and efficient navigation. The Committee 
directs the FAA to develop a fair and equitable fee structure 
for its AeroNav products that takes into consideration input 
from industry stakeholders and restores the 17-day availability 
of digital content. The Committee directs the FAA to report on 
it plans to adhere to this directive no later than March 1, 
2013.

                            AVIATION SAFETY

    The Committee provides $1,255,000,000 for aviation safety, 
which is $2,009,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level, 
and equal to the budget request.
    The Committee continues its direction requiring the 
Secretary to provide annual reports regarding the use of the 
funds provided, including, but not limited to, the total full-
time equivalent staff years in the offices of aircraft 
certification and flight standards, total employees, vacancies, 
and positions under active recruitment.
    Aircraft Certification Service.--The Committee provides no 
less than the full budget request of $209,969,000 for the FAA's 
Aircraft Certification Service. The Committee remains concerned 
that delays in FAA certification of new aircraft and related 
technologies could negatively affect aviation safety, as well 
as the economic health and competitiveness of U.S. 
manufacturers. Accordingly, the Committee reiterates its 
interest in FAA's progress on certification reforms, as these 
critical activities are of utmost importance to aviation 
safety.
    Inspector Staffing.--The Committee continues to place a 
high priority on FAA's critical safety workforces and funds its 
inspector workforce at the requested level. FAA is making 
progress in advancing risk-based oversight systems for its 
4,300 safety inspectors. FAA's inspector workload is driven by 
a number of factors, including complexity of air carrier 
operations and industry use of foreign and domestic aircraft 
repair stations. However, we are concerned about FAA's lack of 
progress in using a reliable inspector staffing model. After 
several years of development, it is troubling that FAA is still 
not using a useful model to determine the appropriate number of 
safety inspectors needed or where they should be located to 
address the most pressing safety risks.
    Human Intervention Motivation Study and the Flight 
Attendant Drug and Alcohol Program.--The Committee recognizes 
the effectiveness of the Human Intervention Motivation Study 
(HIMS) and the Flight Attendant Drug and Alcohol Program 
(FADAP) in mitigating drug and alcohol abuse through a peer 
identification and intervention program. The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,103,000 to continue these programs 
through fiscal year 2015.
    The Committee is concerned with the length of time the FAA 
is taking to process manufacturers' petitions to be included on 
the list of approved Portable Oxygen Concentrators (POCs) under 
the Special Federal Aviation Regulation 106 (SFAR 106). SFAR 
106 permits passengers to carry on and use certain POCs on 
board aircraft if the devices are determined to be acceptable 
by established safety standards and aircraft operators ensure 
certain safety conditions are met. Delays in the current 
process threaten to dissuade the investment of manufacturing 
companies in the United States in the development of innovative 
new technologies. The Committee urges the FAA to follow through 
on its 2005 commitment to promulgate a performance-based 
standard for all POCs so specific manufacturers do not have to 
pursue formal rulemaking for each device model. In the interim, 
the Committee urges the FAA to establish a procedure by which 
SFAR 106 petitions are reviewed and processed not later than 6 
months after the initial submission.

                    COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

    The Committee recommends $16,700,000 for the office of 
commercial space transportation, which is equal to the budget 
request and $429,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    The Office of Commercial Space Transportation protects 
public safety through regulatory oversight of the rapidly 
growing U.S. commercial space transportation industry. The FAA 
also has a statutory mandate to encourage, facilitate, and 
promote commercial space transportation. The commercial space 
transportation industry is nearly certain to increase its 
activities providing orbital and suborbital services to serve 
commercial, scientific, and government purposes. Of particular 
importance are orbital flights to support the operation of the 
International Space Station. This increase in commercial space 
activity will require the FAA to provide a significantly 
greater number of permits and licenses. The Committee wishes to 
ensure that the FAA has the ability to provide these permits 
and licenses effectively and efficiently so that the U.S. can 
emerge as the world leader in space transport. The Committee 
will encourage a reprogramming of funds to the Office of 
Commercial Space Transportation above the levels provided, if 
necessary to keep pace with this growing industry.

                         FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $573,591,000 for finance and 
management activities, which is equal to the budget request and 
$8,526,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    Workforce Diversity Report.--In 2011, the Administration 
issued Executive Order 13583 requiring all Federal agencies to 
develop a plan for recruiting, hiring, promoting, and retaining 
a diverse workforce. The Committee reiterates its direction 
that the FAA report data and information on the agency's 
recruitment outreach and hiring efforts in minority 
communities. The Committee expects the report to include a 
year-to-year comparison of hiring statistics for 
underrepresented populations as well as a description of the 
strategies the agency utilizes to recruit a more diverse 
workforce. The FAA is directed to provide its letter report to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 1, 
2013.

                    NEXTGEN AND OPERATIONS PLANNING

    The Committee recommends $60,064,000 for NextGen and 
Operations Planning, which is equal to the budget request and 
$70,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Second Career Training Program.--The bill retains language 
prohibiting the use of funds for the second career training 
program. This prohibition has been in annual appropriations 
Acts for many years and is included in the President's budget 
request.
    Aviation User Fees.--The bill includes a limitation carried 
for several years prohibiting funds from being used to finalize 
or implement any new unauthorized user fees.
    Aeronautical Charting and Cartography.--The bill maintains 
the provision prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to 
conduct aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities 
through the working capital fund (WCF).
    Credits.--This bill includes language allowing funds 
received from specified public, private, and foreign sources 
for expenses incurred to be credited to the appropriation.

                        FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $2,730,731,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     2,850,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     2,749,596,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +18,865,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -100,404,000


    The Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account is the principal 
means for modernizing and improving air traffic control and 
airway facilities. The appropriation also finances major 
capital investments required by other agency programs, 
experimental research and development facilities, and other 
improvements to enhance the safety and capacity of the airspace 
system.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$2,749,596,000, for the FAA's facilities and equipment program, 
an increase of $18,865,000 above the level provided in fiscal 
year 2012 and $100,404,000 below the budget request. The bill 
provides that, of the total amount recommended, $2,269,596,000 
is available for obligation until September 30, 2015, and 
$480,000,000 (the amount for personnel and related expenses) is 
available until September 30, 2013. These obligation 
availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts.

                                            FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Fiscal year
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                   2012 enacted    2013 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 1--Engineering, Development, Test and Evaluation:
    Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.............     $29,000,000     $33,100,000     $33,100,000
    NAS Improvement of System Support Laboratory................       1,000,000       1,000,000       1,000,000
    William J. Hughes Technical Center Facilities...............      14,000,000      11,500,000      11,500,000
    William J. Hughes Technical Center Infrastructure                  7,500,000       8,000,000       8,000,000
     Sustainment................................................
    Data Communications for Trajectory Based Operations (NGATS).     143,000,000     142,630,000     142,630,000
    Next Generation Transportation System Technology                  15,000,000      24,600,000      24,600,000
     Demonstration..............................................
    Next Generation Transportation System--Systems Development..      85,000,000      61,000,000      55,000,000
    Next Generation Transportation System--Trajectory Based            7,000,000      16,500,000      16,500,000
     Operations.................................................
    Next Generation Transportation System--Reduce Weather Impact      15,600,000      16,600,000      16,600,000
    Next Generation Transportation System--High Density/Arrivals/     12,000,000      11,000,000      11,000,000
     Departures.................................................
    Next Generation Transportation System--Collaborative ATM....      24,000,000      24,200,000      24,200,000
    Next Generation Transportation System--Flexible Terminals         33,300,000      30,500,000      30,500,000
     and Airports...............................................
    Next Generation Transportation System--System Network              5,000,000      11,000,000      11,000,000
     Facilities.................................................
    Next Generation Transportation System--Future Facilities....      15,000,000      95,000,000      36,415,000
    Performance Based Navigation/RNAV/RNP.......................      29,200,000      36,200,000      41,200,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
            Total Activity 1....................................     435,600,000     522,830,000     463,245,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 2--Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment:
a. En Route Programs:
    En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM)....................     155,000,000     144,000,000     144,000,000
    En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM)--Post Release 3....  ..............      10,000,000      10,000,000
    En Route Communications Gateway (ECG).......................       2,000,000       3,100,000       3,100,000
    Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)--Provide.............       2,800,000       3,300,000       3,300,000
    Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC)--               3,600,000  ..............  ..............
     Relocation.................................................
    ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements..............      41,000,000      46,000,000      40,000,000
    Air Traffic Management (ATM)................................       7,500,000      21,700,000      21,700,000
    Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure....................       4,800,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Air Traffic Control En Route Radar Facilities Improvements..       5,800,000       5,900,000       5,900,000
    Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS)...................       1,000,000      15,000,000      15,000,000
    Oceanic Automation System...................................       4,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Next Generation Very High Frequency Air/Ground                    45,150,000      33,650,000      33,650,000
     Communications System (NEXCOM).............................
    System-Wide Information Management..........................      66,350,000      57,200,000      57,200,000
    ADS--B NAS Wide Implementation..............................     285,100,000     271,600,000     271,600,000
    Windshear Detection Service.................................       1,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Weather and Radar Processor (WARP)..........................       2,500,000         500,000         500,000
    Collaborative Air Traffic Management Technologies--WP2......      41,500,000      34,420,000      34,420,000
    Colorado ADS-B/WAM Cost Share...............................       3,800,000       1,400,000       1,400,000
    Automated Terminal Information System (ATIS)................       1,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Tactical Flow Time Based Flow Management....................      38,700,000      12,900,000      12,900,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal En Route Programs..............................     712,600,000     668,670,000     662,670,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Terminal Programs:
    Airport Surface Detection Equipment--Model X (ASDE-X).......       2,200,000       7,400,000       7,400,000
    Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR)--Provide..............       7,700,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
    Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS)           25,000,000      34,500,000      34,500,000
     (TAMR Phase 1).............................................
    Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement Program (TAMR      108,750,000     153,000,000     153,000,000
     Phase 3)...................................................
    Terminal Automation Program.................................       2,500,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
    Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities--Replace............      51,600,000      64,900,000      64,900,000
    ATCT/Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) Facilities--        52,000,000      25,200,000      25,200,000
     Improve....................................................
    Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR)....................       8,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards Compliance..      24,600,000      26,000,000      26,000,000
    Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-9)..........................       6,000,000       6,400,000       6,400,000
    Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11).............................       3,900,000       8,200,000       8,200,000
    Runway Status Lights........................................      29,800,000      35,250,000      35,250,000
    National Airspace System Voice Switch (NVS).................       9,000,000      10,250,000      10,250,000
    Integrated Display System (IDS).............................       8,800,000       4,200,000       4,200,000
    Remote Monitoring and Logging System (RMLS).................       4,200,000       4,700,000       4,700,000
    Mode S Service Life Extension Program (SLEP)................       4,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    ASR-8 Service Life Extension Program........................  ..............  ..............  ..............
    Surveillance Interface Modernization........................  ..............       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Tower Flight Data Manager (TFDM)............................  ..............      37,600,000      35,600,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Terminal Programs..............................     348,050,000     432,600,000     430,600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Flight Service Programs:
    Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)...................       2,500,000  ..............  ..............
    Future Flight Service Program...............................  ..............       8,000,000       8,000,000
    Flight Service Station (FSS) Modernization..................       4,500,000       2,900,000       2,900,000
    Weather Camera Program......................................       4,800,000       4,400,000       3,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Flight Service Programs........................      11,800,000      15,300,000      13,900,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Landing and Navigational Aids Program:
    VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) with Distance                5,000,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
     Measuring Equipment (DME)..................................
    Instrument Landing System (ILS)--Establish..................       5,000,000       7,000,000       7,000,000
    Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) for GPS................      95,000,000      96,000,000      92,000,000
    Runway Visual Range (RVR)...................................       5,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Approach Lighting System Improvement Program (ALSIP)........       5,000,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    Distance Measuring Equipment (DME)..........................       5,000,000       5,000,000       5,000,000
    Visual NAVAIDS--Establish/Expand............................       3,400,000       3,500,000       3,500,000
    Instrument Flight Procedures Automation (IFPA)..............       2,200,000       7,100,000       7,100,000
    Navigation and Landing Aids--Service Life Extension Program        7,000,000       8,000,000       8,000,000
     (SLEP).....................................................
    VASI Replacement--Replace with Precision Approach Path             8,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
     Indicator..................................................
    GPS Civil Requirements......................................      19,000,000      40,000,000      15,000,000
    Runway Safety Areas--Navigational Mitigation................      25,000,000      30,000,000      30,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Landing and Navigational Aids Programs.........     184,600,000     210,100,000     181,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Other ATC Facilities Programs:
    Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Monitoring................        ,400,000       6,600,000       6,600,000
    Unstaffed Infrastructure Sustainment........................      18,000,000      18,000,000      18,000,000
    Aircraft Related Equipment Program..........................      11,700,000      10,100,000      10,100,000
    Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support...............       5,000,000       5,000,000       5,000,000
    Alaskan Satellite Telecommunications Infrastructure (ASTI)..      15,500,000       6,800,000       6,800,000
    Facilities Decommissioning..................................       5,000,000       5,000,000       5,000,000
    Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support...................      77,581,000      85,000,000      77,581,000
    Aircraft Fleet Modernization................................       9,000,000       2,100,000       2,100,000
    FAA Employee Housing and Life Safety Shelter System Service.       2,500,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Other ATC Facilities Programs..................     149,681,000     141,100,000     133,681,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total Activity 2....................................   1,406,731,000   1,467,770,000   1,421,951,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Activity 3--Non-Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment:
a. Support Equipment:
    Hazardous Materials Management..............................      20,000,000      20,000,000      20,000,000
    Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS)......................      30,100,000      15,800,000      15,800,000
    Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF).............      10,000,000      10,000,000      10,000,000
    National Air Space (NAS) Recovery Communications (RCOM).....      12,000,000      12,000,000      12,000,000
    Facility Security Risk Management...........................      16,000,000      14,200,000      14,200,000
    Information Security........................................      15,200,000      14,000,000      14,000,000
    System Approach for Safety Oversight (SASO).................      23,600,000      23,000,000      23,000,000
    Aviation Safety Knowledge Management Environment (ASKME)....      17,200,000      12,800,000      12,800,000
    Data Center Optimization....................................       1,000,000       1,000,000       1,000,000
    Aerospace Medical Equipment Needs (AMEN)....................      10,000,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS)....  ..............      15,000,000      15,000,000
    National Test Equipment Program.............................  ..............       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Mobile Assets Management Program............................  ..............       1,700,000       1,700,000
    Aerospace Medicine Safety Information Systems (AMSIS).......  ..............       3,000,000       3,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Support Equipment..............................     155,100,000     147,500,000     147,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Training, Equipment and Facilities:
    Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization............      16,500,000      12,500,000      12,500,000
    Distance Learning...........................................       1,500,000       1,500,000       1,500,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Subtotal Training, Equipment and Facilities.............      18,000,000      14,000,000      14,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total Activity 3....................................     173,100,000     161,500,000     161,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 4--Facilities and Equipment Mission Support:
a. System Support and Services:
    System Engineering and Development Support..................      32,900,000      35,000,000      35,000,000
    Program Support Leases......................................      40,000,000      40,900,000      40,900,000
    Logistics Support Services (LSS)............................      11,700,000      11,500,000      11,500,000
    Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center Leases....................      17,000,000      17,500,000      17,500,000
    Transition Engineering Support..............................      13,000,000      14,000,000      14,000,000
    Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC)..................      22,000,000      23,000,000      23,000,000
    Resource Tracking Program (RTP).............................       4,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD).....      78,000,000      70,000,000      75,000,000
    Aeronautical Information Management Program.................      20,200,000       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Moves.....................       1,500,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total Activity 4........................................     240,300,000     217,900,000     222,900,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Activity 5--Personnel and Related Expenses:
    Personnel and Related Expenses..............................     475,000,000     480,000,000     480,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total All Activities....................................   2,730,731,000   2,850,000,000   2,749,596,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

    Next Generation Air Transportation System Transformational 
Programs.--The Committee recognizes FAA's NextGen 
transformational programs are critical to its overall plans to 
change the way air traffic is managed.
    The DOT Office of Inspector General recently reported on 
the status of the transformational programs and highlighted 
that FAA's approach to approving small segments of complex 
NextGen programs has some drawbacks. There is no question that 
segmenting programs can reduce risk to the Government, but such 
segmentation does not provide a crosswalk for how key programs 
align with FAA's plans for delivering benefits. The IG report 
shows the extraordinarily complex interdependencies between 
programs and the essential roles FAA automation programs, like 
ERAM, play in executing NextGen. The Committee urges FAA to 
follow through on its commitment to address the IG report's 
recommendations. The Committee is particularly interested in 
ensuring that FAA follows through on the IG's recommendation to 
establish--and use--an integrated master schedule for managing 
NextGen investments.
    NextGen--Systems Development.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $55,000,000 for NextGen--systems development, which is 
$6,000,000 below the budget request and $30,000,000 below the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    NextGen Future Facilities.--The Committee recommends 
$36,415,000 for the NextGen Future Facilities initiative, which 
is $58,585,000 below the budget request and $21,415,000 above 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. These funds will be used to 
fund pre-construction activities related to the Liberty 
Integrated Control Facility. This Committee is aware that this 
is the first step in FAA's long-term plan to realign and 
consolidate its air traffic facility network into large, 
integrated facilities that could fundamentally change the way 
FAA operates and manages the National Airspace System. However, 
this plan is only in its initial stages. The FAA has provided 
limited details regarding how this new facility will improve 
productivity, reduce agency costs, and improve the flow of air 
traffic. The Committee looks forward to receiving a more 
detailed and well justified plan for this new facility in the 
coming months. The Committee also looks forward to receiving 
information on the long-term cost savings associated with the 
potential elimination of outdated, inefficient, and obsolete 
facilities.
    Performance-Based Navigation.--The Committee provides 
$41,200,000 for Performance Based Navigation/RNAV/RNP. This is 
a $5,000,000 increase above the budget request and $12,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The Committee has 
strongly supported the accelerated development of Performance 
Based Navigation (PBN) procedures and processes, and continues 
to have a strong interest in using PBN to provide substantial, 
near-term NextGen benefits to users of the NAS. The Committee 
is encouraged by the enactment of Section 213 of the FAA 
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112-95), which 
requires FAA to develop performance-based metrics and 
environmental streamlining procedures to further accelerate RNP 
and RNAV flight paths at a minimum of 70 commercial airports 
throughout the NAS, including through the use of third parties 
to support the development of procedures.
    The Committee directs the FAA to fully utilize the tools 
provided in Section 213, including the use of third parties and 
categorical exclusions, so that efficient RNP and RNAV 
procedures can be produced in sufficient quantities in order to 
meet the demand that exists within the NAS for these types of 
procedures. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 to continue the 
Third Party Procedure development program to utilize qualified 
third parties to design, deploy, and maintain public use RNP 
procedures at airports across the country where aircraft flying 
RNP procedures would achieve measureable benefit.
    The Committee also directs the FAA to provide a detailed 
status update on its progress in meeting Congressional mandates 
under Section 213, including the estimated fuel and carbon 
dioxide emissions savings from any new RNP or RNAV procedure 
designed or implemented in 2012, to the Committees on 
Appropriations, by March 1, 2013. This report should also 
address the use of third parties and identify the flight 
procedures developed, or in the process of being developed, by 
them.

              AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

                           EN ROUTE PROGRAMS

    En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM).--The Committee 
provides $154,000,000 for the en route modernization program 
(ERAM). This level is equal to the budget request and 
$1,000,000 below the level provided in fiscal year 2012. ERAM 
is the FAA's program to replace the FAA's en route host 
computer system, its backup system, and other related display 
system and radar position processor infrastructure.
    ERAM is a foundational component of NextGen, and it is 
critical to meeting FAA's goals for increasing airspace 
capacity and reducing flight delays. FAA originally planned to 
deploy ERAM at 20 of its en-route facilities by the end of 
2010. However, due to software problems at the first two key 
sites, Salt Lake City and Seattle, FAA has been forced to delay 
original deployment estimates by nearly four years. The program 
has also seen cost overruns of $330 million in prior years.
    FAA has taken a number of steps to improve the 
predictability of the schedule and costs of ERAM, and the ERAM 
system is now in use on a limited basis at nine locations. 
Nevertheless, the cost and timeframes for completing ERAM 
remain unclear. There are important lessons learned from ERAM 
that FAA needs to address to better manage its NextGen 
portfolio and reduce risks when deploying software intensive 
systems. These include better expectation setting for the 
controller workforce, addressing shortcomings in testing at the 
FAA Technical Center, bolstering Government Acceptance, and 
effectively using contract incentives for both development and 
implementation. The Committee will continue to monitor the 
program closely and looks forward to the final report from the 
DOT Inspector General on ERAM, which was requested by this 
Committee in fiscal year 2011.
    ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $40,000,000 for ARTCC 
Building Improvements, which is $1,000,000 below the fiscal 
year 2012 enacted level and $6,000,000 below the budget 
request.

                           TERMINAL PROGRAMS

    Terminal Automation Modernization/Eeplacement Program (TAMR 
Phase 3).--The Committee recommendation includes $153,000,000 
for the terminal automation modernization and replacement 
program which is equal to the budget request and $44,250,000 
above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. Phase 3 of the TAMR 
program is intended to modernize or replace terminal automation 
systems at TRACON facilities around the country. Last December, 
FAA's Joint Resource Council (JRC) made a final investment 
decision to implement the STARS system at eleven ARTS IIIE 
facilities by 2017. Additionally, FAA is expected to make an 
investment decision later this year to upgrade or replace as 
many as 94 ARTS IIE systems. Replacing the automation systems 
at these terminal facilities is a major undertaking. FAA must 
determine how these facilities fit into the agency's future 
facilities plan and effectively manage the cost and scheduling 
risks inherent in a program of this magnitude. The Committee 
directs the FAA to provide a plan by March 1, 2013 to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations which will include (1) 
costs and timelines for installing new systems; (2) how new 
automated controller tools will be introduced; and (3) how long 
the older systems will need to be sustained.
    Runway Status Lights.--The Committee provides $35,250,000 
for the Runway Status Lights program, the same as the budget 
request and $5,450,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted 
level. This funding will continue to support the design, 
production, and installation of runway status lights (RWSL) at 
busy airports. Runway status lights are a fully automated 
system that gives pilots and vehicle operators a direct visual 
alert when it is unsafe to enter or cross a runway. The RWSL 
program responds to a safety recommendation from the National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to ``implement a safety 
system that provides direct warning capability to flight 
crews.'' The Committee strongly supports RWSLs as an additional 
layer of safety to reduce runway incursions and encourages the 
FAA to review the suitability of deploying this critical safety 
enhancing technology at airports being equipped with the 
Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (ASSC) system. The 
Committee directs the FAA to provide a letter report to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by April 15, 2013 
on the merits and costs associated with installing RWSLs at 
ASSC-equipped airports.
    Tower Flight Data Manager.--The Committee provides 
$35,600,000 for the Tower Flight Data Manager (TFDM) program. 
This level is $2,000,000 below the budget request and 
$35,600,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                        FLIGHT SERVICE PROGRAMS

    Weather Camera Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $3,000,000 for the Alaska Weather Camera program, 
which is $1,400,000 below the budget request and $1,800,000 
below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                     LANDING AND NAVIGATIONAL AIDS

    Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS).--The Committee 
recommendation includes $92,000,000 for the wide area 
augmentation system program, which is $4,000,000 below the 
budget request and $3,000,000 below the fiscal year 2012 
enacted level.
    GPS Civil Requirements.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $15,000,000 for GPS Civil Requirements, which is 
$25,000,000 below the budget request and $4,000,000 below the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level. While the Committee recognizes 
the significance of FAA's contribution to GPS, there is a 
significant unobligated balance at the Department of Defense.

             OTHER AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES PROGRAMS

    Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $77,581,000 for Electrical Power 
Systems, which is $7,419,000 below the budget request and the 
same as the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                            MISSION SUPPORT

    Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development (CAASD).--
The Committee provides $75,000,000 for CAASD which is 
$5,000,000 above the budget request and $3,000,000 below the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level. As FAA continues to develop the 
solution sets for NextGen, there is an ongoing need for 
research and systems engineering support to supplement and 
validate the FAA's internal capabilities. CAASD has been 
instrumental in providing technical and operational analytical 
support for a number of key initiatives including performance-
based navigation, airspace design, NAS-wide information system 
security, and communications modernization.

                     PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES

    The Committee recommends $480,000,000 for personnel and 
related expenses which is an increase of $5,000,000 above the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level and the same level as the budget 
request. This appropriation finances the personnel, travel and 
related expenses of the FAA's facilities and equipment 
workforce.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Capital Investment Plan.--The bill continues to require the 
submission of a five-year capital investment plan.

                 RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

                    (INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $167,556,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       180,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       175,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +7,444,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -5,000,000


    This appropriation provides funding for long-term research, 
engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic 
control system and to raise the level of aviation safety, as 
authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the 
Federal Aviation Act. The appropriation also finances the 
research, engineering and development needed to establish or 
modify federal air regulations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $175,000,000, an increase of 
$7,444,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and a 
decrease of $5,000,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes the following funding 
levels for Research, Engineering, and Development programs:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                             Program                             --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                   2012 enacted    2013 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire Research and Safety........................................      $7,158,000      $7,667,000      $7,667,000
Propulsion and Fuel Systems.....................................       2,300,000       2,882,000       2,882,000
Advanced Materials/Structural Safety............................       2,534,000       2,569,000       2,569,000
Aircraft Icing--Atmospheric Hazards/Digital System Safety.......       5,404,000       6,644,000       6,644,000
Continued Airworthiness.........................................      11,600,000      13,202,000      12,103,000
Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research...............       1,147,000       1,691,000       1,691,000
Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors.........       6,162,000       5,416,000       5,416,000
System Safety Management........................................      10,027,000      11,345,000      10,641,000
Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors..........      10,364,000      10,014,000      10,014,000
Aeromedical Research............................................      11,000,000       9,895,000       9,895,000
Weather Program.................................................      16,043,000      15,539,000      15,539,000
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research..............................       3,504,000       5,901,000       7,000,000
NextGen--Alternative Fuels for General Aviation.................       2,071,000       1,995,000       1,995,000
Joint Planning and Development Office...........................       5,000,000      12,000,000       7,000,000
NextGen--Wake Turbulence........................................      10,674,000      10,350,000      10,350,000
NextGen--Air Ground Integration Human Factors...................       7,000,000      10,172,000      10,172,000
NextGen--Self Separation Human Factors..........................       3,500,000       7,796,000       3,500,000
NextGen--Weather Technology in the Cockpit......................       8,000,000       4,826,000       4,826,000
Environment and Energy..........................................      15,074,000      14,776,000      14,776,000
NextGen--Environmental Research--Aircraft Technologies, Fuels,        23,500,000      19,861,000      24,861,000
 and Metrics....................................................
System Planning and Resource Management.........................       1,717,000       1,757,000       1,757,000
William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility..........       3,777,000       3,702,000       3,702,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................     167,556,000     180,000,000     175,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NextGen--Alternative Fuels for General Aviation.--The 
Committee provides $1,995,000 for alternative fuels research 
for general aviation, which is the same as the budget request 
and $76,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. Among 
other research activities, these funds will be used to complete 
initial studies on the use of high aromatic additives for 
octane enhancement and on the assessment criteria for the use 
of bio-mass derived fuels. The Committee understands that the 
Unleaded Avgas Transition Aviation Rulemaking Committee 
recently issued recommendations to ensure the development of 
and transition to an unleaded avgas with the least impact upon 
the existing fleet of general aviation piston engine aircraft. 
The Committee looks forward to the FAA's response, including 
agency plans to implement the recommendations and devote the 
resources required to transition in a way that effectively 
balances environmental improvement with aviation safety, 
technical challenges, and economic impact.
    NextGen Environmental Research--Aircraft Technologies, 
Fuels and Metrics.--The Committee provides $24,861,000 for the 
FAA's NextGen environmental research aircraft technologies, 
fuels and metrics program, which is $5,000,000 above the budget 
request and $1,361,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted 
level. The FAA's continuous, lower energy, emissions, and noise 
program (CLEEN) has supported a number of research initiatives 
that will help advance the development of more efficient 
engines, airframes and alternative fuels. The Committee 
supports the FAA's efforts to research, develop, and test these 
technologies, given that fuel costs continue to consume the 
largest portion of airline operating budgets and contribute to 
higher airfares for the traveling public. The increase above 
the budget request is provided to support additional research 
and testing of technologies and alternative fuels that offer 
the greatest potential for improving overall fuel efficiency 
and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
    The Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO).--The 
Committee recommends $7,000,000 for the JPDO, a decrease of 
$5,000,000 below the budget request and a $2,000,000 increase, 
or 40 percent, above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The 
JPDO was established to develop a plan for NextGen in the 2025 
timeframe and to coordinate Federal research to modernize the 
Nation's air transport system. Regardless of various FAA 
reorganizations, FAA needs to establish a clearly defined role 
for the JPDO and set expectations for how it will leverage 
research conducted at other Federal agencies, including the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department 
of Defense, the Department of Commerce and the Department of 
Homeland Security. The Committee directs the FAA to provide the 
Committee with a quarterly report on its progress in 
coordinating research with other agencies and leveraging 
federal dollars to advance the goals of NextGen.
    Rescission.--The Committee recommendation includes a 
rescission of $26,183,998, as requested by the President.

                       GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Liquidation of
                                         contract        Limitation  on
                                      authorization       obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...     $3,435,000,000     $3,350,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013..      3,400,000,000      2,424,000,000
Recommended in the bill...........      3,400,000,000      3,350,000,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year            -35,000,000              - - -
 2012.............................
    Budget request, fiscal year                 - - -        926,000,000
 2013.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bill includes a liquidating cash appropriation of 
$3,400,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, authorized by 
the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended. 
This funding provides for liquidation of obligations incurred 
pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on 
obligations for grants-in-aid for airport planning and 
development, noise compatibility and planning, the military 
airport program, reliever airports, airport program 
administration, and other authorized activities.

                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

    The bill includes a limitation on obligations of 
$3,350,000,000 for fiscal year 2013, which is $926,000,000 
above the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2012 
enacted level.

                  ADMINISTRATION AND RESEARCH PROGRAMS

    Airport Administrative Expenses.--Within the overall 
obligation limitation, the bill includes $105,000,000 for the 
administration of the airports program by the FAA. This funding 
level is equal to the budget request and $2,000,000 above the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The increase is provided to 
enhance investigations of airport revenue diversion.
    Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP).--The 
recommendation includes $15,000,000 which is the same level as 
the budget request and the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The 
ACRP was established through Section 712 of the Vision 100--
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176) to 
identify shared problem areas facing airports that can be 
solved through applied research but are not adequately 
addressed by existing Federal research programs.
    Airport Technology Research.--The recommendation includes a 
minimum of $29,300,000 for the FAA's airport technology 
research program which is equal to the budget request and 
$50,000,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The funds 
provided for this program are utilized to conduct research in 
the areas of airport pavement; airport marking and lighting; 
airport rescue and firefighting; airport planning and design; 
wildlife hazard mitigation; and visual guidance.
    Airport Revenue Diversion.--The Airport and Airway 
Improvement Act of 1982 requires that revenue generated at a 
public-use airport is used for the airport's capital and 
operating expenses--except in a small number of cases in which 
grandfathered airports already had a revenue sharing agreement. 
After a series of revenue diversions were uncovered at airports 
across the country, the FAA Authorization of 1994 reiterated 
that using airport revenue for unauthorized purposes is 
illegal. In addition to violating U.S. law, revenue diversion 
undermines the sustainability of airports, which are critical 
to U.S. economic competitiveness and the international movement 
of passengers and goods.
    The Committee is concerned about the potential ongoing 
revenue diversion at a number of airports across the country. 
The Committee notes that airport revenues are intended, by law, 
to be used for airport purposes and that the use of airport 
revenues for non-airport purposes is unlawful, except in cases 
where the airport's use of airport revenue for non-airport 
purposes was ``grandfathered in'' by statute. The Committee 
urges FAA to review its oversight of airport revenue diversion, 
and determine if additional oversight is needed. If 
appropriate, the FAA should consider reprogramming funds to 
enhance revenue diversion enforcement within the Office of the 
Associate Administrator for Airports. Further, the Committee 
directs the FAA to require corrective action plan from an 
airport within sixty days of any finding of revenue diversion.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Runway Incursion Prevention Systems and Devices.--
Consistent with prior year appropriations Acts, the bill allows 
funds under this limitation to be used for airports to procure 
and install runway incursion prevention systems and devices.
    Local Match.--As a result of H.R. 658, the FAA 
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95), the 
local match requirement for allowable costs at most small 
airports doubled from 5 percent to 10 percent. The Committee is 
concerned that this new requirement changed the rules mid-
stream for small airports that had started, but not completed, 
safety and capacity projects before the FAA reauthorization 
bill was enacted into law. The Committee has included language 
that would allow small airports to continue to receive a 95 
percent federal share for unfinished phased projects that were 
underway before the FAA bill was enacted into law on February 
14, 2012.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

    Section 110. The Committee retains a provision limiting the 
number of technical workyears at the Center for Advanced 
Aviation Systems Development to 600 in fiscal year 2011.
    Section 111. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 
FAA from requiring airport sponsors to provide the agency 
`without cost' building construction, maintenance, utilities 
and expenses, or space in sponsor-owned buildings, except in 
the case of certain specified exceptions.
    Section 112. The Committee continues a provision allowing 
reimbursement for fees collected and credited under 49 U.S.C. 
45303.
    Section 113. The Committee retains a provision allowing 
reimbursement of funds for providing technical assistance to 
foreign aviation authorities to be credited to the operations 
account.
    Section 114. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 
funds limited in this Act for the Airport Improvement Program 
to be provided to an airport that refuses a request from the 
Secretary of Transportation to use public space at the airport 
for the purpose of conducting outreach on air passenger rights.
    Section 115. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 
the FAA from paying Sunday premium pay except in those cases 
where the individual actually worked on a Sunday.
    Section 116. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 
FAA from using funds to purchase store gift cards or gift 
certificates through a government-issued credit card.
    Section 117. The Committee includes a provision that allows 
airports experiencing the required level of boardings through 
charter and scheduled air service to be eligible for funds 
under 49 U.S.C. 47114(c).
    Section 118. The Committee includes a provision that 
requires approval from the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Administration of the Department of Transportation for 
retention bonuses for any FAA employee.
    Section 119. The Committee includes a provision that limits 
the cost-share required under the contract tower program to 20 
percent.
    Section 119A. The Committee includes a provision that 
requires the Secretary to block the display of an owner or 
operator's aircraft registration number in the Aircraft 
Situational Display to Industry program, upon the request of an 
owner or operator.
    Section 119B. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 
funds to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules 
at Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New Jersey.

                     Federal Highway Administration

    The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides 
financial assistance to the states to construct and improve 
roads and highways. It also provides technical assistance to 
other agencies and organizations involved in road building 
activities. Title 23 of the United States Code and other 
supporting statutes provide authority for the activities of the 
FHWA. Funding is provided by contract authority, while program 
levels are established by annual limitations on obligations, as 
set forth in appropriations Acts.

                   AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013

    The most recent multi-year surface transportation 
authorization Act, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), 
expired on September 30, 2009. Since that time, the Congress 
has enacted several short-term extensions that continued to 
provide contract authority for the FHWA and other surface 
transportation agencies under the same structure as SAFETEA-LU. 
However, the current SAFETEA-LU extension ends June 30, 2012.
    It is unclear what authorization law (or laws) will be 
effective during fiscal year 2013. Conferees from the House and 
Senate currently are working on surface transportation 
authorization legislation. The Committee is in the unenviable 
position of recommending appropriations for a program without 
authorization.
    The Committee therefore provides only minimal bill language 
that sets the overall FHWA obligation limitation for fiscal 
year 2013, contingent upon authorization. It is the Committee's 
intention that appropriations made by this bill will be wholly 
contingent on a reauthorization of the highway program and will 
be distributed only in accordance with the new authorization 
law.

                  THE PRESIDENT'S 2013 BUDGET REQUEST

    The President's budget request once again pretends as 
though Congress has enacted the Administration's transportation 
authorization proposal into law, even though the Administration 
has never publicly released its proposal or transmitted it to 
Congress, as has been customary since the Eisenhower 
Administration. As such, the FHWA budget request is a fictional 
document, on which numerous staff hours and government 
resources were expended. In short, it is a waste of taxpayer 
dollars.
    The budget request and accompanying budget justifications 
are the primary means by which Congress learns about agency 
budgetary priorities. This year and last year, FHWA's budget 
justifications were almost useless. Such fiction is of no help 
to the Committee in assessing program needs and priorities for 
fiscal year 2013. With the exception of the section on FHWA's 
administrative expenses, the budget justification contains no 
pertinent information or recommendations the Committee may use 
to make meaningful decisions. The Committee, however, notes 
with appreciation that the FHWA budget staff is very helpful, 
capable, and responsive to the Committee.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$39,882,583,000 for the activities of the FHWA in fiscal year 
2013, contingent upon reauthorization. This amount is 
$1,662,000,000 below fiscal year 2012 (due to the lack of 
disaster funds) and $2,686,417,000 below the budget request. 
Included within the recommended amount is an obligation 
limitation of $39,143,583,000 and $739,000,000 in contract 
authority that is exempt from the obligation limitation.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations, compared with the fiscal year 2012 enacted 
levels and the fiscal year 2013 budget request for FHWA:

                                            (In thousands of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Fiscal year
                        Program                         --------------------------------------   Recommended in
                                                            2012 enacted      2013 request*         the bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation)...........        $39,143,583        $41,830,000        $39,143,583
Exempt contract authority..............................            739,000            739,000            739,000
Liquidation of contract authorization..................         39,882,583         42,569,000         39,882,583
Emergency relief (disaster appropriation)..............          1,662,000              - - -              - - -
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total program level................................         41,544,583         42,569,000        39,882,583
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The budget request treats all highways spending as mandatory. The Committee, however, treats the requested
  amounts as though they are subject to the obligation limitation (except the contract authority traditionally
  exempted from the obligation limitation), as in past years.

                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $412,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       437,780,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       392,855,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -19,145,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -44,925,000


    The limitation on administrative expenses caps the amount, 
from within the limitation on obligations, that FHWA may spend 
on salaries and expenses necessary to conduct and administer 
the federal-aid highway program, highway-related research, and 
most other federal highway programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $392,855,000, 
which is $19,145,000 below fiscal year 2012, and $44,925,000 
below the budget request. The recommended amount is equal to 
the most recent authorized level, which reflects a reduction in 
administrative expenses proportionate to the modest reduction 
experienced in the overall program in fiscal year 2012.

                          FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................   $39,143,583,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................    41,830,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................    39,143,583,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................    -2,686,417,000


    The federal-aid highways program is designed to aid in the 
development, operations and management of an intermodal 
transportation system that is economically efficient and 
environmentally sound, to provide the foundation for the nation 
to compete in the global economy, and to move people and goods 
safely.
    There are approximately four million miles of public roads 
in the United States and about 600,000 bridges. Currently, the 
federal government provides grants to states to assist in 
financing the construction and preservation of about 994,500 
miles (24 percent) of these roads, which represents the 
National Highway System plus key feeder and collector routes. 
Highways eligible for federal aid carry about 85 percent of 
total U.S. highway traffic.
    Federal-aid highways and bridges are managed through a 
federal-state partnership. States and localities maintain 
ownership of and responsibility for the maintenance, repair and 
new construction of roads. State highway departments have the 
authority to initiate federal-aid projects, subject to FHWA 
approval of the plans, specifications, and cost estimates. The 
Federal government provides financial support, on a 
reimbursable basis, for construction and repair through 
matching grants, the terms of which vary with the type of road.
    Under SAFETEA-LU, federal-aid highways funds have been made 
available to the states through a mix of ``apportioned 
programs,'' which are distributed using a formula provided in 
law, and ``allocated programs,'' which are distributed based on 
criteria set in law and which allow for some discretion on the 
part of the Secretary in selecting recipients.
    All programs included within the federal-aid highways 
program are financed from the highway trust fund and most are 
distributed via apportionments and allocations to states. The 
federal-aid highways program is funded by contract authority, 
and liquidating cash appropriations are subsequently provided 
to fund outlays resulting from obligations incurred under 
contract authority.
    The Committee sets, through the annual appropriations 
process, an overall limitation on the total contract authority 
that can be obligated under the federal-aid highways program in 
a given year. The Committee also provides direction and other 
guidance regarding some of the programs that operate under this 
overall limitation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations for 
the federal-aid highways program of $39,143,583,000, contingent 
upon authorization. This amount is the same as fiscal year 2012 
and $2,686,417,000 below the budget request.
    Because the structure of the federal-aid highways program 
for fiscal year 2013 is unknown at this time due to lack of 
authorizing legislation, the Committee includes no detailed 
summaries of particular programs under SAFETEA-LU.
    Limitation on Transportation Research.--The Committee 
continues bill language limiting the amount the FHWA may spend 
on transportation research and technology contract programs. 
Within the overall obligation limitation for federal-aid 
highways, the Committee recommends an obligation limitation for 
transportation research of $429,800,000, which is equal to 
fiscal year 2012 and the budget request.
    Under SAFETEA-LU, the transportation research and 
technology contract programs include: surface transportation 
research, training and education, university transportation 
research, and intelligent transportation systems research. 
Funding for the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) also 
is included within this limitation, although the BTS will be 
housed within the Office of the Secretary.
    Because future reauthorization actions may change the 
structure of existing research programs, the Committee does not 
provide a detailed breakdown of transportation research program 
activities.
    Loan Fees.--The Committee continues bill language allowing 
the Secretary to charge and collect fees from the applicant for 
a direct loan, guaranteed loan, or line of credit to cover the 
cost of the financial and legal analyses performed on behalf of 
the Department. These fees are not subject to the obligation 
limitation or the limitation on administrative expenses set for 
the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 
program under section 608 of title 23, United States Code.
    State Programs.--The Committee directs the Secretary to 
provide states with as much discretion as possible in 
administering their state surface transportation formula funds. 
State departments of transportation can best allocate resources 
to satisfy their states' individual and unique surface 
transportation needs.
    Public-private Partnerships.--In instances where the 
Secretary exercises discretion in project selection, the 
Committee directs the Secretary to give strong consideration to 
infrastructure projects funded through public-private 
partnership investment.
    Corrosion.--The Committee notes corrosion detrimentally 
impacts surface transportation infrastructure and is an 
economic burden and safety hazard. The Committee directs the 
FHWA to report to the Committees on Appropriations within 180 
days of enactment on the costs and benefits associated with 
developing a comprehensive corrosion analysis and mitigation 
tool to prevent, predict, and control corrosion-related 
problems in highway transportation.
    Geosynthetics.--The Committee directs the FHWA to continue 
assessing the use of geosynthetics in highway and civil 
infrastructure applications, especially potential cost savings 
and environmental benefits. The Committee also encourages FHWA 
to review and consider the recommendations in GAO's upcoming 
report on geosynthetics and the associated life-cycle costs of 
incorporating innovative materials in pavements.

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................   $39,882,583,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................    42,569,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................    39,882,583,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................    -2,686,417,000


    The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
of $39,882,583,000, which is the same as fiscal year 2012 and 
$2,686,417,000 below the budget request. This is the amount 
required to pay the outstanding obligations of the highway 
program at levels provided in this Act and prior appropriations 
Acts.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

    Section 120. The Committee continues a provision that 
distributes obligation authority among federal-aid highways 
programs.
    Section 121. The Committee continues a provision that 
credits funds received by the Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics to the federal-aid highways account.
    Section 122. The Committee continues a provision that 
provides requirements for any waiver of the Buy American Act.
    Section 123. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting tolling in Texas, with exceptions.

              Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) was 
established within the Department of Transportation (DOT) by 
Congress through the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 
1999. FMCSA's mission is to promote safe commercial motor 
vehicle operations and reduce truck and bus crashes. FMCSA 
works with federal, state, and local entities, the motor 
carrier industry, highway safety organizations, and the public 
to further its mission.
    FMCSA resources are used to prevent and mitigate commercial 
vehicle accidents through regulation, enforcement, stakeholder 
training, technological innovation, and improved information 
systems. FMCSA also is responsible for enforcing Federal motor 
carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations for all 
commercial vehicles entering the United States along its 
southern and northern borders.
    FMCSA's current activities are authorized under an 
extension of SAFETEA-LU, which expires June 30, 2012. For 
purposes of determining authorized funding levels, the 
Committee assumes another extension of SAFETEA-LU through 
fiscal year 2013. The Committee's recommendations for FMCSA are 
contingent upon reauthorization.

              MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)


                                      Liquidation of
                                         Contract        Limitation on
                                      Authorization       Obligations

Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...       $247,724,000     ($247,724,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2013 .        250,000,000      (250,000,000)
Recommended in the bill...........        244,144,000      (244,144,000)
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year             -3,580,000       (-3,580,000)
 2012.............................
    Budget request, fiscal year            -5,856,000       (-5,856,000)
 2013.............................


    This limitation controls FMCSA spending on salaries, 
operating expenses, and research. It provides resources to 
support motor carrier safety program activities and to maintain 
the agency's administrative infrastructure. This funding 
supports nationwide motor carrier safety and consumer 
enforcement efforts, including the Compliance, Safety, and 
Accountability Program, regulation and enforcement of household 
goods transport, and federal safety enforcement at the U.S. 
borders. These resources also fund regulatory development and 
implementation, information management, research and 
technology, grants to States and local partners, safety 
education and outreach, and the safety and consumer telephone 
hotline.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $247,724,000 in liquidating cash 
for motor carrier safety operations and programs. The Committee 
also recommends limiting obligations from the highway trust 
fund to $247,724,000 for motor carrier safety operations and 
programs in fiscal year 2013. These levels are $3,580,000 below 
fiscal year 2012 and $5,856,000 below the budget request. They 
are the maximum authorized levels, assuming current, annualized 
SAFETEA-LU levels, and they are contingent upon 
reauthorization.
    Within the amounts provided for operations and programs, 
the Committee recommends $1,000,000 for commercial motor 
vehicle operator's grants, which provide commercial motor 
vehicle operators with critical safety training. This amount is 
the same as fiscal year 2012 and the budget request. It is the 
full authorized level, assuming current, annualized SAFETEA-LU 
levels.
    The Committee continues bill language making funds for the 
research and technology program available until September 30, 
2015. The Committee also continues bill language prohibiting 
any funds relating to outreach and education from being 
transferred to another agency.
    Chameleon Carriers.--The Committee directs the FMCSA to use 
$5,000,000 of the funds provided for operations and programs to 
implement a risk-based monitoring of all motor carriers for 
chameleon carrier characteristics, as recommended in the recent 
GAO report, GAO-12-364, ``New Applicant Reviews Should Expand 
to Identify Freight Carriers Evading Detection.'' FMCSA 
estimates this amount is sufficient to complete the initial 
start-up of such a screening tool, including early evaluations, 
algorithm development, capability implementation, post-
implementation evaluations, and 5 FTE to support the effort. 
FMCSA anticipates it will take one year to implement the 
capability to screen all carriers using a risk-based approach, 
and the Committee directs such capability to be in place by the 
end of fiscal year 2013.
    A chameleon carrier is a motor carrier that was once put 
out-of-service due to safety violations, but that 
``reincarnates'' itself under a new corporate identity to 
resume business. FMCSA needs better ways to identify and put 
out-of-service permanently such carriers. The GAO report noted 
FMCSA currently monitors all household goods and passenger bus 
motor carriers for chameleon carrier traits, but such sectors 
represent only 2% of the motor carrier market. The vast 
majority of motor carriers are freight carriers. GAO and the 
DOT Inspector General found that FMCSA can expand its new-
entrant audits to the freight sector, but only if it uses risk-
based data to target its resources to the riskiest new 
entrants.
    GAO suggests such risk-based audits could be accomplished 
using as few as 2-3 FTE, in addition to the current 6 FTE, by 
using a data-based algorithm to correctly identify the riskiest 
carriers. The Committee fully supports this type of risk-based 
approach, as it makes the best use of taxpayer resources. The 
Committee also directs FMCSA, in implementing this risk-based 
approach over the next year, to determine the most cost-
effective method of collecting and updating carrier data, 
including solutions available in the private sector. The 
Committee notes FMCSA's ongoing efforts to consolidate its 
databases may further assist the effort to begin risk-based 
monitoring of all new entrant motor carriers.
    Compliance, Safety, and Accountability.--The Committee is 
concerned about FMCSA's proposed new scoring system in the 
Compliance, Safety, and Accountability (CSA) program, which is 
the primary means by which FMCSA oversees motor carriers 
currently in operation. A wide range of industry groups are 
concerned that the new CSA scores do not actually correlate to 
risk and may inaccurately portray carriers in a variety of 
ways. The Committee directs FMCSA to increase its outreach to 
industry to address these concerns before finalizing the CSA 
scoring system. The lack of correlation between a score and 
actual risk is a very serious concern and should be addressed 
with public participation.

                      MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Liquidation of
                                            contract      Limitation on
                                         authorization     obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......     $307,000,000   ($307,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......      330,000,000    (330,000,000)
Recommended in the bill...............      307,000,000    (307,000,000)
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...            - - -            - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..      -23,000,000    (-23,000,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA's motor carrier safety grants were authorized by the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and 
continued by SAFETEA-LU and subsequent extensions of SAFETEA-
LU.
    These grants are used to support compliance reviews in the 
states, identify and apprehend traffic violators, conduct 
roadside inspections, and conduct safety audits of new entrant 
carriers. Additionally, grants are provided to states for 
safety enforcement at the U.S. borders, improvement of state 
commercial driver's license oversight activities, and 
improvements in linking states' motor vehicle registration 
systems and carrier safety data.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $307,000,000 in liquidating cash 
for this program, as well as a $307,000,000 limitation on 
obligations, in fiscal year 2013. These levels are the same as 
fiscal year 2012 and $23,000,000 below the budget request. They 
reflect the full authorized levels for each grant within this 
account, assuming the current, annualized SAFETEA-LU program 
levels. The Committee's recommendations are contingent upon 
reauthorization.
    The Committee recommends the following obligation 
limitations for grants funded under this account:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor carrier safety assistance program (MCSAP)......     ($212,000,000)
Commercial driver's license improvements program.....       (30,000,000)
Border enforcement grants............................       (32,000,000)
Performance and registration information system              (5,000,000)
 management program..................................
Commercial vehicle information systems and networks         (25,000,000)
 deployment..........................................
Safety data improvement grants.......................        (3,000,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Entrant Audits.--Of the funds made available for the 
Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Grants, the Committee 
recommends $29,000,000 for audits of new entrant motor 
carriers, which is the same as fiscal year 2012, $3,000,000 
below the budget request, and the full authorized level 
assuming extension of current law.
    FMCSA requires all new entrants to pass a safety audit 
within the first 18 months of operations in order to receive 
permanent DOT registration. With the expansion of such vetting 
to the freight sector over the next year, the Committee expects 
to see improvement in the agency's ability to detect and shut 
down chameleon carriers.

 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

    Sec. 130. The Committee continues language subjecting the 
funds appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions 
included in prior appropriations Acts regarding Mexico-
domiciled motor carriers.

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
was established in March of 1970 to administer motor vehicle 
and highway safety programs. It was the successor agency to the 
National Highway Safety Bureau, which was housed in the Federal 
Highway Administration.
    NHTSA's mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and 
reduce economic costs due to road traffic crashes, through 
education, research, safety standards and enforcement activity. 
To accomplish these goals, NHTSA establishes and enforces 
safety performance standards for motor vehicles and motor 
vehicle equipment, investigates safety defects in motor 
vehicles, and conducts research on driver behavior and traffic 
safety.
    NHTSA provides grants and technical assistance to state and 
local governments to enable them to conduct effective local 
highway safety programs. Together with state and local 
partners, NHTSA works to reduce the threat of drunk and 
impaired drivers and to promote use of safety belts, helmets, 
child safety seats, airbags, and other life-saving devices.
    NHTSA establishes and ensures compliance with fuel economy 
standards, investigates odometer fraud, establishes and 
enforces vehicle anti-theft regulations, and provides consumer 
information on a variety of motor vehicle safety topics.
    NHTSA's current programs were authorized by the following 
laws: (1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act 
(chapter 301 of title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.); (2) the 
Highway Safety Act (chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the 
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (MVICSA) (Part C 
of subtitle VI of title 49, U.S.C.); (4) the Transportation 
Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) 
Act; and (5) the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU).
    SAFETEA-LU expired on September 30, 2009. The Congress 
enacted many short-term extensions of SAFETEA-LU, with the 
latest extension ending June 30, 2012. In the absence of a 
long-term authorization bill for surface transportation 
programs, including highway safety programs, the Committee 
assumes the continuation of the current program structure. The 
Committee's recommendations with respect to funds provided from 
the Highway Trust Fund are contingent upon reauthorization.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $776,188,000, which is $23,786,000 
below fiscal year 2012 and $204,812,000 below the budget 
request. The decrease is attributable to the expiration of the 
Seat Belt Performance Grants, which were funded at $48,500,000 
in fiscal year 2012. The Committee's recommendation maintains 
all other grants at current funding levels and increases 
operational resources by $24,714,000 in fiscal year 2013. The 
following table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                 2012 enacted     2013 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research (general fund and highway trust fund)     $249,646,000     $338,000,000     $274,360,000
Highway traffic safety grants (highway trust fund)...........      550,328,000      643,000,000      501,828,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................................      799,974,000      981,000,000      776,188,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends funding levels that provide NHTSA 
with sufficient resources to continue its critical work 
improving the safety of passenger travel on the nation's 
highway system. The Committee commends NHTSA and its partners 
for the 3% decrease in highway fatalities in 2010, bringing 
highway fatalities to a new record low. The Committee 
encourages NHTSA and the network of researchers and public 
safety personnel to continue their work to enhance safety and 
reduce fatalities.

                        OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 (Highway trust
                                                                (General fund)       fund)            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012..............................     $140,146,000     $109,500,000     $249,646,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013.............................            - - -      338,000,000      338,000,000
Recommended in the bill......................................      152,000,000      122,360,000      274,360,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012..........................       11,854,000       12,860,000       24,714,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013.........................     +152,000,000     -215,640,000      -63,640,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The operations and research appropriations support 
research, demonstrations, technical assistance, and national 
leadership for highway safety programs. Many of these programs 
are conducted in partnership with state and local governments, 
the private sector, universities, research units, and various 
safety associations and organizations. These programs address 
alcohol and drug countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, 
traffic law enforcement, emergency medical and trauma care 
systems, traffic records and licensing, traffic safety 
evaluations, motorcycle safety, pedestrian and bicycle safety, 
pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy driving, young and 
older driver safety programs, and development of improved 
accident investigation procedures.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $274,360,000, which is $24,714,000 
above fiscal year 2012 and $63,640,000 below the budget 
request. Of this total, $152,000,000 is from the General Fund 
for vehicle safety programs and $122,360,000 is from the 
Highway Trust Fund for behavioral highway safety operations and 
research. The Committee rejects the Administration's request to 
fund the vehicle safety portion out of the highway trust fund, 
rather than the general fund.
    The Committee recognizes that NHTSA's operational resources 
have been fairly flat for several years and that there are 
several areas that could use additional resources at this time. 
However, NHTSA's budget request is full of new funding requests 
that cannot be accommodated. Therefore, the Committee provides 
specific instructions below as to which activities are approved 
to receive additional resources.
    Vehicle Safety.--The Committee directs NHTSA to spend 
additional funds provided in fiscal year 2013 on the following 
activities in these approximate amounts:
    
 $5,000,000--New Car Assessment Program.
    
 $7,000,000--Vehicle Electronics Systems Safety.
    The Committee provides an additional $5,000,000 for the New 
Car Assessment Program (NCAP), which is the primary means by 
which new vehicles are evaluated by NHTSA for safety 
performance. NCAP is responsible for the star safety ratings 
that inform consumers purchasing vehicles. The Committee 
provides funds to improve NCAP, so it once again covers 85% of 
the new vehicle market.
    The Committee provides an additional $7,000,000 for the 
Vehicle Electronic Systems Safety initiative. Electronic 
systems are becoming increasingly important in vehicle design 
and manufacturing. NHTSA has identified advanced electronic 
control systems as an emerging technology in need of greater 
study and understanding. The Committee provides resources to 
evaluate the safety of these critical new systems.
    Highway Safety.--The Committee directs NHTSA to spend the 
additional funds provided in fiscal year 2013 on the following 
activities in these approximate amounts:
    
 $2,000,000--Impaired Driving Countermeasures.
    
 $2,000,000--Occupant Protection Initiative.
    
 $5,000,000--Highway Safety Research.
    
 $3,000,000--Core Competency and Training Program.
    The Committee provides $2,000,000 in additional funding for 
development of Impaired Driving Countermeasures, particularly 
to support NHTSA's role in the implementation of ignition 
interlock programs nationwide.
    The Committee provides $2,000,000 in additional funding for 
the Occupant Protection Initiative, particularly to support 
renewal of the Click-It-Or-Ticket campaign and to further 
improve effective use of seatbelts and child restraints.
    The Committee provides $5,000,000 in additional funding for 
the Highway Safety Research Program, which is a 67% increase 
above fiscal years 2011 and 2012. This program covers all 
research relating to unsafe behaviors that impact highway 
safety, including for example alcohol-impaired driving, drug-
impaired driving, speeding, use of occupant protection devices, 
distracted driving, driving by older and younger persons, 
pedestrian behavior, and motorcycle driving. The Committee 
notes NHTSA is in the best position to determine which 
particular research projects have the greatest potential to 
improve highway safety.
    The Committee provides an additional $3,000,000 to support 
NHTSA's Core Competency and Training Program for highway safety 
professionals at the federal, state, and local levels. In past 
years, NHTSA provided this critical training to highway safety 
professionals by taking down its own operational resources, 
thereby diverting funds from needed research and countermeasure 
development. The Committee's recommendation folds this training 
into the base for highway safety operations.
    National Driver Register.--The Committee recommends funding 
the National Driver Register (NDR) at the full authorized 
amount of $4,116,000, from within the highway safety 
operational funds. The NDR is a computerized database of 
information regarding drivers with revoked or suspended 
licenses and drivers convicted of serious traffic violations. 
The NDR allows state motor vehicle administrators to 
communicate effectively with other states to identify such 
drivers.

                     HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Limitation on
                                         contract        Limitation on
                                      authorization        obligation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...       $550,328,000     ($550,328,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2013..        643,000,000      (643,000,000)
Recommended in the bill...........        501,828,000      (501,828,000)
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year            -48,500,000      (-48,500,000)
     2012.........................
    Budget request, fiscal year          -141,172,000     (-141,172,000)
     2013.........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The highway traffic safety state grant programs currently 
authorized include: highway safety programs, occupant 
protection incentive grants, alcohol impaired driving 
countermeasures incentive grants, safety belt performance 
grants, state traffic safety information systems improvement 
grants, high visibility enforcement program, child safety and 
child booster seat safety incentive grants, and motorcyclist 
safety grants.
    These grant programs provide resources to states for 
highway safety programs that are data-driven and that meet 
states' most pressing highway safety problems. They are a 
critical asset in reducing highway traffic fatalities and 
injuries.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $501,828,000 in liquidating cash 
from the Highway Trust Fund to pay outstanding obligations of 
the highway safety grant programs at the levels provided in 
this Act and prior appropriations Acts. The Committee also 
recommends limiting the obligations from the highway trust fund 
in fiscal year 2013 for the highway traffic safety grants 
programs to $501,828,000. These levels are $48,500,000 below 
fiscal year 2012 and $141,172,000 below the budget request, and 
they are contingent upon reauthorization.
    The Committee's recommendation maintains current funding 
for all grants, except the safety belt performance grant, which 
has been phased out by the Administration because it achieved 
its purpose of incentivizing states to enact primary seatbelt 
laws and is no longer needed.
    All other grants are funded at the highest possible level 
under the current authorization. Because reauthorization has 
not yet occurred, the Committee assumes the highway traffic 
safety grant programs now authorized will be reauthorized in 
fiscal year 2013 at the same annualized levels.
    The Committee does not provide any funding for the 
Administration's proposed new distracted driving prevention 
grants because they are not authorized. The Committee also 
declines the Administration's request to combine the child 
safety and booster seat grant with the occupant protection 
incentive grant into a new ``combined occupant protection 
incentive grant.''
    The Committee recommends the following funding allocations:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway safety programs..............................     ($235,000,000)
Occupant protection incentive grants.................       (25,000,000)
Safety belt performance grants.......................              - - -
Distracted driving prevention grants.................              - - -
State traffic safety information systems improvements       (34,500,000)
Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures incentive         (139,000,000)
 grants..............................................
Grant administration.................................       (25,328,000)
High visibility enforcement program..................       (29,000,000)
Child safety and child booster seat safety incentive         (7,000,000)
 grants..............................................
Motorcyclist safety..................................        (7,000,000)
                                                      ------------------
    Total............................................      (501,828,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Below are descriptions of the grant programs for which the 
Committee recommends funding in fiscal year 2013. The 
descriptions are based on current law:
    Highway Safety Grants.--The state and community highway 
safety formula grant program, authorized by 23 U.S.C. 402, 
supports state highway safety programs designed to reduce 
traffic crashes and resulting deaths, injuries, and property 
damage. A state may use these grants only for highway safety 
purposes and at least 40 percent of these funds are to be 
expended by political subdivisions of the state.
    Occupant Protection Incentive Grants.--The occupant 
protection incentive grants, authorized by 23 U.S.C. 405, 
encourage states to adopt and implement programs to reduce 
deaths and injuries from riding unrestrained or improperly 
restrained in motor vehicles.
    State Traffic Safety Information Systems Improvements.--The 
state traffic safety information systems improvements program, 
authorized by 23 U.S.C. 408, provides incentive grants to 
encourage states to adopt and implement programs to improve the 
timeliness, accuracy, completeness, uniformity, integration, 
and accessibility of state data needed to identify priorities 
in national, state, and local highway and traffic safety 
programs.
    Alcohol-impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive 
Grants.--The alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures incentive 
grant program, authorized by 23 U.S.C. 410, encourages states 
to adopt and implement programs to reduce traffic safety 
problems resulting from individuals driving under the influence 
of alcohol.
    Grants Administration Expenses.--Section 2001(a)(11) of 
SAFETEA-LU authorizes funding salaries and operating expenses 
necessary to the administration of the grants programs.
    High Visibility Enforcement Program.--Section 2009 of 
SAFETEA-LU directs NHTSA to administer at least two high-
visibility traffic safety law enforcement campaigns each year 
to achieve one or both of these objectives: (1) reduce alcohol-
impaired or drug-impaired operation of motor vehicles; and (2) 
increase the use of safety belts by occupants of motor 
vehicles. These funds may be used to pay for the development, 
production, and use of broadcast and print media in carrying 
out traffic safety law enforcement campaigns.
    Child Safety and Child Booster Seat Safety Incentive 
Grants.--Section 2012 of SAFETEA-LU authorizes incentive grants 
to states that enforce laws requiring any child riding in a 
passenger vehicle who is too large to be secured in a child 
safety seat to be secured in a child restraint meeting the 
requirements of section 3 of Anton's Law (49 U.S.C. Sec. 30127 
note; 116 Stat. 2772).
    Motorcyclist Safety.--Section 2010 of SAFETEA-LU authorizes 
incentive grants to encourage states to adopt and implement 
programs to reduce the number of single and multivehicle 
crashes involving motorcyclists. States may use grant funds 
only for motorcyclist safety training and motorcyclist 
awareness programs.

      ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY 
                             ADMINISTRATION

    Section 140. The Committee continues a provision that 
provides limited funding for travel and related expenses 
associated with state management reviews and highway safety 
core competency development training.
    Section 141. The Committee continues a provision that 
exempts from the current fiscal year's obligation limitation 
any obligation authority that was made available in previous 
public laws for multiple years including this fiscal year.
    Section 142. The Committee continues a provision that 
prohibits funding for the National Highway Safety Advisory 
Committee.

                    Federal Railroad Administration

    The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) was established 
by the Department of Transportation Act, on October 15, 1966. 
The FRA plans, develops, and administers programs and 
regulations to promote the safe operation of freight and 
passenger rail transportation in the United States. The U.S. 
railroad system consists of over 550 railroads with over 
187,000 freight employees, 171,000 miles of track, and 1.35 
million freight cars. In addition, the FRA continues to oversee 
grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) 
with the goal of assisting Amtrak with improvements to its 
passenger service and physical infrastructure.

                         SAFETY AND OPERATIONS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $178,596,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       156,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       184,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +5,404,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       +28,000,000


    The safety and operations account provides funding for 
FRA's safety program activities related to passenger and 
freight railroads. Funding also supports salaries and expenses 
and other operating costs related to FRA staff and programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $184,000,000 for safety and 
operations, which is $5,404,000 above the fiscal year 2012 
enacted level and $28,000,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee rejects the proposal to establish a rail safety user 
fee collected from railroads to offset salary costs associated 
with rail safety inspectors. Of the amount provided under this 
heading, $12,860,000 is available until expended.
    Rolling Stock Pooled Procurement.--August 2011, the Federal 
Railroad Administration (FRA) announced grants totaling 
$728,565,044 for pooled procurements of diesel locomotives and 
bi-level passenger cars that will be used on state-supported 
Amtrak regional corridors in the Midwest, California, and 
Pacific Northwest. While the Committee believes in the benefits 
of pooled procurements and standardized equipment purchases, 
the Committee is troubled by the slow pace of these two 
procurements. Especially during a time of severe budget 
constraints, the Committee urges FRA to maximize the options to 
be considered through the pooled procurement process and to 
fully and fairly evaluate the total cost of ownership of the 
equipment as well as track and attendant infrastructure. The 
Committee is also disappointed by the lack of progress with the 
pooled procurement process. While the FRA recently released the 
request for proposal for the bi-level coaches, the locomotive 
procurement has not yet started. The Committee expects FRA to 
work with the states to ensure that the equipment procurement 
award for both the coaches and locomotives is made before the 
end of the year. Furthermore, the Committee directs FRA to 
submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no 
later than July 1, 2012, a detailed plan with schedule 
milestones for making the awards through the pooled 
procurements before December 31, 2012.

                   RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $35,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        35,500,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        35,500,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The railroad research and development program provides 
science and technology support for FRA's policy and regulatory 
efforts. The program's objectives are to reduce the frequency 
and severity of railroad accidents through scientific 
advancement, and to support technological innovations in 
conventional and high speed railroads.
    The Committee is encouraged by FRA research & development 
activities in the areas of communications-based train control 
and vital positive train control, and believes that these 
technologies show considerable potential for safety 
improvements and better management of rail capacity 
constraints. However, research and development projects related 
to vital positive train control demonstrate that there are 
various remaining technological challenges such as braking 
algorithms, for example. The Committee believes that it is 
important that FRA continues to dedicate resources toward 
addressing these challenges, and strongly encourages FRA to 
expedite its research and development investments in vital 
positive train control in ways that will improve safety 
capacity in the nation's rail system. An important element in 
this regard will be focusing on the moving of block 
technologies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,500,000 
for railroad research and development, which is $500,000 above 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. The Committee's recommendation includes the following 
allocation for FRA's Railroad Research and Development account:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Railroad System Issues....................................    $3,374,000
Human Factors.............................................     3,045,000
Rolling Stock and Components..............................     2,794,000
Track and Structures......................................     5,075,000
Track and Train Interaction...............................     3,353,000
Train Control.............................................     7,330,000
Grade Crossings...........................................     1,956,000
Hazardous Materials Transportation........................     1,444,000
Train Occupant Protection.................................     4,284,000
R&D Facilities and Test Equipment.........................     2,375,000
Railroad Cooperative Research Program.....................       500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM

    The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing 
(RRIF) program was established by Public Law 109-178 to provide 
direct loans and loan guarantees to State and local 
governments, government-sponsored entities, and railroads. 
Credit assistance under the program may be used for 
rehabilitating or developing rail equipment and facilities. No 
Federal appropriation is required to implement the program, 
because a non-Federal partner may contribute the subsidy amount 
required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the form of a 
credit risk premium.
    The Committee maintains bill language specifying that no 
new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments may be made 
using Federal funds for the payment of any credit premium 
amount during fiscal year 2013.

  CAPITAL ASSISTANCE FOR HIGH SPEED CORRIDORS AND INTERCITY PASSENGER 
                              RAIL SERVICE




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................          - - -\1\
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................            - - -

\1\The Administration requested $1,000,000,000 as mandatory spending for
  a new Network Development account for similar activities.

    The Capital Assistance for High Speed Corridors and 
Intercity Passenger Rail Service program was first funded in 
the American Reinvestment Recovery Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no funding for capital assistance 
for high speed corridors and intercity passenger rail service 
in fiscal year 2013. The recommendation is the same as the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level, and $1,000,000,000 below the 
budget request.

     Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

    Amtrak operates trains over 20,000 miles of track owned by 
freight railroad carriers, and over about 654 miles of its own 
track, most of which is on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) from 
Washington, D.C., to Boston, Massachusetts. Amtrak operates 
both electrified trains, which can achieve speeds of up to 150 
mph on the highest quality track on the NEC, and diesel 
locomotives, which currently can achieve speeds between 74-110 
miles per hour.
    Congressional budget justification.--The Committee 
appreciates the level of detail in the fiscal year 2013 budget 
justifications and directs Amtrak to continue to submit 
justifications with a similar level of detail in all future 
budget years.

    Operating Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $466,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       350,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -116,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      +350,000,000


    Amtrak runs a deficit each year and requires a federal 
subsidy to cover both operating losses and capital investments. 
The Committee commends Amtrak for taking steps to lower the 
needed Federal subsidy for operating losses. While not yet 
fully self-sufficient, Amtrak has taken steps that reduce the 
need for a Federal subsidy by over $100,000,000 in fiscal year 
2012. However, Amtrak typically requests and receives more 
funding than it actually needs, resulting in an excessive 
appropriation each fiscal year. For example in fiscal year 
2012, Amtrak requested $616,000,000 for its operating subsidy 
and was appropriated $466,000,000. To date, Amtrak projects to 
lose $345,000,000, making the excess subsidy around 
$121,000,000. The following chart demonstrates this dynamic 
over the past three fiscal years.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amtrak Funding Levels ($millions)    FY 2010      FY 2011      FY 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's Budget Request.......          572          563       \1\616
Appropriation....................          563          563          466
Actual Loss......................          420          446       \2\345
Excess Appropriation.............          143          117         121
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the President requested funds for
  Amtrak as mandatory; thus, $616 million is Amtrak's Grant request.
\2\This is Amtrak's estimate of end-of-year loss, based on monthly
  progress reports.

    The Committee notes the majority of Amtrak's services are 
profitable. However, federally mandated services such as long-
distance and state-supported routes sustain large losses that 
cannot be overcome by Amtrak's profitable services. The table 
below reflects the profitability, or lack thereof, of Amtrak's 
six major lines of business.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Profit/(Loss)
           Amtrak's Line of Business           -------------------------
                                                  FY 2010      FY 2011
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Route Performance--Acela......................       $135.1       $208.1
Route Performance--Northeast Regional.........          6.6         47.1
Route Performance--State Supported Routes.....      (181.2)      (148.4)
Route Performance--Long Distance Routes.......      (520.4)      (553.5)
National Train Service NonCore................        (1.6)       (37.6)
Ancillary/Freight/Depreciation/Interest.......        141.5         38.1
                                               -------------------------
    Total Profit/Loss.........................      (420.0)      (446.2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for operating grants 
for Amtrak, which is $116,000,000 below the fiscal year 2012 
enacted level and $350,000,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee includes bill language allowing the Secretary 
to retain up to one-half of one percent for the use of the FRA 
in the implementation of the Amtrak Operating Grants as 
authorized by section 103 of the Passenger Rail Investment and 
Improvement Act. FRA requires such funds to oversee the 
operating grants to Amtrak, to ensure prudent use of federal 
funds and to foster transparency.
    Food, Beverage and First Class Services.--In fiscal year 
2011, food and beverage services resulted in $85 million in 
direct operating losses. The majority of these losses are 
attributable to long distance routes and labor costs. While 
Amtrak has made progress at reducing commissary and support 
costs, labor costs have increased mainly due to wage increases. 
Currently, the average salary of an on-board service attendant 
is between $24.11 and $27.09 per hour. This is more than twice 
the average salary of a transportation attendant across various 
transportation modes,\1\ and over 20% higher than the average 
salary of a flight attendant.\2\ Further, in Amtrak's last 
negotiated labor agreement in 2010, on-board service attendants 
were guaranteed a 3% wage increase per year until 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Mean Hourly 
Wage of Transportation Attendants, Except Flight Attendants is $11.64. 
People working in this field provide services to ensure the safety and 
comfort of passengers aboard ships, buses, trains, or within the 
station or terminal. They perform duties such as greeting passengers, 
explaining the use of safety equipment, serving meals or beverages, and 
answering questions related to travel. This definition excludes 
``Baggage Porters and Bellhops''
    \2\According to Amtrak Financial and BLS data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee is concerned with the taxpayer footing the 
bill for Amtrak's consistently unprofitable Food, Beverage and 
First Class Service. The Committee directs Amtrak to create 
performance metrics in its next five year financial plan to 
reduce costs in food service, especially in labor costs and 
commissary and support costs.
    Further, the Committee directs the Amtrak Inspector General 
(IG) to submit an analysis of the cost of providing food 
service. The IG should conduct a comprehensive cost comparison 
of current services versus the alternative of Amtrak 
contracting out these services. This cost comparison should 
include the total cost of potential buy-outs of current 
employees. Further, the IG should submit an analysis of which 
positions in food service can be contracted out and which 
positions cannot. This analysis and report shall be provided to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by November 
1, 2012.
    Reduced price fares.--The bill continues a provision that 
prohibits funding on routes where Amtrak is offering 50 percent 
or more off the normal, peak fare.

  CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER 
                              CORPORATION




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $952,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................    $1,452,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      $500,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................    $1,452,000,000


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,452,000,000 for capital grants, 
of which no less than $271,000,000 is provided for Amtrak's 
debt service. The Committee's recommendation is $500,000,000 
above the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 and $1,452,000,000 
above the budget request.
    Bridges and Tunnels Grants.--The bill provides $500,000,000 
of capital funds to fund high priority, state-of-good-repair, 
intercity infrastructure projects owned by Amtrak or States. 
Funding should go to existing infrastructure needs rather than 
unrealistic new high-speed rail lines to nowhere. This funding 
shall be used only to reduce the state-of-good-repair 
infrastructure backlog, and it must provide joint 
transportation benefits of regional significance. Further, this 
funding may not supplant any local, state or private funding 
sources for projects that are otherwise programmed under Amtrak 
or States' funded capital programs. The bill allows up to 
$80,000,000 of these funds to be used for Amtrak operating 
assistance only if the Secretary of Transportation determines 
that Amtrak requires such assistance to remain operational. The 
Committee strongly believes that these infrastructive funds 
should be used for capital improvement and only used for 
operating assistance in the event of an unanticipated and 
emergency shortfall. Finally, the Federal share of any grant 
shall not exceed 80%.
    Americans with Disabilities Act.--The Committee recommends 
that Amtrak use no less than $50,000,000 of its capital funds 
to assist it in meeting its statutory obligations under the 
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA requires that 
Amtrak make all intercity passenger rail stations readily 
accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, 
including individuals who use wheelchairs, as soon as 
practicable.
    Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory 
Commission.--The Committee recommends up to $3,000,000, instead 
of up to one half of one percent of the funds provided under 
this heading, as enacted in fiscal year 2012 and as proposed in 
the budget request. The Committee directs the Northeast 
Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission to 
submit its FY 2014 budget request to the Appropriations 
Committees in similar format and substance as those submitted 
by other executive agencies of the federal government.

                    NEXT GENERATION HIGH SPEED RAIL

                              (RESCISSION)

    The Committee recommends the permanent rescission of 
$1,973,000 from previously appropriated funds.

                 NORTHEAST CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

                              (RESCISSION)

    The Committee recommends the permanent rescission of 
$4,419,000 from previously appropriated funds.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

    Section 150. The Committee retains a provision that ceases 
the availability of Amtrak funds if a railroad contracts for 
services outside the United States for any service performed by 
a full-time or part-time Amtrak employee as of July 1, 2006.
    Section 151. The Committee retains a provision, which 
allows FRA to receive and use cash or spare parts to repair and 
replace damaged automated track inspection cars and equipment 
in connection with the automated track inspection program.
    Section 152. The Committee includes a provision which 
authorizes the Secretary to allow issuers of any preferred 
stock to redeem or repurchase such stock sold to the 
Department.
    Section 153. The Committee continues a provision that 
limits overtime to $35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak's 
president to waive this restriction for specific employees for 
safety or operational efficiency reasons, and requires 
notification to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations within 30 days of granting such waivers.
    Section 154. The Committee includes a provision which 
transfers unobligated balances in contract authority that were 
originally authorized for Magnetic Levitation to activities 
authorized under the Railway-Highway Grade Crossing Hazard 
Elimination Program.

                     Federal Transit Administration

    The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) was established as 
a component of the Department of Transportation on July 1, 
1968, when most of the functions and programs under the Federal 
Transit Act (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) were 
transferred from the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. Known as the Urban Mass Transportation 
Administration until enactment of the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Federal Transit 
Administration administers federal financial assistance 
programs for planning, developing, and improving comprehensive 
mass transportation systems in both urban and non-urban areas.
    The most recent authorization for the programs under the 
Federal Transit Administration is contained in the Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (P.L. 109-59). During the 
authorization period provided under, the annual Appropriations 
Acts included annual limitations on obligations for the formula 
and bus grants programs, and direct appropriations of budget 
authority from the General Fund of the Treasury for the FTA's 
administrative expenses, research programs, and capital 
investment grants. The transit programs authorized under 
SAFETEA-LU expired on September 30, 2011, with short term 
extensions continuing the activities.
    In the past, the Committee has assumed a continuation of 
the program authorized by SAFETEA-LU, or something very 
similar. The Committee is confident that new surface 
authorization is forthcoming, and had tried to recommend 
funding levels and authorities that are flexible enough to meet 
the new bill. While the Committee is prepared for some changes, 
it appears that the new authorization will adhere more closely 
to the SAFETEA-LU account structure rather than the accounts 
proposed by the Administration and therefore, the Committee has 
chosen to propose appropriations consistent with prior years.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $98,713,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       166,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       100,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +1,287,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -66,000,000


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $100,000,000 for FTA's 
administrative expenses, an increase of $1,287,000 over the 
fiscal year 2012 level, and a decrease of $66,000,000 below the 
budget request. The Committee recommendation provides for the 
base program and does not include the funds requested to retain 
employees brought on pursuant to the stimulus bill's funding, 
nor does it include funds for new unauthorized safety offices.
    Unauthorized Safety Office.--Once again, FTA is proposing 
to establish an office to regulate local rail transit safety. 
While the Committee wholly endorses the efforts and regulations 
of state offices overseeing the safety of transit and rail 
systems within their states, the Committee notes that there are 
major challenges to FTA undertaking this initiative, aside from 
the lack of authorization, that have led the Committee to 
determine that Federal funds are not appropriate. Based on a 
Committee hearing with the DOT Office of Inspector General and 
the Government Accountability Office on March 29, 2012, and two 
reports issued on the topic: DOT OIG's ``Challenges to 
Improving Oversight of Rail Transit Safety and Implementing an 
Enhanced Federal Role'' (MH-2012-048) and GAO's ``FTA's 
Programs are Helping Address Transit Agencies' Safety 
Challenges, but Improved Performance Goals and Measures Could 
Better Focus Efforts'', the Committee believes there is plenty 
FTA can accomplish within existing funds and existing 
authorities to be a leader in advising states and transit 
agencies on safety concerns. Further, both reports mention that 
FTA has issues and deficiencies in its own rail accident 
database, and that major obstacles exist to implementing a 
nation-wide, one-size fits all system. According to the IG and 
GAO, FTA still has not achieved the recommendations included in 
both reports. Until FTA can get its house in order to manage 
the program currently in place, additional funds, FTE and 
responsibilities would simply distract the agency and the 
Committee will not recommend funds for these new activities.
    Operating Plans.--The Committee reiterates its direction 
from previous years which requires the FTA's operating plan to 
include a specific allocation of administrative expenses 
resources. The operating plan should include a delineation of 
full time equivalent employees, for the following offices: 
Office of the Administrator; Office of Administration; Office 
of Chief Counsel; Office of Communications and Congressional 
Affairs; Office of Program Management; Office of Budget and 
Policy; Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation; 
Office of Civil Rights; Office of Planning and Environment; and 
Regional Offices. Further, the operating plan must include any 
new programs or changes to the budget request, including new 
grant programs. In addition, the Committee directs the FTA to 
notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations at 
least thirty days in advance of any change that results in an 
increase or decrease of more than five percent from the initial 
operating plan submitted to the Committees for fiscal year 
2013.
    Budget Justifications and Annual New Starts Report.--The 
Committee also continues the direction to FTA to submit future 
budget justifications in a format consistent with the 
instruction provided in House Report 109-153. FTA is free to 
submit a budget in alternate formats, but must also include the 
information required by the Committee. The Committee has again 
included bill language requiring FTA to submit the annual new 
starts report with the initial submission of the budget request 
due in February, 2013.
    Transit Security.--The Committee continues bill language 
prohibiting FTA from creating a permanent office of transit 
security. The Committee's position remains that the Department 
of Homeland Security is the lead agency on transportation 
security and has overall responsibility among all modes of 
transportation, including rail and transit lines.
    Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGAs).--TEA-21 required 
that the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Banking sixty 
days before executing a full funding grant agreement. In its 
notification to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, the Committee directs the FTA to include the 
following: (1) a copy of the proposed full funding grant 
agreement; (2) the total and annual federal appropriations 
required for that project; (3) yearly and total federal 
appropriations that can be reasonably planned or anticipated 
for future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2012; (4) a 
detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and 
anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization; (5) an 
evaluation of whether the alternatives analysis made by the 
applicant fully assessed all viable alternatives; (6) a 
financial analysis of the project's cost and sponsor's ability 
to finance the project, which shall be conducted by an 
independent examiner and which shall include an assessment of 
the capital cost estimate and the finance plan; (7) the source 
and security of all public- and private-sector financial 
instruments; (8) the project's operating plan, which enumerates 
the project's future revenue and ridership forecasts; and (9) a 
listing of all planned contingencies and possible risks 
associated with the project.
    The Committee continues the direction to FTA to inform the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing thirty 
days before approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any 
full funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to 
changes shall include any budget revisions or program changes 
that materially alter the project as originally stipulated in 
the full funding grant agreement, including any proposed change 
in rail car procurements. In addition, the Committee directs 
FTA to continue reporting monthly to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations on the status of each project with 
a full funding grant agreement or that is within two years of a 
full funding grant agreement. The Committee finds the monthly 
updates informative and a useful oversight tool.

                         FORMULA AND BUS GRANTS

                  (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)


                                                          Limitation on
                                                            contract
                                                          authorization

Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $8,360,565,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     8,178,557,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     8,360,565,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013 .................      +182,008,000


    Formula grants to states and local agencies funded under 
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) fall into the 
following categories: Alaska Railroad, clean fuels grant 
program, over-the-road bus accessibility program, urbanized 
area formula grants, bus and bus facility grants, fixed 
guideway modernization, planning programs (both metropolitan 
and statewide), formula grants for special needs for elderly 
individuals and individuals with disabilities, formula grants 
for other than urbanized areas, job access and reverse commute 
formula program, new freedom program, growing states and high 
density states formula, National Transit Database, alternatives 
analysis, and alternative transportation in parks and public 
lands. SAFETEA-LU provided contract authority for the formula 
and bus program from the mass transit account of the highway 
trust fund. The Appropriations Act sets an annual obligation 
limitation for such authority. This account is the only FTA 
account funded from the highway trust fund.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an obligation limitation of 
$8,360,565,000,000 for the formula programs and activities 
which is $182,008,000 above the budget request and the same as 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. Funds are contingent upon 
enactment of legislation reauthorizing the transit program, and 
available for an array of programs under chapter 53 of title 49 
United States Code. It is the intent of the Committee that the 
specific authorities and provisions will be determined by a 
subsequent reauthorization of the formula transit program, or 
the appropriations conference process. The Committee's 
recommendation also includes $9,400,000,000 in liquidating 
funds.

                RESEARCH AND UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTERS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $44,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       120,957,000
Recommended in the bill                                       44,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -76,957,000


    Grants for transit research are authorized by the Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59) (SAFETEA-LU). Starting in 
fiscal year 2006, activities formerly under the `Transit 
Planning and Research' account are now under the `Formula and 
Bus Grants' account. The National Research program, the Transit 
Cooperative Research Program, and the National Institute are 
funded under this new heading. Funding for the National 
Research programs will be used to cover costs for FTA's 
essential safety and security activities and transit safety 
data collection. Under the national component of the program, 
FTA is a catalyst in the research, development and deployment 
of transportation methods and technologies which address issues 
such as accessibility for the disabled, air quality, traffic 
congestion, and transit services and operational improvements. 
The University Research Centers program will provide continued 
support for research education and technology transfer 
activities aimed at addressing regional and national 
transportation problems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $44,000,000 for FTA's research 
activities, the same as last year's level. FTA proposed a new 
account, ``Research and Technology Deployment'' as a mandatory 
program funded at a level $76,957,000 over the level 
recommended in this bill. The Committee did not receive an 
authorization or funding proposal and has chosen to continue 
with the already established account.
    Consistent with the direction that was provided in previous 
years, the Committee requires FTA to report by May 15, 2013, on 
all FTA-sponsored research projects from fiscal year 2012 and 
2013. For each project, the report should include information 
on the National relevance of the research, relevance to the 
transit industry and community, expected final product and 
delivery date, sources of non-FTA funding committed to the 
project or research institute, and FTA funding history.

                       CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,955,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     2,235,486,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,816,993,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -138,007,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -418,493,000


    Grants for capital investment to rail or other fixed 
guideway transit systems are awarded to public bodies and 
agencies (transit authorities and other state and local public 
bodies and agencies thereof) including states, municipalities, 
other political subdivisions of states; public agencies and 
instrumentalities of one or more states; and certain public 
corporations, boards and commissions under state law. The Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59) (SAFETEA-LU) made two 
significant changes to the major capital investment grant 
program. First, SAFETEA-LU funded the program entirely from the 
General Fund of the Treasury. Second, grants for bus and bus 
facilities and fixed guideway modernization projects, plus 
alternative analysis funds were made eligible under the 
`Formula and Bus Grants' account, which is funded by the mass 
transit account of the highway trust fund. Grants to the Denali 
Commission and the Hawaii and Alaska ferries were dictated by 
SAFETEA-LU. Other projects and investments were specifically 
authorized by SAFETEA-LU and are subject to regulation and 
oversight by FTA. However, like the other surface 
transportation programs, authority for the capital investment 
grants program expired at the end of September 2011 and is 
dependent on authorization extensions until the enactment of a 
multi-year reauthorization package.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,816,993,000 for capital 
investment grants which is $138,007,000 below the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level and $418,493,000 below the budget request. 
Within the amount provided, the Committee includes a total of 
$27,394,000, or approximately one and a half percent, for 
oversight activities of the investments in this account. The 
Committee's recommendation includes funding for the following 
capital investment grants:

                                         Fiscal Year 2013 recommendation
Small Starts:
    CA Fresno, Fresno Area Express......................     $10,000,000
    CA San Francisco, Van Ness Ave BRT..................      10,000,000
    FL Jacksonville, JTA BRT (North)....................      19,074,600
    MI Grand Rapids, Silver Line BRT....................      14,744,000
    TX El Paso, Mesa Corridor BRT.......................      15,237,058
    FL Jacksonville JTA Southeast.......................      19,101,000
    OR West Eugene Emerald Express......................      19,410,136
    AZ Mesa, Central Mesa...............................      20,000,000
Signed Full Funding Grant Agreements:
    NY Long Island Rail Road East Side Access...........     215,000,000
    NY Second Avenue Subway.............................     123,384,621
    TX Dallas Northwest/Southeast.......................      79,030,569
    VA Northern VA Dulles...............................      96,000,000
    WA Seattle University Link LRT......................     110,000,000
    MN Central Corridor LRT.............................      98,443,694
    FL Orlando Central Florida..........................      30,080,650
    CO Denver Eagle.....................................     150,000,000
    TX Houston North Corridor...........................     100,000,000
    TX Houston Southeast Corridor.......................     100,000,000
    UT Salt Lake City Draper............................       5,716,600
    CT Hartford New Britain Busway......................      58,715,922
New Starts--Anticipated in 2013:
    CA San Francisco Third Street.......................     100,000,000
    HI Honolulu.........................................     100,000,000
    CA South Sacramento Corridor Phase 2................      45,660,000
    CA San Jose Silicon Valley..........................     150,000,000
    OR Portland-Milwaukie...............................     100,000,000

    While the Committee's recommendation is slightly lower than 
the budget request, the Committee made every effort to address 
the priorities in this account. First, the Committee funded 
every project with a signed full funding grant agreement (FFGA) 
as a contract has already been made between the Department and 
the various states and localities. Second, the Committee funded 
projects that have a high likelihood of reaching a FFGA during 
2012, and all of the small starts proposed for funding in 
fiscal year 2013. The Committee was able to fund every FFGA at 
the negotiated payout amount, and was able to provide a healthy 
payout for the first year of the anticipated new FFGAs.
    The Committee cannot stress the point enough: capital 
investment grants are discretionary dollars. FTA needs to 
manage the projects and the pipeline so as to not overwhelm the 
discretionary budget of the agency. Relatively few communities 
have a fixed guideway system, and fixed guideway systems are 
not suitable for every community so it is befuddling as to why 
the budget would propose making the activities under this 
account mandatory and the funds drawn from a trust fund funded 
from the gas tax paid for by all, to help the transportation 
infrastructure for all.
    The Committee's recommendation funds the small starts and 
bus rapid transit projects out of the capital investment grants 
account. The sleight of hand provision which directed these 
projects to be funded out of the formula account is simply not 
an option in fiscal year 2013. Neither the House or Senate 
surface reauthorization proposals contain discretionary funds 
to shoulder the burden of financing said projects. Upon inquiry 
by the Committee, FTA has stated that should the fiscal year 
2013 appropriation again move the small starts/bus rapid 
transit projects to an account that, upon enactment of a new 
surface authorization bill, cannot accommodate those projects, 
FTA has no way to come through with the funding.
    The Committee and FTA will need to give a closer look at 
the projects moving through the grant pipeline and be more 
selective on which projects receive Federal dollars. The 
Committee supports mass transit and supports local efforts to 
maximize transit expansion, but project construction will need 
to be financed to a greater degree at the local level. Not 
every project, even those that complete all the requirements 
under Title 49, will be able to receive Federal funds. Fixed 
guideway systems are not an entitlement. The Committee supports 
FTA's ability to provide technical assistance and assistance 
with project oversight to help localities make sound 
investments. However, the Committee directs FTA to only further 
projects to a full funding grant agreement if the project 
requires a less than 60 percent new starts share and rates 
medium high or high in the categories related to finance and 
reducing congestion.

             WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $150,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       135,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       150,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       +15,000,000


    Section 601 of Division B of the Passenger Rail Investment 
and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432) authorized 
$1.5 billion over a ten-year period for preventive maintenance 
and capital grants for the Washington Metropolitan Area 
Transportation Authority (WMATA). The law requires that the 
federal funds be matched dollar for dollar by Virginia, 
Maryland and the District of Columbia in equal proportions. The 
compact required under the law has been established and 
Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia have all 
committed to providing $50 million each in local matching 
funds.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $150,000,000 for 
preventive maintenance and capital grants for WMATA, which is 
$15,000,000 more than the budget request and equal to the 
authorization and fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The Committee 
directs WMATA to continue addressing the safety issues within 
the agency, specifically, those identified by the National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Further, the Committee 
directs WMATA to continue with its capital improvement plans 
and not defer capital and safety investments in order to offset 
operating costs.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

    Section 160. The Committee continues the provision that 
exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on 
obligations.
    Section 161. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows funds appropriated for capital investment grants and bus 
and bus facilities not obligated by September 30, 2015, plus 
other recoveries to be available for other projects under 49 
U.S.C. 5309.
    Section 162. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows for the transfer of prior year appropriations from older 
accounts to be merged into new accounts with similar, current 
activities.
    Section 163. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows prior year funds available for capital investment grants 
to be used in this fiscal year for such projects.
    Section 164. The Committee continues the provision that 
requires unobligated funds or recoveries under section 5309 of 
title 49 that are available for reallocation shall be directed 
to projects eligible to use the funds for the purposes for 
which they were originally intended.
    Section 165. The Committee continues the provision that 
provides flexibility to fund program management oversight 
activities as authorized by section 5316 of title 49, United 
States Code.
    Section 166. The Committee includes a new provision that 
prohibits funds from being used to carry out 49 U.S.C. 
5309(m)(6)(B) and (C).
    Section 167. The Committee continues the provision that 
prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project with a 
new starts share greater than 60%.
    Section 168. The Committee has included a new provision 
regarding charter bus service. In prior year appropriations 
Acts, transit operators in Seattle, Washington have been exempt 
from the regulations regarding charter bus service. The 
standing regulation in part 604 to title 49, Code of Federal 
Regulations was the result of a provision in SAFETEA-LU (P.L. 
109-59) which directed the Secretary to initiate a negotiated 
rulemaking process to bring both transit and charter bus 
operators to the table and come to an agreement about 
nonscheduled bus service. The negotiated rulemaking process was 
long, but fair, and in the end the parties reached a consensus 
on most of the issues and FTA issued the final rule in 2007. 
Other communities, companies, and agencies across the country 
have complied in good faith with the negotiated rule, except 
one. Rather than once again legislatively prohibiting the 
Secretary from enforcing this regulation, the Committee directs 
the Secretary and the Administrator of the Federal Transit 
Administration to sit down with the stakeholders and come to a 
resolution on this issue.
    Section 169. The Committee continues the provision that 
permits the Secretary to consider significant private 
contributions when calculating the non-Federal share of new 
starts projects.
    Section 169A. The Committee includes a new provision that 
rescinds a total of $102,889,367 in unobligated prior year 
funds.
    Section 169B. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding a certain fixed guideway project in Houston, Texas.
    Section 169C. The Committee continues a provision that 
allows fuel and utilities for vehicles to be treated as a 
capital maintenance expense under section 5307 in fiscal year 
2013, up to $100,000,000.

             SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

                    (HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $32,259,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        33,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        33,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +741,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System, located 
between Montreal and Lake Erie, is a binational, 15-lock system 
jointly operated by the U.S. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation (SLSDC) and its Canadian counterpart, the Canadian 
St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation. The SLSDC was 
established by the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of 1954 and is a 
wholly owned government corporation and an operating 
administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). 
The SLSDC is charged with operating and maintaining the U.S. 
portion of the St. Lawrence Seaway. This responsibility 
includes the two U.S. locks in Massena, New York, vessel 
traffic control in portions of the St. Lawrence River and Lake 
Ontario, and trade development functions to enhance the 
utilization of the St. Lawrence Seaway.
    The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorized the 
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund as a source of appropriations for 
SLSDC operations and maintenance. Additionally, the SLSDC 
generates non-federal revenues which can then be used for 
operations and maintenance.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
$33,000,000 to fund the operations, maintenance, and capital 
asset renewal needs of the SLSDC. This funding level is the 
same as the fiscal year 2012 request and $741,000 more than the 
prior year appropriation. The Committee continues the 
requirement that the SLSDC provides semiannual reports 
consistent with the requirements stated in the Explanatory 
Statement of the Department of Transportation Appropriations 
Act of 2009.

                        MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

    The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is responsible for 
programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime industry in support 
of the Nation's security and economic needs, as authorized by 
the Merchant Marine Act of 1936. MARAD's mission is to promote 
the development and maintenance of an adequate, well-balanced 
United States merchant marine, sufficient to carry the Nation's 
domestic waterborne commerce and a substantial portion of its 
waterborne foreign commerce, and capable of serving as a naval 
and military auxiliary in time of war or national emergency. 
MARAD, working with the Department of Defense (DoD), helps 
provide a seamless, time-phased transition from peacetime to 
wartime operations, while balancing the defense and commercial 
elements of the maritime transportation system. MARAD also 
manages the maritime security program, the voluntary intermodal 
sealift agreement program and the ready reserve force, which 
assures DoD access to commercial and strategic sealift and 
associated intermodal capability. Further, MARAD's education 
and training programs through the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy 
and six state maritime academies help create skilled U.S. 
merchant marine officers.

                       MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $174,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       184,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       184,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +10,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The purpose of the Maritime Security Program (MSP) is to 
maintain and preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet to serve the 
national security needs of the United States. The MSP provides 
direct payments to U.S. flagship operators engaged in U.S.-
foreign trade. Participating operators are required to keep the 
vessels in active commercial service and are required to 
provide intermodal sealift support to the Department of Defense 
in times of war or national emergency.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $184,000,000 
for this account, an increase of $10,000,000 over the level 
enacted in fiscal year 2012. This recommendation provides 
funding directly to MARAD and assumes that MARAD will continue 
to administer the program with support and consultation of the 
Department of Defense. Funds are available until expended.

                        OPERATIONS AND TRAINING




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $156,258,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       146,298,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       145,753,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -10,505,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................          -545,000


    The operations and training account provides funding for 
headquarters and field offices to administer and direct MARAD 
operations and programs. The account also provides funding for 
the operation of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and financial 
assistance to the six state maritime academies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $145,753,000 for MARAD operations 
and training expenses, $10,505,000 less than the fiscal year 
2012 funding level and $545,000 below the fiscal year 2013 
budget request.
    MARAD Operations.--Of the funds provided, $47,000,000 is 
for headquarters and regional office operations, and maritime 
program expenses. This proposal reflects a reduction of 
$1,199,000 from the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and 
$2,000,000 below the request. The Committee notes that MARAD 
reports 33 vacancies, as of January 2012, in the headquarters 
and regional offices. The fiscal year 2012 statement of the 
managers directed MARAD to report on the number of vacancies 
concurrent with the fiscal year 2013 budget submission. The 
report was ultimately transmitted with a cover letter dated May 
10, 2012. The Committee directs MARAD to apply the reduction 
from the budget request to salaries and expenses. Further, the 
Committee continues the reporting requirement that MARAD submit 
information on the number of vacancies at MARAD headquarters 
and regional offices, and the duties associated with each 
vacancy concurrent with the fiscal year 2014 budget submission.
    United States Merchant Marine Academy.--The U.S. Merchant 
Marine Academy (the Academy or USMMA) provides educational 
programs for men and women to become shipboard officers and 
leaders in the maritime industry. The Committee continues to 
include language requiring all funding for the Academy go 
directly to the Secretary, and that 50 percent of the funding 
will not be available until MARAD submits a plan detailing how 
the funding will be spent. The Committee's funding 
recommendation includes a total of $77,253,000 in fiscal year 
2013 for the USMMA, of which up to $63,253,000 is for Academy 
operations and not less than $14,000,000 is for capital 
improvements. While the Committee is providing the budget 
request of $34,146,000 for the salaries and benefits to USMMA 
employees, the Committee can't help but note the USMMA is 
reporting, as of January 2012, a 16 percent vacancy rate with 
52 unfilled positions. Should the USMMA find they still have a 
large number of vacancies in June 2013, the Committee urges 
MARAD and the USMMA explore opportunities to shift the unused 
salaries and expenses funds to capital improvements through the 
regular reprogramming procedures.
    Gender and ethnic diversity at the U.S. Merchant Marine 
Academy [USMMA].--The Committee is concerned about the lack of 
diversity at the USMMA. The levels of female and ethnic 
minority students at the USMMA are very low, below those at 
other service academies and state marine academies. The 
Committee understands that the USMMA is in the process of 
hiring a permanent staff person to address diversity issues but 
is still concerned about the lack of a plan beyond that to 
address diversity. The Committee directs the USMMA to develop a 
coordinated comprehensive strategy to recruit and retain female 
and ethnic minority students. The USMMA is directed to provide 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with a report 
summarizing its efforts to address this issue by March 21, 
2013.
    State Maritime Academies.--The Committee recommends 
$17,500,000 for the state maritime academies. Of the funds 
provided, $3,600,000 is for direct payments, $2,400,000 is for 
student payments, and $11,500,000 is for schoolship maintenance 
and repair.

                             SHIP DISPOSAL




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $5,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        10,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         4,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +1,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -6,000,000


    MARAD serves as the federal government's disposal agent for 
government-owned merchant vessels weighing 1,500 gross tons or 
more. The ship disposal program provides resources to dispose 
of obsolete merchant-type vessels in the National Defense 
Reserve Fleet (NDRF). The Maritime Administration was required 
by Public Law 106-398 to dispose of its obsolete inventory by 
the end of 2006. These vessels pose a significant environmental 
threat due to the presence of hazardous substances such as 
asbestos and solid and liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). 
As reported in the fiscal year 2013 budget documents, MARAD has 
custody of approximately 49 obsolete vessels that are not yet 
under contract for disposal, a reduction of 15 ships from the 
64 reported in the 2012 budget. The obsolete ships are located 
at the James River Reserve Fleet site in Virginia (14 ships--a 
reduction of 2 from the prior year), the Suisun Bay Reserve 
Fleet (SBRF) site in California (27 ships--a reduction of 12 
from the prior year), and the Beaumont Reserve Fleet site in 
Texas (8 ships--one less than the prior year). MARAD 
anticipates removing another 9 ships from the SBRF during 
fiscal year 2012.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for this account, 
$6,000,000 below the budget request and $1,500,000 below the 
fiscal year 2012 funding level. Funds are available until 
expended.
    Within the funds provided, the Committee recommends 
$3,000,000 for maintenance and safeguarding of the Nuclear Ship 
Savannah. The remaining funds are for ship disposal activities. 
The Committee notes MARAD has successfully put a number of 
ships out for sale rather than contracting for disposal, thus 
saving the taxpayer millions. The fiscal year 2013 proposed 
funding level reflects the Committee's confidence that MARAD 
can continue moving a significant number of ships out of the 
NDRF by sales rather than by contract.

              MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI) PROGRAM

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $3,740,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         3,750,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         3,750,000
Bill compared with:...................................
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................           +10,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, as provided for by 
Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, provides for 
guaranteed loans for purchasers of ships from the U.S. 
shipbuilding industry and for modernization of U.S. shipyards. 
Funds for administrative expenses for the Title XI program are 
appropriated to this account, and then paid to operations and 
training to be obligated and expended.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $3,750,000 
for the Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program, $10,000 
more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. MARAD 
currently manages a loan portfolio of approximately 
$2,300,000,000. Since 2009, the agency has reported 
consistently that the number of loans not in default has fallen 
short of the stated goal of 92%. Until the portfolio performs 
up to the agency's goal of 92% of loans not in default, the 
Committee cannot endorse an expansion of this loan program

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

    Section 170. The Committee continues a provision that 
allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and 
services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy 
involving government property under the control of MARAD and 
rental payments shall be paid into the Treasury as 
miscellaneous receipts.
    Section 171. The Committee continues a provision regarding 
MARAD ship disposal.

         Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

    The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
(PHMSA) administers nationwide safety programs designed to 
protect the public and the environment from risks inherent in 
the commercial transportation of hazardous materials by 
pipeline, air, rail, vessel, and highway. Many of these 
materials are essential to the national economy. The agency's 
highest priority is safety, and it uses safety management 
principles and security assessments to promote the safe 
transport of hazardous materials and the security of the 
nation's pipelines.

                          OPERATIONAL EXPENSES

                         (PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $21,360,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        21,047,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        23,030,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +1,670,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        +1,983,000


    This appropriation finances the operational support costs 
for PHMSA, including agency-wide functions of administration, 
management, policy development, legal counsel, budget, 
financial management, civil rights, human resources, 
acquisition services, information technology, and governmental 
and public affairs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $23,030,000 for PHMSA operational 
expenses, of which $639,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline 
Safety Fund. This is $1,670,000 above fiscal year 2012, and 
$1,983,000 above the budget request. The Committee includes 
bill language directing PHMSA to transfer $1,500,000 to the 
pipeline safety program to fund the pipeline information grants 
to communities.
    The Committee recommends increased funding to cover base 
adjustments in the pipeline safety program and to continue 
support for PHMSA's seven-year information technology (IT) 
modernization effort, which began in fiscal year 2010. The 
Committee includes $3,815,000 of total operational expenses to 
further the IT modernization, as proposed in the budget 
request. The Committee directs PHMSA to include full lifecycle 
costs of this IT modernization initiative in its future budget 
justifications.

                       HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $42,338,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        50,673,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        42,546,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +208,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -8,127,000


    The hazardous materials safety program advances the safe 
and secure transport of hazardous materials (hazmat) in 
commerce by air, truck, railroad and vessel. PHMSA evaluates 
hazmat safety risks, develops and enforces regulations for 
transporting hazmat, educates shippers and carriers, 
investigates hazmat incidents and failures, conducts research, 
and provides grants to improve emergency response to 
transportation incidents involving hazmat.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $42,546,000 to continue the 
agency's hazardous materials safety program, which is $208,000 
above fiscal year 2012 and $8,127,000 below the budget request. 
The Committee recommends $1,725,000 of the total to remain 
available for three years for long-term research and 
development contracts.
    President's Fee Proposal.--The Committee does not include 
the President's request for a new fee on the processing and 
enforcing of special permits and approvals, which would have 
raised $12,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. An expensive new fee 
should not be enacted through an appropriations Act, especially 
when the new fee would be imposed on top of an existing fee 
structure, but rather through authorizing legislation 
originating in the committees of jurisdiction.
    Special Permits and Approvals.--The Administration's 
request to collect new fees for the processing and enforcing of 
special permits and approvals (SP&A) is intended to relieve the 
increased costs associated with a dramatic increase in program 
workload over the past few years. The workload increased 
because PHMSA made necessary program improvements in response 
to reviews and audits by DOT's Office of the Inspector General 
and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
    The Committee recognizes the value of these improvements, 
the increased demand on the SP&A program, and the value of the 
SP&A program in ensuring safety while accommodating industry 
innovations in safely transporting hazardous materials. 
However, the Committee notes PHMSA can and should deal with the 
increased workload in ways that do not require a permanent 
expansion of program size and resources. The SP&A process 
should be streamlined using ongoing IT system modernizations, 
and it should be reevaluated to ensure it is operating 
efficiently and as only exceptions to the HMR, which is the 
primary method of regulating the transport of hazardous 
materials.
    The Committee directs PHMSA to evaluate how it can better 
utilize the Hazardous Materials Regulations and to formulate 
recommendations on how and when HMR improvements can occur, the 
cost-savings of such improvements, and the anticipated 
lessening of the SP&A workload as a result of such 
improvements. PHMSA will report such findings to the Committees 
on Appropriations within 180 days of enactment.

                            PIPELINE SAFETY

                         (PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

                    (OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

                  (PIPELINE SAFETY DESIGN REVIEW FUND)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  (Oil spill
                                                 (Pipeline     liability trust   (Design review       Total
                                                safety fund)        fund)            fund)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.............      $90,679,000      $18,573,000            - - -     $109,252,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013............      150,500,000       21,510,000       $4,000,000      176,010,000
Recommended in the bill.....................       90,679,000       18,573,000        2,000,000      111,252,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.........                0                0        2,000,000        2,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013........      -59,821,000       -2,937,000       -2,000,000      -64,758,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental 
protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage 
prevention, education and training, development and enforcement 
of regulations and policies, research and development, grants 
for states pipeline safety programs, and emergency planning and 
response to accidents. The pipeline safety program is 
responsible for a national regulatory program to protect the 
public against the risks to life and property in the 
transportation of natural gas, petroleum and other hazardous 
materials by pipeline. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 expanded 
the role of the pipeline safety program in environmental 
protection and created new emphasis on spill prevention and 
containment of oil and hazardous substances from pipelines.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $111,252,000 to continue pipeline 
safety operations, research and development, and state grants-
in-aid, which is $2,000,000 above fiscal year 2012 and 
$60,758,000 below the budget request. Of the total, $18,573,000 
is from the oil spill liability trust fund, $90,679,000 is from 
the pipeline safety fund, and $2,000,000 is from the newly 
authorized pipeline safety design review fund. These amounts 
reflect the maximum authorized funding levels.
    The Committee recommends $1,058,000 of the funds provided 
to be used for the one-call State grant program, which is the 
same as fiscal year 2012. The Committee recommends $48,191,000 
of the funds provided to remain available until September 30, 
2015, for multi-year grants and research and development 
contracts, which is the same amount as fiscal year 2012.
    New Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund.--The Committee 
allows $2,000,000 of Pipeline Safety budgetary resources to be 
derived from the newly authorized Pipeline Safety Design Review 
Fund, which is codified at 49 U.S.C. 60117(n). The fund works 
as follows: if a new major pipeline project exceeds the 
authorized $2.5 million threshold and begins the planning or 
construction phases in fiscal year 2013, then PHMSA is 
authorized to recoup costs associated with overseeing and 
inspecting it by imposing a design review fee upon the project 
sponsor(s). If no such projects are initiated in fiscal year 
2013, then these fees will not be collected and these funds 
will not be expended. The design review fee more accurately 
aligns the costs of overseeing major projects with those who 
initiate them.
    Pipeline Safety Inspectors.--The Administration requests a 
staggering and unreasonable 120 increase in its full-time 
equivalent (FTE) for pipeline inspection and enforcement 
personnel. The new pipeline authorization, however, which 
President Obama signed into law on January 3, 2012, and which 
passed the House and Senate with unanimous consensus in 2011, 
provided only 10 new FTE if PHMSA first demonstrates it can 
fill the significant, long-standing vacancies in its pipeline 
inspection and enforcement personnel by the end of fiscal year 
2013.
    As of May 14, 2012, PHMSA still had vacancies in 10 of its 
135 total FTE for pipeline inspection and enforcement. 
Therefore, the Committee provides no additional resources at 
this time. The Committee will reconsider a modest request for 
additional Pipeline Safety personnel in the Administration's 
fiscal year 2014 budget, but only if PHMSA satisfies the pre-
conditions enacted into law--by filling existing vacancies 
before asking for more and by determining that requested 
increases are necessary.
    The Committee is aware of several challenges PHMSA faces in 
hiring pipeline safety inspectors. One such challenge is the 
delay caused by the federal hiring process, which is compounded 
by other market dynamics. The Committee encourages the Office 
of Personnel Management to give strong consideration to PHMSA's 
request for direct-hire authority for its pipeline safety 
inspection and enforcement personnel. Such authority may enable 
PHMSA to increase its personnel to authorized levels and 
thereby demonstrate the need for additional resources.
    Pipeline Emergencies Training Program.--The Committee 
reiterates its concern that the U.S. pipeline infrastructure is 
aging and poses significant safety and environmental risks. The 
individuals nationwide who are tasked with responding to 
pipeline disasters must be well-trained, and PHMSA must take 
seriously its role in providing such training through the 
Pipeline Emergencies Training Program.
    The Committee is advised there may be deficiencies in 
pipeline emergency training in various areas throughout the 
country. Therefore, the Committee directs PHMSA to report in-
person to the Committees on Appropriations, within 180 days of 
enactment, on whether it has a robust and active training 
curriculum, how training is delivered, and what resources are 
used to prepare emergency responders.
    Self-contained Breathing Apparatus.--The Committee is 
advised that the approval processes for Self Contained 
Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) respirator cylinders by both PHMSA 
and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 
(NIOSH) may be duplicative and potentially restrictive of 
competitive options. The Committee requests PHMSA to conduct a 
study, within a year of enactment, on whether these approval 
processes can be made more efficient.

                     EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

                     (EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)


                                           (Emergency       (Emergency
                                          preparedness     preparedness
                                             fund)        grant program)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......         $188,000    ($28,318,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......          188,000     (28,318,000)
Recommended in the bill...............          188,000     (28,318,000)
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...            - - -            - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..            - - -            - - -


    The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act 
of 1990 (Public Law 101-615) requires PHMSA to: (1) develop and 
implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grant program; 
(2) monitor public sector emergency response training and 
planning and provide technical assistance to states, political 
subdivisions and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update 
periodically a mandatory training curriculum for emergency 
responders.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $28,318,000 for the emergency 
preparedness grants program, which is the same as fiscal year 
2012 and the budget request.
    HMEP Grants.--The Committee supports PHMSA's efforts to 
strengthen oversight of the Hazardous Materials Emergency 
Preparedness Grants Program, in response to recent audit 
findings by the DOT Office of Inspector General.

           Research and Innovative Technology Administration


                        RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $15,981,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        13,670,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        13,500,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -2,487,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................          -170,000


    The Research and Innovative Technology Administration 
(RITA) was established as an administration within the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) effective November 30, 2004, 
pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs 
Improvement Act, Public Law 108-426. The mission of RITA is to 
provide strategic clarity to DOT's multi-modal and intermodal 
research efforts, while coordinating the multifaceted research 
agenda of the Department. RITA coordinates, facilitates, and 
reviews the following research and development programs and 
activities: advancement and research and development of 
innovative technologies, including intelligent transportation 
systems; education and training in transportation and 
transportation-related fields, including the University 
Transportation Centers and the Transportation Safety Institute; 
and activities of the Volpe National Transportation Center. 
Further, RITA includes the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 
which is funded from the Federal Highway Administration's 
federal-aid highway account.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $13,500,000 for 
fiscal year 2013, which is $2,487,000 below the fiscal year 
2012 appropriation provided for RITA and $170,000 below the 
fiscal year 2013 budget request.
    While the Committee endorses the Administration's proposal 
to bring RITA's functions under the Office of the Secretary, 
the authorizing committees of jurisdiction have not had a 
chance to examine the issue, or consider legislation 
authorizing the change. The Committee encourages the Secretary 
to find additional salaries and expenses savings in 
anticipation of the proposed realignment and directs the 
$170,000 reduction to come from this activity.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The Inspector General's office was established in 1978 to 
provide an objective and independent organization that would be 
more effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, waste, 
and abuse in departmental programs and operations; and (2) 
providing a means of keeping the Secretary of Transportation 
and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems and 
deficiencies in the administration of such programs and 
operations. According to the authorizing legislation, the 
Inspector General (IG) is to report dually to the Secretary of 
Transportation and to the Congress.




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $79,624,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        84,499,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        84,499,000
Bill compared with:
  Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.....................         4,875,000
  Budget request, fiscal year 2013....................             - - -


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $84,499,000 for 
fiscal year 2013, which is $4,875,000 above the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level and equal to the budget request. The 
Committee continues to highly value the work of the IG in 
oversight of departmental programs and activities. The funding 
provided for fiscal year 2013 supports 27 additional FTE 
included in the budget request.
    The Committee recognizes that the National Transportation 
Safety Board Reauthorization Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-443) 
authorized the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to audit, 
at least annually, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 
programs and expenditures, including information security. It 
also provided that the NTSB and OIG, in the absence of a direct 
appropriation, enter into a reimbursable agreement for any 
NTSB-related audits or reviews performed by the OIG. The OIG 
continues to perform the annual audit of NTSB's financial 
statements under the Chief Financial Officers Act, maintain the 
hotline, and conduct follow-up investigations on a cost 
reimbursement basis. The OIG has requested $200,000 from NTSB 
in its congressional justification for reimbursement of costs 
estimated to carry out this function.
    Unfair Business Practices.--The bill maintains language 
first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the OIG to 
investigate allegations of fraud and unfair or deceptive 
practices and unfair methods of competition by air carriers and 
ticket agents.
    Audit Reports.--The Committee requests the IG to continue 
forwarding copies of all audit reports to the Committee 
immediately after they are issued, and to continue to make the 
Committee aware immediately of any review that recommends 
cancellation or modifications to any major acquisition project 
or grant, or which recommends significant budgetary savings. 
The OIG is also directed to withhold from public distribution 
for a period of 15 days any final audit or investigative report 
which was requested by the House or Senate Committees on 
Appropriations.
    Oversight of the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
Authority.--The Committee has continuing concerns about the 
lack of oversight of the Metropolitan Washington Airport 
Authority (MWAA). A recent investigation by the DOT Inspector 
General (IG) found a number of cases of questionable sole 
source contracting practices, a lack of ethical disclosure 
requirements for board members, and an overall lack of 
accountability and transparency. In order to improve the 
oversight of MWAA, the Committee recommendation includes a new 
provision that provides the DOT IG with oversight 
responsibilities for MWAA, and requires that MWAA reimburse the 
DOT IG for this new responsibility.
    Houston METRO Finances.--The Committee directs the IG to 
conduct an audit into the financial solvency of Metropolitan 
Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (Houston METRO). As 
part of this audit, the IG should conduct a stress test to 
determine if Houston METRO has adequate finances to pay for the 
construction of new rail lines as well as the operation and 
maintenance of existing rail lines and the operation and 
maintenance of buses.

                      Surface Transportation Board

    The Surface Transportation Board (STB) was created in the 
Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 and is 
the successor agency to the Interstate Commerce Commission. The 
STB is an economic regulatory and adjudicatory body charged by 
Congress with resolving railroad rate and service disputes and 
reviewing proposed railroad mergers. The STB is decisionally 
independent, although it is administratively affiliated with 
the Department of Transportation. The Passenger Rail Investment 
and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110-432, (PRIIA), included 
new responsibilities for the STB.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $29,310,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        31,250,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        31,250,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +1,940,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,250,000 
for fiscal year 2012, which is $1,940,000 above the fiscal year 
2011 enacted level and equal to the fiscal year 2012 budget 
request. The STB is estimated to collect $1,250,000 in fees 
which will offset the appropriation for a total program cost of 
$30,000,000.

            GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    Section 180. The Committee continues the provision allowing 
the Department of Transportation (DOT) to use funds for 
aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or 
allowances, as authorized by law.
    Section 181. The Committee continues the provision limiting 
appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the 
rate for an Executive Level IV.
    Section 182. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds in this act for salaries and expenses of more 
than 110 political and Presidential appointees in the DOT and 
prohibits political and Presidential personnel from being 
assigned on temporary detail outside the DOT.
    Section 183. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting recipients of funds made available in this Act from 
releasing personal information, including Social Security 
number, medical or disability information, and photographs from 
a driver's license or motor vehicle record, without express 
consent of the person to whom such information pertains; and 
prohibits the withholding of funds provided in this Act for any 
grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision.
    Section 184. The Committee continues the provision allowing 
funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal 
Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration 
from states, counties, municipalities, other public 
authorities, and private sources to be used for expenses 
incurred for training may be credited to each agency's 
respective accounts.
    Section 185. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds from being used to make a grant unless the 
Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business 
days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or 
full funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is 
announced by the Department or its modal administrations, and 
directs the Secretary to give concurrent notification for any 
``quick release'' of funds from the Federal Highway 
Administration's emergency relief program.
    Section 186. The Committee continues a provision allowing 
funds received from rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be 
credited to appropriations of the DOT.
    Section 187. The Committee continues a provision allowing 
amounts from improper payments to a third party contractor that 
are lawfully recovered by the DOT to be available to cover 
expenses incurred in the recovery of such payments.
    Section 188. The Committee mandates that reprogramming 
actions are to be approved or denied solely by the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 189. The Committee caps the amount of fees the 
Surface Transportation Board can charge and collect for late 
complaints filed at the amount authorized for court civil suit 
filing fees.
    Section 190. The Committee includes a provision allowing 
funds to the modal administrations to be obligated to the 
Office of the Secretary for the costs related to assessments or 
reimbursable agreements only when such amounts are for the 
costs of goods and services that are purchased to provide a 
direct benefit to the applicable modal administration or 
administrations.

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                     Management and Administration




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,331,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     1,349,400,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,326,614,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -4,886,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -22,786,000


    Management and Administration provides operating support to 
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 
including salaries and expenses (S&E) for all HUD employees. 
The Committee supports the Department's efforts to transform 
the way HUD does business and recommends the Department first 
and foremost focus its efforts on its human capital 
investments. While the Committee appreciates the expanded 
Congressional Budget Justifications the Department submitted, 
the Committee is appalled with the quality of the information 
the Department and Administration provides throughout the year 
to explain and justify their budget requests.
    HUD does not have adequate knowledge of the number of 
people it takes to implement a program and is not transparent 
about the budgeting of S&E resources. Further, the information 
HUD provides is often wrong, contains mathematical errors and 
calls into question HUD's entire Congressional Budget 
Justification and the Department's competence in managing its 
resources. The Congressional Budget Justification is delivered 
to the Committee on behalf of the President's effort to ensure 
housing for the nation's most vulnerable and to revitalize 
distressed communities. If the Department and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) cannot provide to the Committee 
basic data that is accurate, it calls into question the 
Administration's competence in administering the Nation's 
housing and economic development policies.
    Therefore, the Committee directs HUD and OMB to jointly 
provide quarterly in-person briefings to the House and Senate 
Committee on Appropriations on their efforts to improve data 
quality and management of the Department's efforts and S&E 
resources. These briefings should provide updates on the 
Administration's efforts to improve the Department's budget 
process, hiring process, performance appraisal process, 
succession planning process and the budgeting of S&E resources. 
In addition, these briefings should include reports on the 
number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) projected for each office 
in the Department compared to last year's actual level and the 
authorized level for the current fiscal year.
    Full Time Equivalent Levels.--HUD should be embarrassed by 
the lack of FTE data it provides and has available internally. 
It is completely unacceptable for a Cabinet level-agency to not 
have systems in place to track the most fundamental FTE data 
including FTE levels, actual onboard position levels, salary 
levels, benefits levels and employee tenure. This lack of 
essential information led to multiple Anti-Deficiency Act 
violations in fiscal year 2011, in which HUD hired more people 
than it had resources to pay. To date, HUD has not even tried 
to address these problems and thus the Committee has no faith 
in HUD's ability to appropriately staff its operations. The 
Committee now will direct FTE levels for each office. The 
Committee directs the Department to operate fully within these 
FTE levels. The Department shall not hire a shadow workforce of 
contractors to perform functions normally done by government 
employees in order to go above these totals.
    Congressional Budget Justification.--The Committee 
continues bill language requiring HUD to submit detailed 
staffing justifications for each office within the Department.
    Reprogramming.--As in previous years, the Committee 
reiterates that the Department must limit the reprogramming of 
funds between the program, projects, and activities within each 
account without prior approval of the Committees on 
Appropriations. Unless otherwise identified in the bill or 
report, the most detailed allocation of funds presented in the 
budget justifications is approved, and any deviation from such 
approved allocation subject to the normal reprogramming 
requirements.
    Reorganizations.--The Committee expects notice one month 
prior notice to any office, program or activity reorganization. 
Additionally, the Committee requires notice on a monthly basis 
of all ongoing litigation, including any negotiations or 
discussions, planned or ongoing, regarding a consent decree 
between the Department and any other entity, including the 
estimated costs of such decrees.
    New initiatives.--The Committee reiterates that no changes 
may be made to any program, project, or activity if it is 
construed to have policy implications, without prior approval 
of the Committees on Appropriations.
    Relationship between HUD and the Committee on 
Appropriations.--The primary relationship between the Committee 
and HUD exists via the Departmental budget office. This 
relationship, an absolute necessity in structuring the annual 
appropriations Act, is based on the sharing of a wide range of 
budgetary and cost information. The Committee retains the right 
to call upon all offices and agencies within the Department, 
but the primary connection between the two entities exists 
through the budget office. To that end, the Committee expects 
that all offices within HUD will work with the budget office to 
provide timely and accurate information for submission to the 
Committee. The Department is reminded that directives and 
reports mandated in the House or Senate Appropriations reports 
are not optional, unless revised or eliminated by the Statement 
of Managers accompanying the Act. Finally, the Committee 
cautions HUD that Section 405 of the Appropriations Act governs 
the creation of new offices and policies.

               Administration, Operations, and Management





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $537,789,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       532,546,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       518,068,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -19,721,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -14,478,000


    The Administration, Operations, and Management account 
funds the salaries and expenses of the Immediate Office of the 
Secretary, the Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary and the 
Chief Operating Officer, the Office of Hearings and Appeals, 
the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, the 
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, the 
Office of General Counsel, the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer, the Office of Public Affairs, the Office of the Chief 
Procurement Officer, the Office of Departmental Equal 
Employment Opportunity, the Office of Field Policy and 
Management, the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities, 
the Office of Strategic Planning and Management, the Office of 
the Chief Human Capital Officer, the Office of the Chief 
Information Officer, and the Center for Faith-Based and 
Community Initiatives.
    The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer provides 
general support services to all offices and divisions 
throughout HUD. These services include: management analysis, 
human resource management, employee training, performance 
analysis, general building and office services, and special 
activities directly assigned by the Secretary of HUD.
    The Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM) serves as 
the principal advisor providing oversight and communicating 
Secretarial priorities and policies to field office staff and 
HUD clients. The Regional and Field Office Directors act as the 
operational managers in each of the field offices and manage 
and coordinate cross-program delivery in the field.
    The Office of the Chief Procurement Officer's (OCPO) 
mission is to provide high-quality acquisition support services 
to all HUD program offices by purchasing necessary operational 
and mission-related goods and services; provide advice, 
guidance and technical assistance to all departmental offices 
on matters concerning procurement; assist program offices in 
defining and specifying their procurement needs; develop and 
maintain all procurement guidance including regulations, 
policies, and procedures; and assist in the development of 
sound acquisition strategies.
    The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) provides 
leadership in instituting financial integrity, fiscal 
responsibility and accountability. The CFO is responsible for 
all aspects of financial management, accounting and budgetary 
matters; ensuring the Department establishes and meets 
financial management goals and objectives; ensuring the 
Department is in compliance with financial management 
legislation and directives; analyzing budgetary implications of 
policy and legislative proposals; and providing technical 
oversight with respect to all budget activities throughout the 
Department.
    Appropriations Attorneys.--During consideration of the 
fiscal year 2003 appropriations legislation, it became apparent 
to the Committee that both the Committee and the Department 
would be better served if the attorneys responsible for 
appropriations matters were housed in the Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer (OCFO), and the fiscal year 2003 Act provided 
funds and FTE to the OCFO to accommodate four attorneys 
transferred from the Office of General Counsel (OGC). Since 
that time, the Committee has routinely received prompt, 
accurate, and reliable information from the OCFO on various 
appropriations law matters. For fiscal year 2013, the Committee 
continues to fund appropriations attorneys in the OCFO and 
directs HUD to maintain this responsibility within the OCFO.
    The General Counsel, as the chief legal officer and legal 
voice of the Department, is the legal adviser to the Secretary 
and other principal staff of the Department. It is the 
responsibility of the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) to 
provide legal opinions, advice and services with respect to all 
programs and activities, and to provide counsel and assistance 
in the development of the Department's programs and policies.
    The mission of the Office of Departmental Equal Employment 
Opportunity (ODEEO) is to ensure the enforcement of Federal 
laws relating to the elimination of all forms of discrimination 
in the Department's employment practices. The mission is 
carried out through the functions of three divisions: the 
Affirmative Employment division, the Alternative Dispute 
Resolution division, and the Equal Employment Opportunity 
division.
    The Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives 
conducts outreach, recommends changes to HUD policies and 
programs that present barriers to grassroots organizations, and 
initiates special projects, such as grant writing training.
    The Office of Strategic Planning and Management drives 
organizational, programmatic, and operational change across the 
Department to maximize efficiency and performance. The office 
will facilitate HUD's strategic planning process by identifying 
the Department's strategic priorities and transformational 
change initiatives, create and manage work plans for targeted 
transformation projects, and develop key program performance 
measures and targets for monitoring.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $518,068,000 for this account, 
which is $19,721,000 below above the level enacted in fiscal 
year 2012 and $14,478,000 below the budget request. Further, 
the committee directs that the offices within this account 
shall have no more than 2,197 Full Time Equivalents. The funds 
and allowable FTE shall be distributed as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Office                      Funding level  FTE level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary............      $3,572,000         18
Office of the Deputy Secretary and Chief            1,206,000          6
 Operating Officer...........................
Office of Hearings and Appeals...............       1,711,000         10
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business            705,000          5
 Utilization.................................
Office of the Chief Financial Officer........      47,627,000        194
Office of the General Counsel................      95,102,000        629
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental       2,400,000         17
 Relations...................................
Office of Public Affairs.....................       3,502,000         25
Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer....     247,535,000        475
Office of Field Policy and Management........      47,500,000        342
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer......      16,563,000        121
Office of the Departmental Equal Employment         3,127,000         20
 Opportunity.................................
Center for Faith-Based and Community                1,404,000          8
 Initiatives.................................
Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities       2,360,000         17
Office of Strategic Planning and Management..       4,884,000         30
Office of the Chief Information Officer......      38,870,000        280
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Secretary must provide quarterly status 
updates to the Committees regarding pending congressional 
reports. The bill also provides that no more than $25,000 
provided under the immediate Office of the Secretary shall be 
available for the official reception and representation 
expenses as the Secretary may determine. In addition, the bill 
includes a provision requiring the Department to notify the 
Committees on Appropriations one month in advance of any 
international travel.

                  Personnel Compensation and Benefits


                       PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $200,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       211,634,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       206,500,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +6,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -5,134,000


    The Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) oversees the 
administration of HUD's Public Housing, Housing Choice Voucher, 
and Native American Programs. PIH is responsible for 
administering and managing programs authorized and funded by 
Congress under the basic provisions of the U.S. Housing Act of 
1937.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $206,500,000 for this account, 
which is $6,500,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 
2012, and $5,134,000 below the fiscal year 2013 budget request. 
The Committee directs that PIH shall have no more than 1,527 
FTE.

                   COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $100,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       103,882,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       103,500,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +3,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................          -382,000


    The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) 
assists in developing viable communities by promoting 
integrated approaches that provide decent housing, a suitable 
living environment, and expanded economic opportunities for low 
and moderate-income persons. The primary means toward this end 
is the development of partnerships among all levels of 
government and the private sector, including for-profit and 
nonprofit organizations. This Office is responsible for the 
effective administration of Community Development Block Grants 
(CDBG), Home Investment Partnership (HOME), Brownfields 
Economic Development Initiative (BEDI), Self-Help Homeownership 
Opportunity Program (SHOP), Homeless Assistance Grants and 
other HUD community development programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $103,500,000 for this account, 
which is $3,500,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 
2012, and $332,000 below the budget request. The Committee 
directs that CPD shall have no more than 810 FTE.
    Office of Sustainable Communities.--The Committee provides 
$2,360,000 for the Office of Sustainable Communities for the 
following limited purposes: to continue overseeing and 
providing technical assistance to previous grantees that 
received fiscal year 2010 and 2011 funds; to continue 
coordinating with other federal agencies to remove unnecessary 
federal barriers to local development projects; and to continue 
identifying ``sustainability'' best practices within the 
Department's existing programs.
    The Committee, however, does not include funding for 
additional grants and, accordingly, does not include funding 
for another grant competition or additional oversight. Instead, 
the Committee directs the Department to undertake the following 
activities, which are achievable with the resources provided 
and within the appropriate scope of this office, as defined in 
the previous paragraph:
    1. Evaluate the results of the first two pilot programs, 
including identifying best practices and lessons learned. Such 
evaluation shall include, to the greatest possible extent, 
cost-benefit analysis for each grantee's activities, including 
cost-savings and efficiencies realized by particular 
activities.
    2. Determine how best to export such best practices and 
lessons learned to all communities interested in undertaking 
such efforts using their own funds (including federal funds 
over which communities have control). These methods shall not 
involve the provision of additional federal grant funds, nor 
any unauthorized mandates or funding conditions imposed by the 
Department. Rather, they shall reflect cost-free or minimal-
cost methods of sharing with all communities the knowledge 
gained by the Department from the two previous taxpayer-funded 
pilots. Such methods might include a website, educational 
materials, toolkits, etc.
    3. Develop a toolkit to enable localities to pool resources 
and undertake holistic community development and planning 
activities, if they so choose. Such a toolkit might include, 
for example, lessons learned from prior grantees, case studies, 
model plans, sample legal documents such as ``memoranda of 
understanding'' to enable the joint pooling of resources and 
joint planning efforts, sample cost estimates, checklists of 
various parties to be consulted and the various cost-saving 
activities and development efficiencies to be considered, etc.
    The Committee includes additional views on the 
Administration's proposal for Sustainable Communities within 
the Community Development Fund report section.

                                HOUSING




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $391,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       398,832,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       396,500,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +5,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -2,332,000


    The Office of Housing implements programmatic, regulatory, 
financial, and operational responsibilities under the 
leadership of six deputy assistant secretaries and the field 
staff for activities related to Federal Housing Administration 
(FHA) multifamily and single family homeownership programs, and 
assisted rental housing programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $396,500,000 for this account, 
which is $5,000,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 
2012, and $2,332,000 below the budget request. The Committee 
directs that the Office of Housing shall have no more than 
3,167 FTE. Further, the Committee directs that the Program 
Support Division shall have no more than 60 FTE and the newly 
formed Office of Housing Counseling shall have no more than 67 
FTE.

                    POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $22,211,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        21,394,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        22,326,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +115,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................          +932,000


    The Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) 
directs the Department's annual research agenda to support the 
research and evaluation of housing and other departmental 
initiatives to improve HUD's effectiveness and operational 
efficiencies. Research proposals are determined through 
consultation with senior staff from each HUD program office, 
the Office of Management and Budget, the Congress, as well as 
discussions with key HUD stakeholders. The office addresses all 
inquiries regarding key housing economic information such as 
the American Housing Survey, Fair Market Rents, Median Family 
Income Limits, annual housing goals and oversight of the 
Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie 
Mac, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, and mortgage market 
analyses.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $22,326,000 for this account, 
which is $115,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 
and $932,000 above the budget request. The Committee directs 
that PD&R shall have no more than 151 FTE.

                   FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $72,600,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        74,296,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        72,904,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +304,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -1,392,000


    The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) is 
responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for 
providing technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing 
Act and the civil rights statutes. FHEO serves as the central 
point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of 
policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information 
related to fair housing issues. FHEO receives, investigates, 
conciliates and recommends the issuance of charges of 
discrimination and determinations of non-compliance for 
complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil rights 
authorities. Additionally, FHEO conducts civil rights 
compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $72,904,000 for this account, 
which is $304,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 
and $1,392,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs 
that the FHEO shall have no more than 581 FTE.

            OFFICE OF HEALTHY HOMES AND LEAD HAZARD CONTROL




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $7,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         6,816,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         6,816,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          -584,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control 
(OHHLHC) is directly responsible for the administration of the 
Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction program authorized by Title X 
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The 
office also addresses multiple housing-related hazards 
affecting the health of residents, particularly children. The 
office develops lead-based paint regulations, guidelines, and 
policies applicable to HUD programs, and enforces the Lead 
Disclosure Rule issued under Title X. For both lead-based paint 
and healthy homes issues, the office designs and administers 
programs for grants, training, research, education and 
information dissemination, and serves as the Department's 
central information source for the Secretary, the Congress, HUD 
staff, HUD grantees, state and local governments and the 
public.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $6,816,000 for this account, which 
is $584,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 and the 
same as the budget request. The Committee directs that OHHLHC 
shall have no more than 58 FTE.

                       Public and Indian Housing


                     TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................   $18,914,369,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................    19,074,283,000
Recommended in the bill...............................    19,134,283,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       219,914,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        60,000,000


    In fiscal year 2005, the Housing Certificate Fund was 
separated into two new accounts: Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 
and Project-Based Rental Assistance. This account administers 
the tenant-based Section 8 rental assistance program otherwise 
known as the Housing Choice Voucher program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $19,134,283,000 for tenant-based 
rental assistance, which is $60,000,000 above the budget 
request and $219,914,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted 
level. Consistent with the budget request, the Committee 
continues the advance of $4,000,000,000 of the funds 
appropriated under this heading for Section 8 programs to 
October 1, 2012.
    Voucher Renewals.--The Committee provides $17,237,948,000 
for the renewal of tenant-based vouchers. This level is the 
same as the budget request and a decrease of $4,403,000 from 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The Department is 
instructed to monitor and report to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations each quarter on the trends in 
Section 8 subsidies and to report on the required program 
alterations due to changes in rent or changes in tenant income.
    Tenant protection.--The Committee provides $75,000,000 for 
tenant protection vouchers, which is equal to the budget 
request and the same as the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    Administrative Fees.--The Committee provides $1,575,000,000 
for allocations to PHAs to conduct activities associated with 
placing and maintaining individuals under Section 8 assistance. 
This amount is equal to the budget request and $225,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.
    Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinators.--The Committee 
provides $60,000,000 to support the Family Self-Sufficiency 
program, which helps section 8 residents find employment and 
increase their earnings. The budget request proposed funding 
this program as a separate account and opening the program up 
to participants outside the Housing Choice Voucher program. HUD 
has not demonstrated that this change would improve the 
effectiveness of the program or provide additional 
opportunities for employment and economic self-sufficiency.
    Mainstream Voucher Renewals.--The Committee provides 
$111,335,000 to renew expiring Section 811 tenant-based 
subsidies. This level is equal to the budget request and 
$683,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The 
Committee directs HUD to issue guidance to the housing agencies 
administering these vouchers to continue to serve people with 
disabilities upon turnover.
    Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing.--The Committee 
provides $75,000,000 for incremental voucher assistance through 
the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) program. This 
funding level is equal to the budget request and the same as 
the level provided in fiscal year 2012. This program is 
administered in conjunction with the Department of Veterans 
Affairs. These vouchers shall remain available for homeless 
veterans upon turnover. This funding will add 10,000 new 
vouchers for this program, and will support the Department of 
Veterans Affairs' (VA) goal of ending homelessness among 
veterans within five years. The Committee directs HUD to report 
on VASH utilization rates, challenges encountered in the 
program, and increases in veteran self-sufficiency by March 1, 
2013.
    The Committee continues in bill language the direction to 
the Department to communicate to each PHA, within 60 days of 
enactment, the fixed amount that will be made available to each 
PHA for fiscal year 2013. The amount provided in this account 
is the only source of federal funds that may be used to renew 
tenant-based vouchers. The amounts appropriated here may not be 
augmented from any other source.
    Section 8 Reforms.--The budget request includes a number of 
new authorizing provisions intended to reform the Housing 
Choice Voucher program, including several provisions that 
result in cost-saving measures that provide administrative 
relief to PHAs. The Committee commends the administration for 
proposing these reforms, particularly given the increasing 
costs of the HCV renewals each year. These rising costs have 
crowded out other HUD programs that address key priorities of 
community development, home ownership, and homelessness. While 
the Committee is fully supportive of many of these reform 
proposals, it does not include these new authorizing provisions 
in this bill. The Committee urges the authorizing committee to 
address these reforms expeditiously, as a failure to reform 
this program could result in either a significant cut to the 
number of leased vouchers, or deep cuts to other HUD programs. 
The Committee urges the administration to continue to work with 
the authorizing committees on a reform bill, with the goal of 
enactment prior to the beginning of fiscal year 2013.
    The Committee also encourages HUD to pursue regulatory and 
administrative reforms that do not require new authorizations, 
but that relieve the administrative burdens on PHAs.

                        HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

                              (RESCISSION)

    The Housing Certificate Fund, until fiscal year 2005, 
provided funding for both the project-based and tenant-based 
components of the Section 8 program. Project-Based Rental 
Assistance and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance are now 
separately funded accounts. The Housing Certificate Fund 
retains balances from previous years' appropriations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    Language is included to allow unobligated balances from 
specific accounts may be used to renew or amend Project-Based 
Rental Assistance contracts.

                      PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,875,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     2,070,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,985,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       110,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -85,000,000


    The Public Housing Capital Fund provides funding for public 
housing capital programs, including public housing development 
and modernization. Examples of capital modernization projects 
include replacing roofs and windows, improving common spaces, 
upgrading electrical and plumbing systems, and renovating the 
interior of an apartment.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,985,000,000 for the Public 
Housing Capital Fund, which is $85,000,000 below the budget 
request and $110,000,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted 
level.
    Within the amounts provided the Committee directs that:
  --No more than $15,345,000 is directed to support the ongoing 
        Public Housing Financial and Physical Assessment 
        activities of the Real Estate Assessment Center; and
  --$20,000,000 is made available for Emergency Capital needs, 
        excluding Presidentially declared disasters. The 
        Committee continues to include language to ensure that 
        funds are used only for repairs needed due to an 
        unforeseen and unanticipated emergency event or natural 
        disaster that occurs during fiscal year 2012;
  --$5,000,000 is directed to the support of administrative and 
        judicial receiverships. The Committee directs that the 
        Department continue to report to the House and Senate 
        Committees on Appropriations quarterly on the progress 
        made at each agency under receivership.

                     PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $3,961,850,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     4,524,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     4,524,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       562,150,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Public Housing Operating Fund subsidizes the costs 
associated with operating and maintaining public housing. This 
subsidy supplements funding received by public housing 
authorities (PHA) from tenant rent contributions and other 
income. In accordance with section 9 of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula 
to public housing authorities for the following purposes: 
utility costs; anti-crime and anti-drug activities, including 
the costs of providing adequate security; routine maintenance 
cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $4,524,000,000 for the federal 
share of PHA operating expenses. This amount is equal to the 
budget request and $562,150,000 above the fiscal year 2012 
enacted level. The Committee does not include language in the 
budget request that would allow PHAs to entirely merge their 
Capital and Operating Funds and use those funds for either 
purpose. While the Committee supports the idea of giving PHAs 
flexibility so they can operate more efficiently, HUD has 
provided no information on how it would identify and budget for 
capital and operating needs in the future if this authority to 
merge funds were approved. The Committee would consider a 
proposal to provide greater flexibility to PHAs in future years 
if HUD provides adequate assurances that it would be able to 
accurately assess PHAs' operating and capital needs, and 
accurately identify actual expenditures for each of these 
activities over time.

                    CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $120,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       150,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -120,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -150,000,000


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no funding for the Choice 
Neighborhoods Initiative. This program remains unauthorized, 
and the Committee urges the Administration to work with the 
authorizing committees prior to requesting new programs in the 
budget request. The Committee believes that many of the 
objectives of the Choice Neighborhood Initiative, including 
affordable housing and community development, can be achieved 
through existing programs at HUD, such as Community Development 
Block Grants and the HOME program. The Committee notes that it 
has provided funding for these two programs at above the budget 
request and above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                        FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................                $0
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        60,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -60,000,000


    The budget request proposes to create a consolidated 
program to help HUD-assisted residents achieve economic 
independence, rather than continue separate programs for 
Housing Choice Voucher and Project Based families.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not include funding for this new, 
consolidated program, but instead continues to provide 
$60,000,000 for Family Self-Sufficiency coordinators in the 
Tenant Based Rental Assistance account, consistent with prior 
year appropriations Acts. The budget request did not provide 
adequate justification for this program change, as it merely 
reiterated the mission and success of the existing program 
under Tenant Based Rental Assistance.

                  NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $650,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       650,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       650,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Native American Housing Block Grants program, 
authorized by the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), provides 
funds to American Indian tribes and their Tribally Designated 
Housing Entities (TDHEs) to address affordable housing needs 
within their communities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $650,000,000 for Native American 
Housing Block Grants, which is the same as fiscal year 2012 and 
the budget request. Of the amounts made available under this 
heading:
--$2,000,000 is for Title VI loan guarantees up to $18,332,000.
--$2,000,000 is for national or regional organizations 
        representing Native American housing interests to 
        provide training and technical assistance to Indian 
        housing authorities and TDHEs. The Committee agrees 
        with the President's budget request that no specific 
        funds should be set aside for the National American 
        Indian Housing Council (NAIHC), as NAIHC has 
        significant carryover and other Indian organizations 
        are interested in and capable of providing these 
        services.
    HUD Inspection, Technical Assistance, and Training.--The 
Committee does not provide additional funding for the 
Department to administer inspections, technical assistance, and 
training because the Department has five fiscal years' worth of 
this funding in carryover balances ($10,000,000). Given the 
enormous need in Indian country for technical assistance and 
training, the Committee is appalled that such funds are not 
being used and recommends no additional funding until the 
Department spends down existing funds.
    The Committee is advised that the Department plans to 
change the way in which these funds are used--namely, by 
initiating a competition for organizations and contractors with 
experience in Indian housing to provide these services. The 
Committee approves this effort to improve the timely use of 
these funds and directs the Department to begin such 
competition as soon as possible.
    Timely Expenditure of Funds.--The Committee continues 
language requiring fiscal year 2013 funds to be spent within 10 
years.
    The Committee reiterates its concern that some tribes carry 
enormous backlogs of unspent block grant funds. Unexpended 
balances of this proportion call into question the need for any 
additional appropriations in this account, which unfortunately 
impacts all tribes. The Committee is aware that some tribes 
spend all of their funds in a given year and could use 
additional grant funding to house tribal members immediately. 
Some tribes even take out loans, with interest paid for by the 
tribe, to bridge-finance NAHASDA projects in between 
appropriations cycles.
    The Committee therefore strongly urges tribes to consider 
adopting a method by which unexpended funds may be 
redistributed for timely use in the upcoming NAHASDA 
reauthorization negotiations. There are many ways to structure 
such a redistribution, so that overall funds are spent down 
(thereby demonstrating a need to increase the overall account) 
while not penalizing a tribe's future allocations.

                  NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $13,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        13,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -13,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -13,000,000


    The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program provides 
grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands 
for housing and housing-related assistance to develop, maintain 
and operate affordable housing for eligible low-income native 
Hawaiian families.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend funding for this program, 
which is $13,000,000 below fiscal year 2012 and the budget 
request. This program is not authorized.

           INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit subsidy:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................       $6,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................        7,000,000
    Recommended in the bill............................        6,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................                0
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................       -1,000,000
Limitation on guaranteed loans:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................      360,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................      900,000,000
    Recommended in the bill............................      633,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................      273,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................     -267,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native American 
individuals and housing authorities to build new housing or 
purchase existing housing on trust land. This program provides 
access to private financing that otherwise might be unavailable 
because of the unique legal status of Indian trust land.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 in new credit subsidy 
for the Section 184 loan guarantee program, which is the same 
as fiscal year 2012 and $1,000,000 below the budget request, to 
guarantee a total loan volume of $360,000,000, which is 
$273,000,000 above fiscal year 2012 and $267,000,000 below the 
budget request.
    The Committee includes language allowing the Secretary to 
increase loan guarantee fees, which will dramatically increase 
the supported loan volume.

              NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND

                            PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program account:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................         $386,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................        1,000,000
    Recommended in the bill............................            - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................         -386,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................       -1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund provides 
loan guarantees for native Hawaiian individuals and their 
families, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the Office of 
Hawaiian Affairs, and nonprofit organizations experienced in 
planning and developing affordable housing for native 
Hawaiians. Loaned funds may be used to purchase, construct, 
and/or rehabilitate single-family homes on Hawaiian Home Lands.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend funding for this program, 
which is $386,000 below fiscal year 2012 and $1,000,000 below 
the budget request. This program is not authorized.

                   Community Planning and Development


              HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $332,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       330,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       330,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -2,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) 
program is authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunities Act (42 
U.S.C. 12901 et seq.). This program provides states and 
localities with resources to address the housing needs of low-
income persons living with HIV/AIDS. Providing housing 
stability for this population facilitates necessary medical 
treatment and is cost-effective. Ninety percent of funding is 
distributed by formula to qualifying states and metropolitan 
areas based on the cumulative incidences of AIDS reported to 
the Centers for Disease Control. The remaining 10 percent of 
funding is distributed by HUD through a national competition. 
Government recipients are required to have a HUD-approved 
Comprehensive Plan or Comprehensive Housing Affordability 
Strategy (CHAS).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $330,000,000, which is $2,000,000 
below fiscal year 2012 and the same as the budget request.
    The Committee includes language requiring the Secretary to 
continue renewing eligible, expiring HOPWA contracts that were 
previously funded under the national competition, before 
awarding new competitive grants.
    The Committee includes language requiring the Department to 
notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of 
enactment of this Act.

                       COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $3,308,090,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     3,143,090,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     3,404,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        95,910,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       260,910,000


    The Community Development Fund, authorized by the Housing 
and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), 
provides funding, primarily through Community Development Block 
Grants, to state and local governments and other eligible 
entities to carry out community and economic development 
activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $3,404,000,000 for the 
Community Development Fund account, which is the $95,910,000 
above fiscal year 2012 and $260,910,000 above the budget 
request.
    Of the amounts made available:
--$3,344,000,000 is for the Community Development Block Grants 
        (``CDBG'') formula program for entitlement communities 
        and states. This is $396,000,000 above both fiscal year 
        2012 and the budget request;
--$60,000,000 is for the Native American Housing and Economic 
        Development Block Grant (also known as ``Indian 
        CDBG''), which is the same as fiscal year 2012 and the 
        budget request; and
--$7,000,000, of the amount provided for the regular CDBG 
        formula program, is for insular areas, per 42 U.S.C. 
        5306(a)(2), which is the same as fiscal year 2012 and 
        the budget request.
    The Committee includes language requiring the Department to 
notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of 
enactment of this Act.
    Matching Funds.--The Committee notes localities often use 
CDBG to serve as the ``local match'' for many other federal 
programs. The point of a local match requirement is to have 
recipients of federal funding at least ``put some skin the 
game'' in exchange for large amounts of federal assistance.
    The Committee directs the Department to provide to the 
Committees on Appropriations, within 180 days of enactment, a 
detailed analysis of how much CDBG funding has been used by 
grantees as matching dollars for other federal programs over 
the last several fiscal years. The report should detail the 
percentage of CDBG funds used to match other federal programs; 
which federal programs are being matched; the local match 
requirements of such federal programs; what portion of the 
local match requirements are being met using CDBG, by federal 
program; and what legal authority allows the use of CDBG as a 
local match, by federal program.
    Sustainable Communities.--The Committee declines to set-
aside any CDBG funds for Sustainable Communities grants, 
consistent with the fact that there is no authorization for 
this program and that the committee of jurisdiction does not 
want this unauthorized program funded. The House Financial 
Services Committee noted in its Views and Estimates on the 
Fiscal Year 2013 Budget:

          [T]he relatively new . . . Sustainable Communities 
        Initiative [ ], which . . . ha[s] yet to be authorized 
        the Committee, should not be funded at the expense of 
        other critical affordable housing programs.

    This language was adopted with unanimous and bipartisan 
agreement.
    The House Committee on Appropriations fully agrees. While 
the Committee recommends a higher amount for CDBG than past 
years, it is still well below the fiscal year 2010 level of 
$3,990,068,000, as observed in the House Financial Services 
Committee's budget views. Additionally, the Committee notes 
Congress does not yet have sufficient information to assess 
whether the prior grants have been successful and should be 
continued. The Committee includes language in the Management 
and Administration portion of this report that directs data 
collection and analysis to enable such an assessment.
    Further, the Committee reiterates its concerns from last 
year that this proposed grant program is unauthorized, with 
amorphous goals that are entirely subjective. If the Department 
agrees that community development goals are local in nature, 
then should not localities be solely responsible for 
determining these goals? The Committee does not agree with 
HUD's proposal that bureaucrats with unfettered discretion 
should make value judgments (with no meaningful parameters or 
other basis in law) on which few communities deserve such 
funds. The Committee instead provides all communities with 
higher CDBG allocations, so all communities can decide how best 
to undertake local development.
    To the extent the Department wishes to educate all 
communities on the best practices and efficiencies learned by 
the Department over the years and to equip all communities with 
the tools necessary to undertake holistic and/or regional 
development activities, then the Committee provides sufficient 
resources within the Office of Sustainable Communities to do 
this (as well as to continue overseeing prior grantees).
    The Committee strongly urges the Department to include in 
such best practices a focus on how integrating housing and 
transportation options can meet the special safety needs of 
elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities.

         COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit subsidy:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................       $5,952,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................                0
    Recommended in the bill............................        6,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................          +48,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................       +6,000,000
Limitation on guaranteed loans:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................      240,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................      500,000,000
    Recommended in the bill............................      244,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012....................           +4,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013...................     -256,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program is a source of 
variable and fixed-rate financing for communities undertaking 
projects eligible under the Community Development and Block 
Grant (CDBG) program. Such activities may include economic 
development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities, and 
large-scale physical development projects. By pledging their 
current and future CDBG allocations to cover the loan amount as 
security, communities are able to finance large-scale projects 
with a federally guaranteed loan. HUD may require additional 
security for a loan, as determined on a case-by-case basis.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Section 108 
loan guarantee program, which is $48,000 above fiscal year 2012 
and $6,000,000 above the budget request, to guarantee a new 
loan volume of $244,000,000.
    Subsidy Carryover.--With carryover balances in this 
account, the total loan volume in fiscal year 2013 may be up to 
$319,000,000. The Committee notes this is more than adequate, 
based on recent program demand. In fiscal years 2010 and 2011, 
loans were guaranteed in amounts of $278,000,000 and 
$290,000,000, respectively.
    Proposed Fee.--The Committee declines to enact the 
President's proposed new fee structure for Section 108 
borrowers. The proposed fee would increase the capital costs of 
assisted development projects, which would decrease the ability 
of local governments to use the Section 108 guarantee to 
finance development in distressed areas and areas of low 
capital investment.

                  HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,000,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     1,000,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,200,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       200,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       200,000,000


    The HOME investment partnerships program provides block 
grants to participating jurisdictions (states, units of local 
government, Indian tribes, and insular areas) to undertake 
activities that expand the supply of affordable housing in the 
jurisdiction. HOME block grants are distributed based on 
formula allocations. Upon receipt of these Federal funds, state 
and local governments develop a housing affordability strategy 
to acquire, rehabilitate, or construct new affordable housing, 
or to provide rental assistance to eligible families.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,200,000,000 for activities 
funded under this account, which is $200,000,000 above fiscal 
year 2012 and the budget request.
    The Committee continues language to prevent approximately 
52 new participating jurisdictions from being permanently added 
to the HOME program. It does not make sense to permanently 
increase the number of participating jurisdictions, when 
overall HOME funding has been significantly decreased in recent 
years.
    The Committee continues language providing much-needed 
reforms to the HOME program. The Department is finalizing 
similar regulations.
    In the general provisions of Title II, the Committee 
includes language making reforms requested by the Department.
    The Committee continues language requiring the Department 
to notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days 
of enactment of this Act.

        SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $53,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................        60,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................         6,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        60,000,000


    Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP) funds 
are distributed through competitive grants to national and 
regional nonprofit organizations and consortia that have 
experience in providing or facilitating self-help homeownership 
opportunities. Grant funds are used for land acquisition and 
infrastructure improvements associated with developing new 
decent, safe, and sanitary non-luxury dwellings for low-income 
persons using the self-help model.
    Additionally, Section 4 Capacity Building funds are set-
aside within this account for activities described under 
section 4(a) of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 
9816 note). Section 4 funds are awarded competitively to a 
limited number of non-profits, which use the funds to develop 
the capacity of community development corporations (CDCs) and 
community housing development organizations (CHDOs). The CDCs 
and CHDOs then undertake community development and affordable 
housing activities. Section 4 funds must be matched by 
recipients with at least three times the grant amount in 
private funding.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for the Self Help 
Homeownership Opportunity Program account, which is $6,500,000 
above fiscal year 2012 and $60,000,000 above the budget 
request. The President's budget proposed eliminating SHOP 
altogether and proposed $35,000,000 for Section 4 Capacity 
Building activities as a set-aside within the Community 
Development Fund (CDF).
    Of the total amount, the Committee recommends:
--$20,000,000 for the SHOP program, which is $6,500,000 above 
        fiscal year 2012 and $20,000,000 above the budget 
        request;
--$35,000,000 for the Section 4 Capacity Building program, of 
        which at least $5,000,000 is for rural capacity 
        building activities. This is the same as fiscal year 
        2012 and the budget request (though the budget request 
        funded Section 4 within CDF); and
--$5,000,000 for rural capacity building activities by national 
        organizations with expertise in rural housing 
        development, which is the same as fiscal year 2012 and 
        $5,000,000 above the budget request.
    Proposed elimination of SHOP.--The Administration once 
again proposes to eliminate all funding for the SHOP program, 
citing the HOME program as an acceptable substitute funding 
source and citing the rising administrative costs of SHOP 
recipients.
    Regarding the first point, the Committee notes there are 
many differences between the SHOP program, which allows non-
profits to create affordable housing through the unique ``self-
help'' model of homeownership, and the HOME program, which 
provides funding to states and local governments to increase 
the stock of affordable housing. There are several reasons why 
the Committee declines to eliminate SHOP: HOME funding has 
decreased significantly in recent years; the self-help and 
sweat-equity model enjoys broad Congressional support; and SHOP 
funding is much-needed in rural areas, where state-wide HOME 
funds are scarce and often set-aside for large tax-credit 
developments, rather than for self-help homeownership.
    Regarding rising administrative costs, the Committee 
directs HUD to evaluate the history of administrative costs in 
the SHOP program, including whether HUD's imposition of various 
requirements, such as mandatory site visits and Energy-Star 
certifications, has resulted in SHOP grantees requiring higher 
administrative costs. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
within 180 days of enactment on whether current administrative 
costs are reasonable, what portion of administrative costs are 
attributable to HUD requirements, and what actions can be taken 
by both HUD and grantees to reduce the administrative burden in 
this program.
    Prohibition on Demand-Response Initiative.--The Committee 
includes language prohibiting the Department from continuing 
its ``demand-response'' (or ``place-based'') initiative using 
Section 4 funds. In doing so, nearly $20,000,000 in funds 
provided between fiscal years 2010 through 2012 will be freed-
up from the Department's control and given back to Section 4 
grantees, to be used on capacity building activities.
    Since fiscal year 2010, the Department has awarded points 
in the Section 4 grant competition to applicants that agree to 
set-aside up to 15% of funds for activities to be determined by 
HUD. While this may have begun with good intentions, HUD has 
failed over three fiscal years to direct how these funds should 
be used, thereby causing delays and holding up nearly 
$20,000,000. It is clear to the Committee that HUD has no idea 
how it intends these funds to be spent, including, for example, 
which entities will be assisted by these funds, how the match 
requirement of the Section 4 program might be impacted, or how 
the geographical and expertise differences of grantees will 
influence project assignments.
    This amount of delay and unpreparedness by HUD is 
inexcusable and particularly ironic, given HUD is the one that 
initiated this effort based on a supposed need to respond to 
demand. If the Department insists on implementing a new, 
unauthorized initiative that essentially rewrites the way in 
which grant funds may be used, then HUD should at least have a 
plan ready to do it.
    Equally inexcusable is the fact that HUD never included 
this initiative--which siphons off grantee resources in an 
effort to support the Department's OneCPD initiative--in any of 
its operating plans, budgets, budget justifications, or any 
other documents describing OneCPD or the Transformation 
Initiative to Congress. In the future, the Committee directs 
HUD to include this and any similar ideas in its budgets, 
budget justifications, and operating plans to Congress, prior 
to undertaking such activities.
    Finally, the Committee notes there is nothing wrong with 
encouraging Section 4 recipients to work in under-served areas, 
but this goal can be accomplished without HUD taking control of 
and holding hostage grantee funds. As a case in point, HUD 
already encouraged Section 4 grantees to work in underserved 
areas prior to fiscal year 2010 (and thereafter) by awarding 
points based on applicants' plans to do such work. This is a 
far better, less coercive way for HUD to encourage serving 
disadvantaged areas.

                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,901,190,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     2,231,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     2,000,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        98,810,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -231,000,000


    The Homeless Assistance Grants account provides funding for 
the homeless programs under title IV of the McKinney Act, as 
amended by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid 
Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009.
    The HEARTH Act streamlined several former homeless 
assistance grants into three programs: (1) the Continuum of 
Care (CoC) Grant program, which competitively funds new 
projects and renewed projects which were previously funded 
under three grant programs: the old supportive housing, shelter 
plus care, and Section 8 moderate rehabilitation single room 
occupancy programs; (2) the Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) 
program, which distributes funding by formula to states, 
localities, and insular areas, to fund traditional shelter and 
outreach activities (as under the old emergency solutions grant 
program) and new prevention and re-housing activities, as 
authorized by the HEARTH Act; and (3) the Rural Housing 
Stability Grants program, which funds activities similar to 
those funded by the old rural homelessness grant program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends funding the homeless grant 
assistance programs at $2,000,000,000, which is $98,810,000 
above fiscal year 2012 and $231,000,000 below the budget 
request. Of the total amount provided, the Committee 
recommends:
  --$286,000,000 for Emergency Solution Grants (ESG), which is 
        $36,000,000 above fiscal year 2012 and the same as the 
        budget request;
  --$1,650,000,000 minimum for Continuum of Care Grants (CoC) 
        and the Rural Housing Stability Grants, which is 
        $57,000,000 above fiscal year 2012 and $287,000,000 
        below the budget request;
  --$6,000,000 for the National Homeless Data Analysis Project, 
        which is the $1,000,000 below fiscal year 2012 and 
        $2,000,000 below the budget request; and
  --$58,000,000 in additional homeless grant funds that the 
        Department may direct toward Emergency Solution Grants, 
        Continuum of Care Grants, or the Rural Housing 
        Stability Grants. However, the Department shall not 
        direct such funds toward the National Homeless Data 
        Analysis Project or to new projects under the Continuum 
        of Care.
    Despite the tough budget environment, Congress has 
increased or held steady homeless grant funding in recent 
years. This year, the Committee recommends an increase of 
$98,810,000.
    HEARTH Act Implementation.--The Committee supports the 
Department's work to address homelessness and to implement the 
HEARTH Act as much reasonably possible, given fiscal 
constraints. As written, the HEARTH Act would require 
$4,400,000,000 each fiscal year to implement while remaining 
internally consistent. Such cost is unreasonable in this fiscal 
environment. This Committee will not fund everything envisioned 
in HEARTH, just as Congress frequently does not fully fund all 
ideas envisioned in authorizing bills. The Committee looks 
forward to working with the Department to make sure the most 
important parts of HEARTH are funded, given fiscal realities.
    The Committee notes it has been over 3 years since HEARTH 
was signed into law, and still there are no regulations for the 
Continuum of Care program. The HEARTH Act required the 
Secretary to promulgate regulations for all programs created or 
modified by the Act within 12 months of the date of enactment, 
which was May 20, 2010. The Committee directs the Department to 
finalize such regulations as soon as possible.
    Emergency Solutions Grants.--The Committee recommends 
increasing Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) to $286,000,000. 
The ESG program, authorized by subtitle B of the HEARTH Act, 
provides funding for homelessness prevention and rapid re-
housing efforts, in addition to traditional emergency shelter 
and outreach activities. Because of the ESG's innovative focus 
on preventing and solving homelessness, rather than simply 
managing it, the Committee strongly supports this program.
    The Committee also continues bill language that makes clear 
the ESG program should not receive less than the appropriated 
amount, notwithstanding any other provision of law, including 
the renewals certification provision in subtitle B of the 
HEARTH Act.
    Continuum of Care Grants.--The Committee is concerned about 
the so-called ``renewal burden'' in the Continuum-of-Care 
program. This number is exploding in growth--in the hundreds of 
millions each year--and is completely unsustainable. Further, 
it has and will continue to crowd-out other homeless funding 
including the Rural Housing Stability Grants and the Emergency 
Solutions Grants.
    The Continuum of Care is supposed to be a competitive 
grants program. However, a ``renewal burden'' is antithetical 
to the concept of competition. Competition for scarce resources 
is what drives better performance and spurs innovation. 
Automatic renewals are just the opposite--creating 
inefficiencies and removing all incentives to perform better.
    To-date, the Department seems uninterested in re-evaluating 
programs to ensure the best use of resources through a national 
competition. Instead, its approach is to simply renew all 
existing grantees and to request even more funding so that 
additional localities may be permanently added to the program, 
without regard to their subsequent performance. This is 
precisely what gives government-run programs a bad name. It is 
not the Committee's intention to maintain an entitlement 
program for ailing and inflexible service providers. The 
Committee reminds providers in the Continuum of Care that these 
funds are intended to assist and house the homeless as 
effectively and as efficiently as possible.
    The Committee is aware the Department is considering ways 
in which localities can be encouraged to choose better projects 
through a local competitive process. This is a step in the 
right direction, but mere encouragement will not solve the 
problem of exploding costs on a national scale. The Committee 
directs the Department to report to the Committees on 
Appropriations within 90 days of enactment on how the Continuum 
of Care can be run more like a true competition--on both the 
national and local level--assuming scarce resources.
    The Committee does not view the Department's ``renewal'' 
estimate as something that must be funded each year. The 
Committee recommends less than the renewal number this year, 
and yet the overall appropriation increases by nearly 
$100,000,000 over fiscal year 2012. The Committee notes the 
HEARTH Act does not expressly require funding renewals. While 
the Secretary is permitted to prioritize funding of renewals 
and has great latitude to fund renewals, this is only to the 
extent sufficient funding is available.

                            Housing Programs


                    PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $9,339,672,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................     8,700,400,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     8,700,400,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -639,672,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Project-Based Rental Assistance account (PBRA) provides 
a rental subsidy to a private landlord tied to a specific 
housing unit so that the properties themselves, rather than the 
individual living in the unit, remain subsidized. Amounts 
provided in this account include funding for the renewal of 
expiring project-based contracts, including Section 8, moderate 
rehabilitation, and single room occupancy (SRO) contracts, 
amendments to Section 8 project-based contracts, and 
administrative costs for performance-based, project-based 
Section 8 contract administrators and costs associated with 
administering moderate rehabilitation and single room occupancy 
contracts.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides a total of $8,700,400,000 for the 
annual renewal of project-based contracts, of which not less 
than $260,000,000 is for the cost of contract administrators. 
This funding level is $639,672,000 below the enacted level for 
fiscal year 2012 and the same as the budget request.

                        HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $374,627,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       475,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       425,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +50,373,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -50,000,000


    The Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) program provides 
eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants 
to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 
housing intended for low income elderly people. In addition, 
the program provides project-based rental assistance contracts 
(PRAC) to support operational costs for units constructed under 
the program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $425,000,000, which is $50,373,000 
above the level enacted for fiscal year 2012 and $50,000,000 
below the budget request. The Committee includes language 
allowing HUD to recoup residual receipts. These funds have 
accumulated in situations where the subsidies and tenant rent 
payments provided have exceeded actual costs. This language 
will permit these funds to be used to provide housing 
assistance for seniors who are not currently receiving 
assistance instead of the funds continuing to remain unused.
    The recommendation allocates funding as follows:
          
 $50,000,000 and all residual receipts 
        collected for new awards of project rental assistance;
          
 $285,000,000 for the renewal and amendment 
        of project-based rental assistance contracts (PRAC);
          
 $90,000,000 for service coordinators and the 
        continuation of congregate services grants.
    The Committee continues language relating to the initial 
contract and renewal terms for assistance provided under this 
heading and language allowing these funds to be used for 
inspections and analysis of data by HUD's REAC program office.

                 HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $165,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       150,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       165,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       +15,000,000


    The Housing for Persons with Disabilities (Section 811) 
program provides eligible private, non-profit organizations 
with capital grants to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation 
or construction of supportive housing for disabled persons and 
provides project-based rental assistance (PRAC) to support 
operational costs for such units.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $165,000,000 for Section 811 
activities, the same as fiscal year 2012 enacted level, and 
$15,000,000 above the budget request. The recommendation 
provides up to $96,000,000 for capital grants and PRAC and 
$69,000,000 for PRAC renewals. Renewal of mainstream vouchers 
is provided under the tenant-based rental assistance account as 
proposed by the budget request. The Committee continues 
language allowing these funds to be used for inspections and 
analysis of data by HUD's REAC program office.

                    OTHER ASSISTED HOUSING PROGRAMS

                     HOUSING COUNSELING ASSISTANCE




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $45,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        55,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        45,000,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -10,000,000


    Section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
1968 authorized HUD to provide housing counseling services to 
homebuyers, homeowners, low and moderate income renters, and 
the homeless.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $45,000,000 funding for housing 
counseling, the same as the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 
and $10,000,000 below the budget request.

            PAYMENT TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $6,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         8,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         4,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -2,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -4,000,000


    The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 
Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 
Improvement Act of 2000, authorized the Secretary to establish 
Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards for 
the construction, design, and performance of manufactured 
homes. All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal 
standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs 
of administering the Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends up to $4,000,000 for the 
manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from fees 
collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust 
Fund established pursuant to the Manufactured Housing 
Improvement Act of 2000. The Committee recommends no direct 
appropriation for this account. The amount recommended is 
$2,500,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2012 and 
$4,000,000 below the budget request.
    In addition, the Committee includes language allowing the 
Department to collect fees from program participants for the 
dispute resolution and installation programs. These fees are to 
be deposited into the trust fund and may be used by the 
Department subject to the overall cap placed on the account.

                     Federal Housing Administration


               MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Limitation of       Limitation of      Administrative
                                                         direct loans      guaranteed loans    contract expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.....................         $50,000,000    $400,000,000,000        $207,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013....................          50,000,000     400,000,000,000         215,000,000
Recommended in the bill.............................          50,000,000     400,000,000,000         215,000,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.................               - - -               - - -           8,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013................               - - -               - - -               - - -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Housing Administration's (FHA) mutual mortgage 
insurance program account includes the mutual mortgage 
insurance (MMI) and cooperative management housing insurance 
funds. This program account covers unsubsidized programs, 
primarily the single-family home mortgage program, which is the 
largest of all the FHA programs. The cooperative housing 
insurance program provides mortgages for cooperative housing 
projects of more than five units that are occupied by members 
of a cooperative housing corporation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 
commitments in the MMI program account: $400,000,000,000 for 
loan guarantees and $50,000,000 for direct loans. The 
recommendation also includes $215,000,000 for administrative 
contract expenses, of which $71,500,000 is transferred to the 
Working Capital Fund for development and modifications to 
information technology systems that serve programs or 
activities under the FHA. The Committee continues language as 
requested, appropriating additional administrative expenses in 
certain circumstances.
    The Committee's recommendation for administrative contract 
expenses is $8,000,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 
2012 and the same as the FY 2013 budget request.

                GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Limitation of       Limitation of
                                     direct loans      guaranteed loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.         $20,000,000     $25,000,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013          20,000,000      25,000,000,000
Recommended in the bill ........          20,000,000      25,000,000,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year                 - - -               - - -
     2012.......................
    Budget request, fiscal year                - - -               - - -
     2013.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Housing Administration's (FHA) general and 
special risk insurance (GI and SRI) program account includes 17 
different programs administered by FHA. The GI fund includes a 
wide variety of insurance programs for special-purpose single 
and multifamily loans, including loans for property 
improvements, manufactured housing, multifamily rental housing, 
condominiums, housing for the elderly, hospitals, group 
practice facilities, and nursing homes. The SRI fund includes 
insurance programs for mortgages in older, declining urban 
areas that would not be otherwise eligible for insurance, 
mortgages with interest reduction payments, and mortgages for 
experimental housing and for high-risk mortgagors who would not 
normally be eligible for mortgage insurance without housing 
counseling.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 
commitments for the general and special risk insurance program 
account as requested: $25,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and 
$20,000,000 for direct loans, which is the same as fiscal year 
2012 and the budget request

                Government National Mortgage Association


        GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE

                            PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Limitation of      Administrative
                                   guaranteed loans    contract expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.    $500,000,000,000         $19,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013     500,000,000,000          21,000,000
Recommended in the bill.........     500,000,000,000          20,500,000
Bill compared to:
    Appropriation, fiscal year                 - - -           1,000,000
     2012.......................
    Budget request, fiscal year                - - -            -500,000
     2013.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Guarantee of Mortgage-Backed Securities Program 
facilitates the financing of residential mortgage loans insured 
or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration, the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Rural Housing Services 
program. The Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) 
guarantees the timely payment of principal and interest on 
securities issued by private service institutions such as 
mortgage companies, commercial banks, savings banks, and 
savings and loan associations that assemble pools of mortgages 
and issue securities backed by the pools. In turn, investment 
proceeds are used to finance additional mortgage loans. 
Investors include non-traditional sources of credit in the 
housing market such as pension and retirement funds, life 
insurance companies, and individuals.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The recommendation includes a $500,000,000,000 limitation 
on loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities as requested 
and $20,500,000 for the personnel costs of GNMA, to be funded 
by Commitment and Multiclass fees. The recommendation for 
personnel costs is $1,000,000 more than fiscal year 2012 and 
$500,000 below the budget request.

                    Policy Development and Research





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $46,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        52,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        52,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +6,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


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

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $52,000,000 
for this account, which is an increase of $6,000,000 over the 
level enacted in fiscal year 2012.
    The Committee commends the Department for making a greater 
investment in the Office of Policy Research and Development 
(PD&R) and giving the office a greater decision-making role in 
departmental management. Before proposing a new program or a 
change to an existing program, HUD should first consult with 
PD&R on any research or findings to support the proposal and 
the cost effectiveness, and the budget office to ensure the 
proposal fits in to the overall spend plan and is properly 
accounted for. The Department would gain a lot of credibility 
if more decisions and programs were more thoroughly vetted with 
PD&R and the budget office prior to proposals to the Congress 
or stakeholders.

                   FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $70,847,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        68,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        68,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -2,847,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) is 
responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for 
providing technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing 
Act and the civil rights statues. FHEO serves as the central 
point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of 
policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information 
related to fair housing issues. FHEO receives, investigates, 
conciliates and recommends the issuance of charges of 
discrimination and determinations of non-compliance for 
complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil rights 
authorities. Additionally, FHEO conducts civil rights 
compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $68,000,000 
for this account, which is $2,847,000 below the level enacted 
in fiscal year 2012. Of the funds provided, $300,000 is for the 
Limited English Proficiency Initiative, $1,500,000 is for the 
National Fair Housing Training Academy, and $23,700,000 is for 
the Fair Housing Assistance Program. Of the $42,500,000 set 
aside for the Fair Housing Initiatives Program, $29,250,000 is 
for private enforcement activities, $8,750,000 is for education 
and outreach activities, and $4,500,000 is for the Fair Housing 
Organization Initiative.

            OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $120,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       120,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       120,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes is 
responsible for administering the Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction program authorized by Title X of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1992. The office also addresses 
multiple housing-related health hazards through the Healthy 
Homes Initiative, pursuant to the Secretary's authority in 
sections 501 and 502 of the Housing and Urban Development Act 
of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 and 1701z-2).
    The office develops lead-based paint regulations, 
guidelines, and policies applicable to HUD programs and 
enforces the Lead Disclosure Rule issued under Title X. For 
both lead-related and Healthy Homes issues, the office designs 
and administers programs for grants, training, research, 
demonstration, and education.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $120,000,000 
for the lead programs, which is equal to the level enacted in 
fiscal year 2012 bill. Of the amount provided, the Committee 
recommends $10,000,000 for the Healthy Homes Initiative, and 
not less than $45,000,000 for the lead hazard reduction 
program.

                     Management and Administration


                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $199,035,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       170,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       175,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -24,035,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        +5,000,000


    The Working Capital Fund was established pursuant to 42 
U.S.C. Sec. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the 
development of, modifications to, and infrastructure for 
Department-wide information technology systems, and for the 
continuing operation of both Department-wide and program-
specific information technology systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $175,000,000 in direct 
appropriations for the Working Capital Fund (WCF) to support 
Department-wide information technology system activities, 
$24,035,000 less than the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and 
$5,000,000 more than the budget request. In addition to the 
direct appropriation for Department-wide systems, funds are 
transferred from FHA.
    The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 over the 
budget request specifically for the purpose of creating a 
system to centrally account for, control, oversee, and report 
on full-time equivalents (FTE) numbers and expenses across the 
Department. The Committee is astonished that no basic system 
exists in the budget office or anywhere in the Department. To 
answer a simple FTE-related question from the Committee, the 
budget office is forced to put out a call for data to each 
office and no system exists to verify the responses. Further, 
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer does not have a 
reliable method for monitoring the FTE burn rate across each 
office or the Department, which explains a number of Anti-
Deficiency Act violations in recent years. There is one 
Department, not a loose cooperative of stand-alone offices. The 
Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and Chief Financial Officer are 
responsible for the allocation and expenditure of these funds 
and the Committee is adamant on oversight. The Committee 
directs HUD to report on this effort and outline a plan for 
creating such a system within the Department's fiscal year 2013 
operating plan.
    As for the $60,000,000 HUD requested through the 
Transformation Initiative for investments in both specific 
office and department-wide information technology (IT) systems, 
the Committee directs HUD to use its current statutory 
authority to establish a true and traditional WCF, complete 
with work agreements, contracts, and fund transfers to pay for 
IT investments. The $175,000,000 provided by direct 
appropriation should be enough to start the year and get the 
WCF and work agreements in place to bring in the remaining 
$60,000,000 by the end of the year. Instead of requesting 
transfer authority under the Transformation Initiative, the 
Department should make the new WCF a part of the fiscal year 
2014 budget request, similar to the Department of 
Transportation. A new WCF will ensure the office or offices 
affected by the Department's IT investments and maintenance 
will be active participants in the decision-making and 
financing of the Department's systems, and more importantly, 
that the Chief Financial Officer will have direct control and 
oversight over those systems and decisions. The Committee views 
the creation of a true WCF to be a more sustainable protocol 
than the Transformation Initiative.
    The Committee has retained language that precludes the use 
of these or any other funds appropriated previously to the 
Working Capital Fund or program offices for transfer to the 
Working Capital Fund that would be used or transferred to any 
other entity in HUD or elsewhere for the purposes of 
implementing the Administration's ``e-Gov'' initiative without 
the Committee's approval in HUD's operating plan. The Committee 
directs that funds appropriated for specific projects and 
activities should not be reduced or eliminated in order to fund 
other activities inside and outside of HUD without the 
expressed approval of the Committee. HUD is not to contribute 
or participate in activities that are specifically precluded in 
legislation, unless the Committee agrees to a change.
    Further, the Committee retains language requiring the 
General Accountability Office (GAO) to audit and oversee HUD's 
information technology programs, development and investments. 
While working with GAO, HUD has made vast improvements to its 
IT management, the Committee views GAO's continued 
participation to be crucial to HUD's efforts.

                      Office of Inspector General





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $124,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       125,600,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       125,600,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +1,600,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The Office of Inspector General (IG) provides agency-wide 
audit and investigative functions to identify and correct 
management and administrative deficiencies that create 
conditions for existing or potential instances of waste, fraud, 
and mismanagement. The audit function provides internal audit, 
contract audit, and inspection services. Contract audits 
provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on 
accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, 
award, administration, re-pricing, and settlement of contracts. 
Internal audits evaluate all facets of agency operations. 
Inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of 
agency operations. The investigative function provides for the 
detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities 
involving programs, personnel, and operations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $125,600,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, which is $1,600,000 above the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level and the same as the budget request.

                       Transformation Initiative





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $50,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................        50,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       +50,000,000


    The Transformation Initiative is the Department's effort to 
improve and streamline the systems and operations at HUD. 
Managed by the Office of Strategic Planning and Management, 
this initiative has three elements: (1) research, evaluation, 
and program metrics; (2) program demonstrations; (3) technical 
assistance and capacity building.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides $50,000,000 for activities under the 
Transformation Initiative (TI), consistent with the fiscal year 
2012 appropriation. The budget requested authority to transfer 
up to 0.5 percent from various other HUD accounts, but not to 
exceed $120,000,000 in total funds.
    The Committee finds the mass transfer to be an awkward 
method of funding the activities under this account and 
distorts the resources required and available under the various 
donor program accounts. A more transparent method is to simply 
appropriate funds for the transformation activities directly. 
The Committee again strongly urges HUD to consider 
incorporating a direct appropriation for TI in the fiscal year 
2014 budget materials.
    Despite the decision to reject HUD's transfer proposal, the 
Committee supports HUD's efforts to reform its operations and 
take a hard look at how the Department delivers services, 
evaluates programs, and seeks to find better, more effective, 
and hopefully more cost efficient ways to fulfill its mission.
    The Committee retains language requiring HUD to submit a 
plan for the fiscal year 2013 funds. Committee's recommendation 
provides funds for the following initiatives:
          
 $1,000,000 for research-ready data 
        integration;
          
 $2,000,000 for biennial research NOFAs;
          
 $1,000,000 for the Multidisciplinary 
        Research Team;
          
 $1,000,000 for the HOME affordability study;
          
 $1,000,000 for emerging research issues;
          
 $1,000,000 for Choice Neighborhoods 
        evaluations;
          
 $5,000,000 for the rental assistance 
        demonstration evaluation;
          
 $7,000,000 for homeless programs 
        demonstrations;
          
 $2,000,000 for the moving to work 
        evaluation;
          
 $2,000,000 for Section 811 project rental 
        assistance demonstration evaluations;
          
 $2,000,000 for the senior and services 
        demonstration; and
          
 $25,000,000 for technical assistance.

    General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban Development

    Section 201. The Committee continues the provision that 
relates to the division of financing adjustment factors.
    Section 202. The Committee continues the provision that 
prohibits available funds from being used to investigate or 
prosecute lawful activities under the Fair Housing Act.
    Section 203. The Committee continues by reference the two 
provisions in prior appropriations Acts that correct the HOPWA 
formula and make other technical corrections.
    Section 204. The Committee continues language requiring 
funds appropriated to be distributed on a competitive basis in 
accordance with the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Reform Act of 1989.
    Section 205. The Committee continues language regarding the 
availability of funds subject to the Government Corporation 
Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950.
    Section 206. The Committee continues language regarding 
allocation of funds in excess of the budget estimates.
    Section 207. The Committee continues language regarding the 
expenditure of funds for corporations and agencies subject to 
the Government Corporation Control Act.
    Section 208. The Committee continues language requiring the 
Secretary to provide quarterly reports on uncommitted, 
unobligated and excess funds in each departmental program and 
activity.
    Section 209. The Committee continues the provision that 
requires that the Administration's budget and the Department's 
budget justifications for fiscal year 2014 shall be submitted 
in the identical account and sub-account structure provided in 
this Act.
    Section 210. The Committee continues the provision that 
exempts PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi and the 
County of Los Angeles from public housing resident 
representation requirement.
    Section 211. The Committee continues the provision that 
authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use agreements from an 
obsolete project to a viable project, provided that no 
additional costs are incurred, and other conditions are met.
    Section 212. The Committee continues the provision that 
prohibits the IG from changing the basis on which the audit of 
GNMA is conducted.
    Section 213. The Committee continues the provision that 
sets forth requirements for eligibility for Section 8 voucher 
assistance, and includes consideration for persons with 
disabilities.
    Section 214. The Committee continues the provision that 
distributes Native American housing block grant funds to the 
same Native Alaskan recipients as 2005.
    Section 215. The Committee continues the provision that 
authorizes the Secretary to insure mortgages under Section 255 
of the National Housing Act.
    Section 216. The Committee continues the provision that 
instructs HUD on managing and disposing of any multifamily 
property that is owned by HUD.
    Section 217. The Committee continues the provision that 
provides that the Secretary shall report quarterly on HUD's use 
of all sole source contracts.
    Section 218. The Committee continues the provision that 
authorizes the Secretary to waive certain requirements on 
adjusted income for certain assisted living projects for 
counties in Michigan.
    Section 219. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows the recipient of a section 202 grant to establish a 
single-asset nonprofit entity to own the project and may lend 
the grant funds to such entity.
    Section 220. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows amounts provided under the Section 108 loan guarantee 
program may be used to guarantee notes or other obligations 
issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in 
the State.
    Section 221. The Committee continues the provision that 
instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 400 units or fewer 
of public housing are exempt from asset management 
requirements.
    Section 222. The Committee continues the provision that 
restricts the Secretary from imposing any requirement or 
guideline relating to asset management that restricts or limits 
the use of capital funds for central office costs, up to the 
limit established in QHWRA.
    Section 223. The Committee continues the provision that 
provides that no employee of the Department shall be designated 
as an allotment holder unless the CFO determines that such 
allotment holder has received training.
    Section 224. The Committee continues the provision that 
provides that funding for indemnities is limited to non-
programmatic litigation and is restricted to the payment of 
attorney fees only.
    Section 225. The Committee continues language regarding 
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and 
publication.
    Section 226. The Committee continues the provision that 
authorizes the Secretary to transfer up to 5 percent of funds 
appropriated under the heading ``Administration, Operations, 
and Management.''
    Section 227. The Committee continues the provision that 
allows the Disaster Housing Assistance Programs to be 
considered a program of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development for the purpose of income verifications and 
matching.
    Section 228. The Committee includes a provision regarding 
PHA salary levels.
    Section 229. The Committee includes a provision that allows 
critical access hospitals to be insured under section 242 of 
the National Housing Act.
    Section 230. The Committee includes a new provision that 
allows the Secretary to increase loan guarantee fees under the 
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program.
    Section 231. The Committee includes a new provision that 
facilitates evictions in HOME-funded properties when necessary 
to ensure safety and that allows recaptured HOME technical 
assistance funding to be redistributed in the formula program.
    Section 232. The Committee includes a provision which 
extends the availability of Hope VI funds appropriated in prior 
years.
    Section 233. The Committee includes a new provision that 
requires annual, rather than quarterly, reporting by the 
Secretary regarding duplication of benefits in Community 
Development Fund disaster funding.
    Section 234. The Committee includes a provision that 
repeals the paragraphs under the heading ``Flexible Subsidy 
Fund.''

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

                       United States Access Board

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $7,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         7,400,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         7,400,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    The United States Access Board (Access Board) was 
established by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 
and is the only Federal Agency whose primary mission is 
accessibility for people with disabilities. The Access Board is 
responsible for developing guidelines under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, the Architectural Barriers Act, and the 
Telecommunications Act. The Access Board is responsible for 
developing standards under section 508 of the Rehabilitation 
Act for accessible electronic and information technology used 
by Federal agencies. The Access Board also enforces the 
Architectural Barriers Act and provides training and technical 
assistance on the guidelines and standards it develops.
    The Access Board has been given responsibilities under the 
Help America Vote Act to serve on the Election Assistance 
Commission's Board of Advisors and Technical Guidelines 
Development Committee. Additionally, the Board maintains a 
small research program that develops technical assistance 
materials and provides information needed for rulemaking.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $7,400,000 
for the operations of the Access Board, which is the same as 
the fiscal year 2012 enacted level.

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $24,100,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        26,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        25,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +900,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -1,000,000


    Established in 1961, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) 
is an independent government agency, responsible for the 
regulation of oceanborne transportation in the foreign commerce 
of the United States. FMC policy focuses on 1) maintaining an 
efficient and competitive international ocean transportation 
system; and 2) protecting the public from unlawful, unfair, and 
deceptive ocean transportation practices. The Federal Maritime 
Commission monitors ocean common carriers, marine terminal 
operators, conferences, ports, and ocean transportation 
intermediaries to ensure they maintain just and reasonable 
practices. Among other activities, FMC also maintains a trade 
monitoring and enforcement program, monitors the laws and 
practices of foreign governments and their impacts on shipping 
conditions in the U.S. and enforces special regulatory 
requirements as they apply to controlled carriers.
    The principal shipping statutes administered by the FMC are 
the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101-41309), the Foreign 
Shipping Practices Act of 1988 (46 U.S.C. 42301-42307), Section 
19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. 42101-42109), 
and Public Law 89-777 (46 U.S.C. 44101-44106).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Federal 
Maritime Commission, which is $900,000 above the fiscal year 
2012 appropriation and $1,000,000 less than the budget request.

            National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $20,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        22,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        25,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................         4,500,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................         3,000,000


    The Amtrak Inspector General is expected to be an 
independent, objective unit responsible for detecting and 
preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and violations of law and for 
promoting economy, efficiency and effectiveness at Amtrak.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for Amtrak's Office of 
Inspector General (Amtrak OIG), which is $4,500,000 above the 
fiscal year 2012 enacted level and $3,000,000 above the 
proposed in the fiscal year 2013 budget. This additional 
funding should be used to review the processes and procedures 
Amtrak and FRA are using to distribute the Bridges and Tunnels 
Grants within Amtrak's Capital and Debt service account.
    As in fiscal year 2012, the Committee continues to fund the 
Amtrak OIG as a separate entity and denies the budget's request 
to fund the Amtrak OIG through a direct grant from the Federal 
Railroad Administration.
    Budget Justification.--The Committee directs the Amtrak OIG 
to submit to the Committees on Appropriations a comprehensive 
budget justification for fiscal year 2012 in similar format and 
substance to those submitted by other agencies of the Federal 
government and similar to the Amtrak OIG submission last year.

                  National Transportation Safety Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $102,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       102,400,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       102,400,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................             - - -


    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 other modes of transportation--
railroad, highway, marine and pipeline--and issuing safety 
recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents. Although 
it has always operated independently, the NTSB relied on the 
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 effective April 
of 1975.
    In addition to its investigatory duties, the NTSB is 
responsible for maintaining the government's database of civil 
aviation accidents and conducting special studies of 
transportation safety issues of national significance. 
Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international 
treaties, the 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. The NTSB also serves as 
the `court of appeals' for any airman, mechanic or mariner 
whenever certificate action is taken by the Administrator of 
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the U.S. Coast 
Guard Commandant, or when civil penalties are assessed by the 
FAA. In addition, the NTSB operates the NTSB Academy in 
Ashburn, Virginia.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $102,400,000 for the salaries and 
expenses of the NTSB, which is equal to the fiscal year 2012 
level and equal to the budget request. The Committee commends 
the NTSB for requesting a budget at a hard freeze at fiscal 
year 2012 enacted levels, even though its budget consists 
largely of salaries and expenses. The leadership of the NTSB is 
to be commended for this recognition of the current era of 
fiscal austerity.
    NTSB Academy.--The agency is encouraged to continue to seek 
additional opportunities to lease out, or otherwise generate 
revenue from the NTSB Academy, so that the agency can 
appropriately focus its resources on the important 
investigative work that is central to the agency's mission. In 
addition, the agency is again directed to submit detailed 
information on the costs associated with the NTSB Academy, as 
well as the revenue the facility is expected to generate, as 
part of the fiscal year 2014 budget request.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION




Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $215,300,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       213,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       225,300,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +10,000,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       +12,300,000


    The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by 
the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the 
Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978). 
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation now operates under the 
trade name `NeighborWorks America.' NeighborWorks America helps 
local communities establish working partnerships between 
residents and representatives of the public and private 
sectors. These partnership-based organizations are independent, 
tax-exempt, community-based nonprofit entities, often referred 
to as NeighborWorks organizations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $225,300,000 
for fiscal year 2012, which is $10,000,000 above the fiscal 
year 2012 enacted level and $12,300,000 above the budget 
request.
    In total, $80,000,000 is provided for the National 
Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling (NFMC) program, which is the 
same as the fiscal year 2012 enacted level and $5,900,000 below 
the fiscal 2013 budget request. The NFMC has provided 
foreclosure counseling for over one million families to date. 
This program has also provided training for more than 4,000 
foreclosure counselors. NeighborWorks has done an admirable job 
in adapting to different responsibilities and fulfilling its 
mission.

           United States Interagency Council on Homelessness





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $3,300,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................         3,600,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         3,300,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................          -300,000


    The mission of the United States Interagency Council on 
Homelessness (USICH) is ``to coordinate the Federal response to 
homelessness and to create a national partnership at every 
level of government and with the private sector to reduce and 
end homelessness in the nation while maximizing the 
effectiveness of the Federal Government in contributing to the 
end of homelessness.'' 42 U.S.C. 11311 (2012).
    The USICH was reauthorized in 2009 in the Homeless 
Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) 
Act, P.L. 111-22, with a termination date of October 1, 2010. 
This date was extended to October 1, 2015.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $3,300,000 for the USICH, which is 
the same as fiscal year 2012 and $300,000 below the budget 
request.
    On June 22, 2010, the USICH fulfilled one of its core 
responsibilities under the HEARTH Act by publishing the 
nation's first comprehensive plan to prevent and end 
homelessness. The plan, ``Opening Doors: The Federal Strategic 
Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness,'' will continue to serve 
as the roadmap for future coordinated efforts between the 
nineteen USICH member agencies and local and state partners.
    The Committee encourages the nineteen USICH agencies to use 
the next few years to establish good working relationships and 
interagency efficiencies that will endure past the USICH's 
sunset date in 2015.

                 TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT

    Section 401. The Committee continues the provision 
requiring pay raises to be funded within appropriated levels in 
this Act or previous appropriations Acts.
    Section 402. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in 
regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
    Section 403. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and 
prohibiting transfers of funds unless expressly provided in 
this Act.
    Section 404. The Committee continues the provision limiting 
consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement 
contracts.
    Section 405. The Committee continues the provision 
specifying reprogramming procedures by subjecting the 
establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the 
reprogramming process.
    Section 406. The Committee continues a provision that 
ensures that 50 percent of unobligated balances may remain 
available for certain purposes.
    Section 407. The Committee continues the provision 
requiring agencies and departments funded in this Act to report 
on all sole source contracts.
    Section 408. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting employee training not directly related to the 
performance of official duties.
    Section 409. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds from being used for any project that seeks to 
use the power of eminent domain unless eminent domain is 
employed only for a public use.
    Section 410. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting the transfer of funds made available in this Act to 
any instrumentality of the United States Government except as 
authorized by this Act or any other appropriations Act.
    Section 411. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to permanently 
replace an employee intent on returning to his past occupation 
after completion of military service.
    Section 412. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds in this Act from being used unless the 
expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act.
    Section 413. The Committee continues the provision 
prohibiting funds from being appropriated or made available to 
any person or entity that has been found to violate the Buy 
American Act.
    Section 414. The Committee continues the provision that 
prohibits funds for first-class airline accommodations in 
contravention of section 301-10.122 and 301-10.123 of title 41 
CFR.
    Section 415. The Committee continues the provision which 
prohibits funds in this Act or any prior Act from going to the 
group ACORN or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied 
organizations.
    Section 416. The Committee includes a provision that 
prohibits convicted felons from receiving certain Federal 
funds.
    Section 417. The Committee includes a provision that 
prohibits funding to corporations with any unpaid Federal tax 
liability.
    Section 418. The Committee includes a provision that 
establishes a spending reduction account.

            House of Representatives Reporting Requirements

    The following materials are submitted in accordance with 
various requirements of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives:

                          FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

    There were no rollcall votes.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of 
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure 
authorizes funding: The Committee on Appropriations considers 
program performance, including a program's success in 
developing and attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, 
in developing funding recommendations.

                          RESCISSION OF FUNDS

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying 
bill:

TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration, Research, Engineering & 
    Development.........................................     $26,183,998
Federal Railroad Administration, Next Generation High 
    Speed Rail..........................................       1,973,000
Federal Railroad Administration, Northeast Corridor 
    Improvement Program.................................       4,419,000
Federal Transit Administration, Formula and Bus Grants..      72,495,539
Federal Transit Administration, Capital Investment 
    Grants..............................................      11,429,055
Federal Transit Administration, Washington Metropolitan 
    Area Transit Authority..............................         523,000
Federal Transit Administration, University 
    Transportation Research.............................         292,554
Federal Transit Administration, Job Access and Reverse 
    Commute Grants......................................      14,661,719
Federal Transit Administration, Research, Training & 
    Human Resources.....................................         247,579
Federal Transit Administration, Interstate Transfer 
    Grants..............................................       2,661,568
Federal Transit Administration, Urban Discretionary 
    Accounts............................................         578,353

TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Housing Certificate Fund................................       Such sums
                                                            as available

            APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
regarding the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying 
bill.

              UNDER TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Account to which
 Account from which the transfer    the transfer is         Amount
             is made                     made
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary.........  Office of the       5% of certain
                                   Secretary.          funds subject to
                                                       conditions
Federal Aviation Administration.  Federal Aviation    2% of certain
                                   Administration.     funds subject to
                                                       conditions
FHWA: Limitation on               Appalachian         $3,220,000
 administrative expenses.          Regional
                                   Commission.
MARAD: Operations & Training....  Maritime            $3,750,000
                                   Guaranteed Loan
                                   (Title XI)
                                   Program Account.
Pipeline & Hazardous Materials    Pipeline Safety...  $1,500,000
 Safety Administration.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

      UNDER TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Account to which
 Account from which the transfer    the transfer is         Amount
             is made                     made
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FHA MMI Program Account.........  Working Capital     $71,500,000
                                   Fund.
Shelter Plus Care...............  Homeless            Such sums as
                                   Assistance Grants.  available
Administration, Operations and    Program Office      5% or $5,000,000,
 Management.                       Salaries and        whichever is
                                   Expenses.           less, subject to
                                                       conditions
Program Office Salaries and       Administration,     5% or $5,000,000,
 Expenses.                         Operations and      whichever is
                                   Management.         less, subject to
                                                       conditions
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS

    Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional 
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as 
defined in clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

          COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(E) (RAMSEYER RULE)

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

                      TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
SUBTITLE VII--AVIATION PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART B--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND NOISE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 471--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBCHAPTER I--AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 47124. Agreements for State and local operation of airport 
                    facilities

  (a) * * *
  (b) Air Traffic Control Contract Program.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) Contract air traffic control tower program.--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (D) Costs exceeding benefits.--If the costs 
                of operating an air traffic tower under the 
                program exceed the benefits, the airport 
                sponsor or State or local government having 
                jurisdiction over the airport shall pay the 
                portion of the costs that exceed such benefit, 
                with the maximum allowable local cost share 
                capped at 20 percent.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                          NATIONAL HOUSING ACT




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

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                    MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR HOSPITALS

  Sec. 242. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (i) Termination of Exemption for Critical Access Hospitals.--
          (1) In general.--The exemption for critical access 
        hospitals under subsection (b)(1)(B) shall have no 
        effect after [July 31, 2011] July 31, 2016.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


             HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1992


SEC. 184. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INDIAN HOUSING.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) Guarantee Fee.--The Secretary shall fix and collect a 
guarantee fee for the guarantee of loans under this section, 
which may not exceed the amount equal to 1 percent of the 
principal obligation of the loan. The fee shall be paid by the 
lender at time of issuance of the guarantee and shall be 
adequate, in the determination of the Secretary, to cover 
expenses and probable losses. The Secretary shall deposit any 
fees collected under this subsection in the Indian Housing Loan 
Guarantee Fund established under subsection (i).]
  (d) Guarantee Fee.--The Secretary shall establish and 
collect, at the time of issuance of the guarantee, a fee for 
the guarantee of loans under this section, in an amount not 
exceeding 3 percent of the principal obligation of the loan. 
The Secretary may also establish and collect annual premium 
payments in an amount not exceeding 1 percent of the remaining 
guaranteed balance (excluding the portion of the remaining 
balance attributable to the fee collected at the time of 
issuance of the guarantee). The Secretary shall establish the 
amount of the fees and premiums by publishing a notice in the 
Federal Register. The Secretary shall deposit any fees and 
premiums collected under this subsection in the Indian Housing 
Loan Guarantee Fund established under subsection (i).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


           CRANSTON-GONZALEZ NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE II--INVESTMENT IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle A--HOME Investment Partnerships

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 225. TENANT AND PARTICIPANT PROTECTIONS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Termination of Tenancy.--An owner shall not terminate the 
tenancy or refuse to renew the lease of a tenant of rental 
housing assisted under this title except for serious or 
repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease, 
for violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or 
for other good cause. Any termination or refusal to renew must 
be preceded by not less than 30 days by the owner's service 
upon the tenant of a written notice specifying the grounds for 
the action. Such 30 day waiting period is not required if the 
grounds for the termination or refusal to renew involve a 
direct threat to the safety of the tenants or employees of the 
housing, or an imminent and serious threat to the property (and 
the termination or refusal to renew is in accordance with the 
requirements of State or local law).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               Subtitle B--Community Housing Partnership

SEC. 231. SET-ASIDE FOR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Recapture and Reuse.--If any funds reserved under 
subsection (a) remain uninvested for a period of 24 months, 
then the Secretary shall deduct such funds from the line of 
credit in the participating jurisdiction's HOME Investment 
Trust Fund and [make such funds available by direct 
reallocation (1) to other participating jurisdictions for 
affordable housing developed, sponsored or owned by community 
housing development organizations, or (2) to nonprofit 
intermediary organizations to carry out activities that develop 
the capacity of community housing development organizations 
consistent with section 233, with preference to community 
housing development organizations serving the jurisdiction from 
which the funds were recaptured] reallocate the funds by 
formula in accordance with section 217(d) of this Act (42 
U.S.C. 12747(d)).
  [(c) Direct Reallocation Criteria.--Insofar as practicable, 
direct reallocations under this section shall be made according 
to the selection criteria established under section 217(c).]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS 
   HURRICANES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO, AND PANDEMIC INFLUENZA ACT, 2006

(Public Law 109-148)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


DIVISION B

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                TITLE I

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS HURRICANES IN THE GULF 
OF MEXICO

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 9

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   Community Planning and Development

                       COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

  For an additional amount for the ``Community development 
fund'', for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, 
long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in the 
most impacted and distressed areas related to the consequences 
of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in 2005 in States for which 
the President declared a major disaster under title IV of the 
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) in conjunction with Hurricane Katrina, 
Rita, or Wilma, $11,500,000,000, to remain available until 
expended, for activities authorized under title I of the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-
383): Provided, That no State shall receive more than 54 
percent of the amount provided under this heading: Provided 
further, That funds provided under this heading shall be 
administered through an entity or entities designated by the 
Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may 
not be used for activities reimbursable by or for which funds 
are made available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds 
allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 
amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this 
heading: Provided further, That each State may use up to five 
percent of its allocation for administrative costs: Provided 
further, That Louisiana and Mississippi may each use up to 
$20,000,000 (with up to $400,000 each for technical assistance) 
from funds made available under this heading for LISC and the 
Enterprise Foundation for activities authorized by section 4 of 
the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note), as in 
effect immediately before June 12, 1997, and for activities 
authorized under section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program 
Extension Act of 1996, including demolition, site clearance and 
remediation, and program administration: Provided further, That 
in administering the funds under this heading, the Secretary of 
Housing and Urban Development shall waive, or specify 
alternative requirements for, any provision of any statute or 
regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with 
the obligation by the Secretary or the use by the recipient of 
these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to 
fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the 
environment), upon a request by the State that such waiver is 
required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, and 
a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be 
inconsistent with the overall purpose of the statute, as 
modified: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the 
requirement that activities benefit persons of low and moderate 
income, except that at least 50 percent of the funds made 
available under this heading must benefit primarily persons of 
low and moderate income unless the Secretary otherwise makes a 
finding of compelling need: Provided further, That the 
Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of 
any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers 
pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development 
Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date of 
such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the 
Secretary must be reconsidered according to the three previous 
provisos on the two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary 
published the waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, 
That prior to the obligation of funds each State shall submit a 
plan to the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, 
including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these 
funds will address long-term recovery and restoration of 
infrastructure: Provided further, That each State will report 
quarterly to the Committees on Appropriations on all awards and 
uses of funds made available under this heading, including 
specifically identifying all awards of sole-source contracts 
and the rationale for making the award on a sole-source basis: 
Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify the 
Committees on Appropriations on any proposed allocation of any 
funds and any related waivers made pursuant to these provisions 
under this heading no later than 5 days before such waiver is 
made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish 
procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication 
of benefits and report [quarterly] annually to the Committees 
on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to prevent 
fraud and abuse of funds made available under this heading 
including duplication of benefits: Provided further, That the 
amounts provided under this heading are designated as an 
emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 
95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 
for fiscal year 2006.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR DEFENSE, THE GLOBAL WAR 
                ON TERROR, AND HURRICANE RECOVERY, 2006

(Public Law 109-234)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                TITLE II

FURTHER HURRICANE DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 9

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                   Community Planning and Development

                       COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

  For an additional amount for the ``Community development 
fund'', for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, 
long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in the 
most impacted and distressed areas related to the consequences 
of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, or Wilma in States for which the 
President declared a major disaster under title IV of the 
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), $5,200,000,000, to remain available 
until expended, for activities authorized under title I of the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-
383): Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be 
administered through an entity or entities designated by the 
Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may 
not be used for activities reimbursable by or for which funds 
are made available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds 
allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 
amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this 
heading: Provided further, That each State may use up to five 
percent of its allocation for administrative costs: Provided 
further, That not less than $1,000,000,000 from funds made 
available on a pro-rata basis according to the allocation made 
to each State under this heading shall be used for repair, 
rehabilitation, and reconstruction (including demolition, site 
clearance and remediation) of the affordable rental housing 
stock (including public and other HUD-assisted housing) in the 
impacted areas: Provided further, That no State shall receive 
more than $4,200,000,000: Provided further, That in 
administering the funds under this heading, the Secretary of 
Housing and Urban Development may waive, or specify alternative 
requirements for, any provision of any statute or regulation 
that the Secretary administers in connection with the 
obligation by the Secretary or the use by the recipient of 
these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to 
fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the 
environment), upon a request by the State that such waiver is 
required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, and 
a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be 
inconsistent with the overall purpose of the statute: Provided 
further, That the Secretary may waive the requirement that 
activities benefit persons of low and moderate income, except 
that at least 50 percent of the funds made available under this 
heading must benefit primarily persons of low and moderate 
income unless the Secretary otherwise makes a finding of 
compelling need: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or 
regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I 
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 no later 
than 5 days before the effective date of such waiver: Provided 
further, That every waiver made by the Secretary must be 
reconsidered according to the three previous provisos on the 
two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary published the 
waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, That prior to 
the obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan to the 
Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including 
criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will 
address long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: 
Provided further, That prior to the obligation of funds to each 
State, the Secretary shall ensure that such plan gives priority 
to infrastructure development and rehabilitation and the 
rehabilitation and reconstruction of the affordable rental 
housing stock including public and other HUD-assisted housing: 
Provided further, That each State will report quarterly to the 
Committees on Appropriations on all awards and uses of funds 
made available under this heading, including specifically 
identifying all awards of sole-source contracts and the 
rationale for making the award on a sole-source basis: Provided 
further, That the Secretary shall notify the Committees on 
Appropriations on any proposed allocation of any funds and any 
related waivers made pursuant to these provisions under this 
heading no later than 5 days before such waiver is made: 
Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish procedures 
to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication of 
benefits and report [quarterly] annually to the Committees on 
Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to prevent fraud 
and abuse of funds made available under this heading including 
duplication of benefits: Provided further, That of the amounts 
made available under this heading, $12,000,000 shall be 
transferred to ``Management and Administration, Salaries and 
Expenses'', of which $7,000,000 is for the administrative 
costs, including IT costs, of the KDHAP/DVP voucher program; 
$9,000,000 shall be transferred to the Office of Inspector 
General; and $6,000,000 shall be transferred to HUD's Working 
Capital Fund: Provided further, That none of the funds provided 
under this heading may be used by a State or locality as a 
matching requirement, share, or contribution for any other 
Federal program: Provided further, That the amounts provided 
under this heading are designated as an emergency requirement 
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), 
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

(Public Law 110-252)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE III--NATURAL DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                CHAPTER 6--HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   Community Planning and Development

                       community development fund

  For an additional amount for ``Community Development Fund'', 
for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term 
recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in areas covered by 
a declaration of major disaster under title IV of the Robert T. 
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) as a result of recent natural disasters, 
$300,000,000, to remain available until expended, for 
activities authorized under title I of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-383): 
Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be 
administered through an entity or entities designated by the 
Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may 
not be used for activities reimbursable by or for which funds 
are made available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds 
allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 
amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this 
heading: Provided further, That each State may use up to five 
percent of its allocation for administrative costs: Provided 
further, That in administering the funds under this heading, 
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall waive, or 
specify alternative requirements for, any provision of any 
statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in 
connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the use by 
the recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for 
requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor 
standards, and the environment), upon a request by the State 
that such waiver is required to facilitate the use of such 
funds or guarantees, and a finding by the Secretary that such 
waiver would not be inconsistent with the overall purpose of 
the statute, as modified: Provided further, That the Secretary 
may waive the requirement that activities benefit persons of 
low and moderate income, except that at least 50 percent of the 
funds made available under this heading must benefit primarily 
persons of low and moderate income unless the Secretary 
otherwise makes a finding of compelling need: Provided further, 
That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any 
waiver of any statute or regulation that the Secretary 
administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the 
effective date of such waiver: Provided further, That every 
waiver made by the Secretary must be reconsidered according to 
the three previous provisos on the two-year anniversary of the 
day the Secretary published the waiver in the Federal Register: 
Provided further, That prior to the obligation of funds each 
State shall submit a plan to the Secretary detailing the 
proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility 
and how the use of these funds will address long-term recovery 
and restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That each 
State will report quarterly to the Committees on Appropriations 
on all awards and uses of funds made available under this 
heading, including specifically identifying all awards of sole-
source contracts and the rationale for making the award on a 
sole-source basis: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
notify the Committees on Appropriations on any proposed 
allocation of any funds and any related waivers made pursuant 
to these provisions under this heading no later than 5 days 
before such waiver is made: Provided further, That the 
Secretary shall establish procedures to prevent recipients from 
receiving any duplication of benefits and report [quarterly] 
annually to the Committees on Appropriations with regard to all 
steps taken to prevent fraud and abuse of funds made available 
under this heading including duplication of benefits.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009

(Public Law 110-329)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 DIVISION B--DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS 
ACT, 2008

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE I--RELIEF AND RECOVERY FROM NATURAL DISASTERS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 10--TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   Community Planning and Development

                       community development fund

  For an additional amount for the ``Community Development 
Fund'', for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, 
long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure, housing, 
and economic revitalization in areas affected by hurricanes, 
floods, and other natural disasters occuring during 2008 for 
which the President declared a major disaster under title IV of 
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
Act of 1974, $6,500,000,000, to remain available until 
expended, for activities authorized under title I of the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-
383): Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be 
administered through an entity or entities designated by the 
Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may 
not be used for activities reimbursable by, or for which funds 
are made available by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds 
allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 
amount of any formula assistance received by a State under the 
Community Development Fund: Provided further, That each State 
may use up to 5 percent of its allocation for administrative 
costs: Provided further, That $6,500,000 shall be available for 
use by the Assistant Secretary of Community Planning and 
Development for the administrative costs, including information 
technology costs, with respect to amounts made available under 
this section and under section 2301(a) of the Housing and 
Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Provided further, That not less 
than $650,000,000 from funds made available on a pro-rata basis 
according to the allocation made to each State under this 
heading shall be used for repair, rehabilitation, and 
reconstruction (including demolition, site clearance and 
remediation) of the affordable rental housing stock (including 
public and other HUD-assisted housing) in the impacted areas 
where there is a demonstrated need as determined by the 
Secretary: Provided further, That in administering the funds 
under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development may waive, or specify alternative requirements for, 
any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary 
administers in connection with the obligation by the Secretary 
or the use by the recipient of these funds or guarantees 
(except for requirements related to fair housing, 
nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment), upon 
a request by a State explaining why such waiver is required to 
facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, if the 
Secretary finds that such waiver would not be inconsistent with 
the overall purpose of title I of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1974: Provided further, That a waiver 
granted by the Secretary under the preceding proviso may not 
reduce the percentage of funds which must be used for 
activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income to 
less than 50 percent, unless the Secretary specifically finds 
that there is compelling need to further reduce or eliminate 
the percentage requirement: Provided further, That the 
Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of 
any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers 
pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development 
Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date of 
such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the 
Secretary must be reconsidered according to the three previous 
provisos on the 2-year anniversary of the day the Secretary 
published the waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, 
That the Secretary shall allocate to the states not less than 
33 percent of the funding provided under this heading within 60 
days after the enactment of this Act based on the best 
estimates available of relative damage and anticipated 
assistance from other Federal sources: Provided further, That 
prior to the obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan 
to the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, 
including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these 
funds will address long-term recovery and restoration of 
infrastructure: Provided further, That each State will report 
quarterly to the Committees on Appropriations on all awards and 
uses of funds made available under this heading, including 
specifically identifying all awards of sole-source contracts 
and the rationale for making the award on a sole-source basis: 
Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify the 
Committees on Appropriations of any proposed allocation of any 
funds and any related waivers made pursuant to the provisions 
under this heading no later than 5 days before such allocation 
or waiver is made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
establish procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any 
duplication of benefits and report [quarterly] annually to the 
Committees on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to 
prevent fraud and abuse of funds made available under this 
heading including duplication of benefits: Provided further, 
That none of the funds provided under this heading may be used 
by a State or locality as a matching requirement, share, or 
contribution for any other Federal program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


  DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

                          (Public Law 110-161)

   AN ACT Making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign 
 operations, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 2008, and for other purposes.



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
DIVISION K--TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED 
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                TITLE II

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Housing Programs

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         [FLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

                          [(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

  [From the Rental Housing Assistance Fund, all uncommitted 
balances of excess rental charges as of September 30, 2007, and 
any collections made during fiscal year 2008 and all subsequent 
fiscal years, shall be transferred to the Flexible Subsidy 
Fund, as authorized by section 236(g) of the National Housing 
Act.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following statements are 
submitted describing the effect of provisions in the 
accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the 
application of existing law.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    Language is included under Office of the Secretary, 
``Salaries and expenses'' specifying certain amounts for 
individual offices of the Office of the Secretary and official 
reception and representation expenses, and specifying transfer 
authority among offices.
    Language is included under Office of the Secretary, 
``Salaries and expenses'' which would allow crediting the 
account with up to $2,500,000 in user fees; prohibits 
establishment of Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs.
    Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, 
``Financial Management Capital'' which provides funds to 
upgrade DOT's financial systems and processes.
    Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, 
``Cyber Security Initiatives'' which provides funds for 
information technology security upgrades.
    Language is included for the Office of Civil Rights, which 
is responsible for advising the Secretary on civil rights and 
equal opportunity issues and ensuring the full implementation 
of the civil rights laws and departmental civil rights policies 
in all official actions and programs.
    Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, 
``Transportation planning, research, and development'' which 
provides funds for conducting transportation planning, 
research, systems development, development activities and 
making grants, and makes funds available until expended.
    Language is included that limits operating costs and 
capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund for the Department 
of Transportation; provides that services shall be provided on 
a competitive basis, except for non-DOT entities; restricts the 
transfer for any funds to the Working Capital Fund with 
approval; and limits special assessments or reimbursable 
agreements levied against any program, project or activity 
funded in this Act to only those assessments or reimbursable 
agreements that are presented to and approved by the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, 
``Minority business resource center'' which limits the amount 
of loans that can be subsidized, and provides funds for 
administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Office of the Secretary, 
``Minority business outreach'' specifying that funds may be 
used for business opportunities related to any mode of 
transportation, and limits the availability of funds.
    Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, 
``Payments to air carriers'' that provides funds from the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund, allows the Secretary of 
Transportation to consider subsidy requirements when 
determining service to a community, limits funds only to 
communities served in fiscal year 2011, eliminates the 
requirement that carriers use at least 15-passenger aircraft, 
and allows the Secretary to repay any funds borrowed from the 
Federal Aviation Administration to fund the essential air 
service program.
    Section 101 prohibits the Office of the Secretary of 
Transportation from approving assessments or reimbursable 
agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal 
administrations in this Act, unless such assessments or 
agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for 
Congressional notification.
    Section 102 allows the Secretary or his designee to work 
with States and State legislators to consider proposals related 
to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities.
    Section 103 allows the Department to use the Working 
Capital Fund to provide transit benefits to Federal employees.
    Section 104 sets administrative requirements of the 
Department's Credit Council.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that provides funds for 
operations and research related to commercial space 
transportation, administrative expenses for research and 
development, establishment of air navigation facilities, 
establishment of air navigation facilities, the operation 
(including leasing) and maintenance of aircraft, subsidizing 
the cost of aeronautical charts and maps sold to the public, 
lease or purchase of passenger motor vehicles for replacement; 
funds for certain aviation program activities; and specifies 
transfer authority among offices.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' permitting transfer of funds, as 
specified.
    Language is included requiring a controller workforce plan 
by March 31 of each fiscal year required by section 221 of 
Public Law 108-176 and reduces the appropriation by $100,000 
for each day the report is late.
    Language is included requiring a similar March 31 report on 
flight standards and aircraft certification staff and reduces 
the appropriation by $100,000 for each day the report is late.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' permitting the use of funds to 
enter into a grant agreement with a nonprofit standard setting 
organization to develop aviation safety standards.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits the use of funds 
for new applicants of the second career training program.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits funds to plan, 
finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new 
aviation user fees not specifically authorized by law after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that credits funds received from 
States, counties, municipalities, foreign authorities, other 
public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred 
in the provision of agency services.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that provides $10,350,000 for 
the contract tower cost sharing program.
    Language is included under the Federal Aviation 
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits funds for 
conducting and coordinating activities on aeronautical charting 
and cartography through the Working Capital Fund.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Facilities and equipment'' that provides funds for 
acquisition, establishment, technical support services, 
improvement by contract or purchase, and hire of air navigation 
and experimental facilities and equipment; engineering and 
service testing, construction and furnishing of quarters and 
related accommodations at remote localities; and the purchase, 
lease, or transfer of aircraft.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Facilities and equipment'' that provides funds from the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund and limits the availability of 
funds.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Facilities and equipment'' that allows certain funds received 
for expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of 
air navigation facilities to be credited to the account.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Facilities and equipment'' that requires the Secretary of 
Transportation to transmit a comprehensive capital investment 
plan for the Federal Aviation Administration.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Research, engineering, and development'' that provides funds 
from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund for research, 
engineering, and development, including construction of 
experimental facilities and acquisition of necessary sites by 
lease or grant; and limits the availability of funds.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Research, engineering, and development'' that allows certain 
funds received for expenses incurred in research, engineering 
and development to be credited to the account.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that provides funds from the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund for airport planning and 
development; noise compatibility planning and programs; 
procurement, installation, and commissioning of runway 
incursion prevention devices and systems; grants authorized 
under section 41743 of title 49, U.S.C.; and inspection 
activities and administration of airport safety programs; and 
limits the availability of funds.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that limits funds available for 
the planning or execution of programs with obligations in 
excess of $3,350,000,000.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that prohibits funds for the 
replacement of baggage conveyor systems, reconfiguration of 
terminal baggage areas, or other airport improvements that are 
necessary to install bulk explosive detection systems.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that establishes a cost share of 
95 percent for construction projects for which the project 
sponsor received a grant in fiscal year 2011. Language is 
included under Federal Aviation Administration, ``Grants-in-aid 
for airports'' that provides $105,000,000 for administration.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that specifies $15,000,000 for 
the airport cooperative research program, $29,300,000 for the 
airport technology research program.
    Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that rescinds contract authority 
above the obligation limitation.
    Section 110 limits the number of technical workyears at the 
Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to 600 in 
fiscal year 2011.
    Section 111 prohibits FAA from requiring airport sponsors 
to provide the agency ``without cost'' building construction, 
maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space in sponsor-owned 
buildings, except in the case of certain specified exceptions.
    Section 112 allows reimbursement for fees collected and 
credited under 49 U.S.C. 45303.
    Section 113 allows reimbursement of funds for providing 
technical assistance to foreign aviation authorities to be 
credited to the operations account.
    Section 114 prohibits funds limited in this Act for the 
Airport Improvement Program to be provided to an airport that 
refuses a request from the Secretary of Transportation to use 
public space at the airport for the purpose of conducting 
outreach on air passenger rights.
    Section 115 prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium 
pay except in those cases where the individual actually worked 
on a Sunday.
    Section 116 prohibits FAA from using funds to purchase 
store gift cards or gift certificates through a government-
issued credit card.
    Section 117 allows airports experiencing the required level 
of boardings through charter and scheduled air service to be 
eligible for funds under 49 U.S.C. 47114(c).
    Section 118 requires approval from the Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Administration of the Department of 
Transportation for retention bonuses for any FAA employee.
    Section 119 limits the cost-share required under the 
contract tower program to 20 percent.
    Section 119A requires the Secretary to block the display of 
an owner or operator's aircraft registration number in the 
Aircraft Situational Display to Industry program, upon the 
request of an owner or operator.
    Section 119B prohibits funds to change weight restrictions 
or prior permission rules at Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New 
Jersey.
    Language is included under the Federal Highway 
Administration, ``Limitation on administrative expenses'' that 
limits the amount to be paid, together with advances and 
reimbursements received, for the administrative expenses of the 
agency, including an amount for financial system upgrades 
subject to conditions. In addition to this limitation, an 
amount is specified that is to be made available to the 
Appalachian Regional Commission for administrative expenses.
    Language is included under the Federal Highway 
Administration, ``Federal-aid highways'' that limits the 
obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety 
construction programs; limits the amount available for the 
implementation or execution of programs for transportation 
research, which shall not apply to any authority previously 
made available for obligation; and allows the Secretary to 
charge, collect and spend fees for loan applications and that 
such amounts are in addition to administrative expenses and are 
not subject to any obligation limitation or limitation on 
administrative expenses under section 608 of title 23, U.S.C., 
and which are available until expended.
    Language is included under the Federal Highway 
Administration, ``Federal-aid highways'' that liquidates 
contract authority.
    Section 120 distributes obligation authority among federal-
aid highways programs.
    Section 121 credits funds received by the Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics to the federal-aid highways account.
    Section 122 provides requirements for any waiver of the Buy 
American Act.
    Section 123 prohibits tolling in Texas, with exceptions.
    Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration, ``Motor Carrier Safety Operations and 
Programs'' that provides a limitation on obligations and 
liquidation of contract authorization, including specifying 
amounts available for research and technology programs and 
commercial motor vehicle operator's grants; and prohibits funds 
for outreach and education from being transferred.
    Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration, ``Motor carrier safety grants'' that provides a 
limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract 
authorization, including specifying amounts available for the 
commercial driver's license improvements program, border 
enforcement grants program, the performance and registration 
information system management program, the commercial vehicle 
information systems and networks deployment program, the safety 
data improvement program, and the commercial driver's license 
information system modernization program; and specifies amount 
for new entrant audits.
    Section 130 continues a provision subjecting funds 
appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions included 
in prior appropriations Acts regarding Mexico-domiciled motor 
carriers.
    Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ``Operations and research'' that limits the 
availability of funds and prohibits the planning or 
implementation of any rulemaking on labeling passenger car 
tires for low rolling resistance.
    Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ``Operations and research'' that provides a 
limitation on obligations, limits the availability of funds, 
and provides a liquidation of contract authorization from the 
highway trust fund.
    Language is included under the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration ``National driver register'' that 
provides a limitation on obligations and a liquidation of 
contract authorization from the highway trust fund.
    Language is included under the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration ``National driver register 
modernization'' that limits the availability of funds.
    Language is included under the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration ``Highway traffic safety grants'' that 
provides a limitation on obligations, limits the availability 
of funds, specifies the amounts for certain safety grant 
programs and provides a liquidation of contract authorization 
from the highway trust fund.
    Language is included under the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration that reallocates funds from the seat belt 
performance grants program to fund a new distracted driving 
grant program and allows a portion of the funding to be used 
for the development, production, and use of broadcast and print 
media in support of efforts to prevent distracted driving.
    Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' prohibiting 
the use of funds for construction, rehabilitation or remodeling 
costs or for office furniture for state, local, or private 
buildings.
    Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' that limits 
funding for an evaluation for the high visibility enforcement 
program.
    Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' limiting the 
amount of funds available for technical assistance to states 
under section 410.
    Section 140 provides funding for travel and related 
expenses for state management reviews and highway safety core 
competency development training.
    Section 141 exempts obligation authority that was made 
available in previous public laws for multiple years from 
limitations on obligations for the current year.
    Section 142 prohibits funding for the National Highway 
Safety Advisory Committee.
    Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 
``Safety and operations'' limiting the availability of funds.
    Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 
``Railroad research and development'' limiting the availability 
of funds.
    Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 
``Railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program'' 
authorizing the Secretary to issue direct loans and loan 
guarantees under sections 502 through 504 of the Railroad 
Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.
    Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 
``Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program'' that 
prohibits new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments using 
federal funds for credit risk premium under section 502 of the 
Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.
    Language is included under the Federal Railroad 
Administration, ``Operating subsidy grants to the National 
Railroad Passenger Corporation'' that allows the Secretary of 
Transportation to make quarterly grants to the National 
Railroad Passenger Corporation; allows the Secretary to approve 
funding only after receiving and reviewing a grant request for 
each train route; ensures that each grant request is 
accompanied by a detailed financial analysis, revenue 
projection, and capital expenditure projection; requires the 
Corporation to submit a detailed business plan that includes 
targets for ridership, revenues, and capital and operating 
expenses as well as semi-annual reports regarding the status of 
the business plan; requires the Corporation to follow the 
provisions of the direct loan agreement; prohibits funds to 
support any route with a discounted fare of more than 50 
percent off the normal peak fare, unless the operating loss is 
the result of a discount covered by a State; and requires 
Amtrak to submit a 2014 budget similar to other Federal 
agencies.
    Language is included under the Federal Railroad 
Administration, ``Capital and Debt Service Grants to the 
National Railroad Passenger Corporation'' that allows the 
Secretary of Transportation to make grants to the National 
Railroad Passenger Corporation for the maintenance and repair 
of capital infrastructure and debt service; allows the 
Secretary to retain some funds to be used for oversight; bars a 
portion of these funds under this section to be used for 
operating losses; restricts the use of funds unless they have 
been approved by the Secretary or are contained in the 
Corporation's business plan; provides funds for high priority 
state-of-good-repair intercity infrastructure projects on 
existing intercity passenger rail services; and allows the 
Secretary to retain some funds to be used by the Northeast 
Corridor Commission.
    Section 150 retains a provision that ceases the 
availability of Amtrak funds if the railroad contracts for 
services outside the United States for any service performed by 
a full-time or part-time Amtrak employee as of July 1, 2006.
    Section 151 retains a provision, which allows FRA to 
receive and use cash or spare parts to repair and replace 
damaged automated track inspection cars and equipment in 
connection with the automated track inspection program.
    Section 152 includes a provision which authorizes the 
Secretary to allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or 
repurchase such stock sold to the Department.
    Section 153 continues a provision that limits overtime to 
$35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak's president to waive this 
restriction for specific employees for safety or operational 
efficiency reasons, and requires notification to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of granting 
such a waiver.
    Section 154 includes a provision which transfers 
unobligated balances in contract authority that were originally 
authorized for Magnetic Levitation to activities authorized 
under the Railway-Highway Grade Crossing Hazard Elimination 
Program.
    Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 
``Administrative Expenses'' specifying an amount for 
administrative expenses and travel; prohibiting a permanent 
office of transit security; directing the submission of the 
annual report on new starts. Language is included under Federal 
Transit Administration, ``Formula and Bus Grants'' that 
provides a limitation on obligations from the Highway Trust 
Fund, contingent upon reauthorization, and limits the 
availability of funds.
    Language is included under Liquidation of Contract 
Authority which makes funds available for payments of 
obligations, contingent upon authorization.
    Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 
``Research and University Research Centers'' that limits the 
availability of funds and specifies the amounts for certain 
offices and programs.
    Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 
``Capital Investment Grants'' that limits the availability of 
funds.
    Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 
``Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority'' for capital 
and preventive maintenance expenditures and requires the 
Secretary to determine that WMATA has placed the highest 
priority on safety investments and waives a requirement under 
the Passenger Rail Infrastructure Improvement and Investment 
Act.
    Section 160 exempts previously made transit obligations 
from limitations on obligations.
    Section 161 allows funds appropriated for capital 
investment grants and bus and bus facilities not obligated by 
September 30, 2015, plus other recoveries to be available for 
other projects under 49 U.S.C. 5309.
    Section 162 allows for the transfer of prior year 
appropriations from older accounts to be merged into new 
accounts with similar, current activities.
    Section 163 allows prior year funds available for capital 
investment grants to be used in this fiscal year for such 
projects.
    Section 164 requires unobligated funds or recoveries under 
section 5309 of title 49 that are available for reallocation 
shall be directed to projects eligible to use the funds for the 
purposes for which they were originally intended.
    Section 165 provides flexibility to fund program management 
oversight activities as authorized by section 5316 of title 49, 
United States Code.
    Section 166 prohibits funds from being used to carry out 49 
U.S.C. 5309(m)(6)(B) and (C).
    Section 167 prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a 
project with a new starts share greater than 60%.
    Section 168 directs the Secretary to conduct a formal 
adjudication related to charter bus service under part 604 of 
title 49 CFR.
    Section 169 permits the Secretary to consider significant 
private contributions when calculating the non-Federal share of 
new starts projects.
    Section 169A rescinds unobligated prior year funds from 
various transit accounts.
    Section 169B prohibits funds for a certain fixed guideway 
project in Houston, Texas.
    Section 169C allows fuel and utilities for vehicles to be 
treated as a capital maintenance expense under section 5307 in 
fiscal year 2013, up to $100,000,000.
    Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway 
Development Corporation that authorizes expenditures, 
contracts, and commitments as may be necessary.
    Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway 
Development Corporation ``Operations and Maintenance'' that 
provides funds derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
    Language is included under Maritime Administration, 
``Maritime Security Program'' that provides funds to preserve a 
U.S. flag merchant fleet.
    Language is included under Maritime Administration, 
``Operations and Training'' that provides dedicated funds for 
salaries and benefits of employees of the United States 
Merchant Marine Academy, Student Incentive Program payments, 
capital improvements at the United States Merchant Marine 
Academy, and the State Maritime Schools Schoolship Maintenance 
and Repair; directs allotment holders, and limits funds until 
the Secretary completes a plan detailing how funding will be 
expended at the Academy.
    Language is included under Maritime Administration, ``Ship 
Disposal'' that limits the availability of funds.
    Language is included under Maritime Administration, 
``Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account'' that 
provides for the transfer to Operations and Training. Section 
170 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and 
services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy 
involving government property under the control of MARAD and 
rental payments shall be covered into the Treasury as 
miscellaneous receipts.
    Section 170 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish 
utilities and services and make repairs to any lease, contract, 
or occupancy involving government property under the control of 
MARAD.
    Section 171 continues a provision regarding MARAD ship 
disposal.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Operational expenses'' which specifies 
the amount derived from the pipeline safety fund and requires 
that $1,500,000 be transferred to the pipeline safety account 
to fund pipeline safety information grants to communities.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Hazardous materials safety'' which 
limits the availability of a certain amount and allows up to 
$800,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) to be 
deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting 
receipts.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Hazardous materials safety'' that 
credits certain funds received for expenses incurred for 
training and other activities incurred in performance of 
hazardous materials exemptions and approval functions.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Pipeline safety'' which specifies the 
amounts derived from the pipeline safety fund and the oil spill 
liability trust fund and limits their period of availability.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Pipeline safety'' that requires the 
agency to fund the one-call state grant program.
    Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, ``Emergency Preparedness Grants'' which 
specifies the amount derived from the emergency preparedness 
fund, limits the availability of some funds, and prohibits 
funds from being obligated by anyone other than the Secretary 
or his designee.
    Language is included under Office of Inspector General, 
``Salaries and expenses'' that provides the Inspector General 
with all necessary authority to investigate allegations of 
fraud by any person or entity that is subject to regulation by 
the Department of Transportation and the authority to 
investigate unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of 
competition by domestic and foreign air carriers and ticket 
agents.
    Language is included under the Office of the Inspector 
General, ``Salaries and expenses'' providing the IG with 
authority to conduct audits and investigations of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) and to 
require MWAA to reimburse the IG to these audits and 
investigations.
    Language is included under Surface Transportation Board, 
``Salaries and expenses'' allowing the collection of $1,250,000 
in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface 
Transportation Board; and providing that the sum appropriated 
from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar 
basis as such fees are received.
    Section 180 allows the Department of Transportation to use 
funds for aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; 
uniforms; or allowances, as authorized by law.
    Section 181 limits appropriations for services authorized 
by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for an Executive Level IV.
    Section 182 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and 
expenses of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees 
in the Department of Transportation, and prohibits political 
and Presidential personnel assigned on temporary detail outside 
the Department of Transportation.
    Section 183 prohibits recipients of funds made available in 
this Act from releasing personal information, including Social 
Security number, medical or disability information, and 
photographs from a driver's license or motor vehicle record, 
without express consent of the person to whom such information 
pertains; and prohibits the withholding of funds provided in 
this Act for any grantee if a state is in noncompliance with 
this provision.
    Section 184 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 to be used for 
expenses incurred for training may be credited to each agency's 
respective accounts.
    Section 185 prohibits funds in Title I of this Act from 
being issued for any grant unless the Secretary of 
Transportation notifies the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations not less than three full business days before 
any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full 
funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is 
announced by the department or its modal administrations.
    Section 186 allows funds received from rebates, refunds, 
and similar sources to be credited to Department of 
Transportation appropriations.
    Section 187 allows amounts from improper payments to a 
third party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the 
Department of Transportation to be available to cover expenses 
incurred in recovery of such payments.
    Section 188 stipulates that the Committees on 
Appropriations solely approve or deny any funds provided or 
limited in this Act that are subject to a reprogramming action 
that requires notice to be provided to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 189 prohibits the Surface Transportation Board from 
charging or collecting filing fees for late complaints in an 
amount in excess of the authorized amount under section 1914 of 
title 28, United States Code.
    Section 190 allows funds to modal administrations to be 
obligated to the Office of the Secretary for the costs related 
to assessments or reimbursable agreements only when the 
services provide a direct benefit to the applicable modal 
administration.

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Management and Administration'' which designates 
funds for ``Administration, Operations and Maintenance''; 
allows funds to be used for certain administrative and non-
administrative expenses; allows funds to be used for 
advertising and promotional activities; requires the Secretary 
to submit a detailed budget justification for each office 
within the Department.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Program office salaries and expenses'' which 
designates funds for ``Public and Indian Housing,'' ``Community 
Planning and Development,'' ``Housing,'' ``Policy Development 
and Research,'' ``Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity'' and 
``Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control.''
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' which specifies 
funds for certain programs, activities and purposes and limits 
the use and availability of certain funds; specifies the 
methodology for allocation of renewal funding; directs the 
Secretary to provide renewal funding based on validated voucher 
system leasing and cost data for the prior year; prohibits 
funds to exceed a public housing agency's authorized level of 
units under contract, except for those participating in the 
Moving to Work demonstration; directs the Secretary to the 
extent possible to prorate each public housing agency's (PHA) 
allocation; directs the Secretary to notify PHAs of their 
annual budget not later than 60 days after enactment of the 
Act; allows the Secretary to extend the notification period 
with the prior approval of the House and Senate appropriations 
committees; specifies the amounts available to the Secretary to 
allocate to PHAs that need additional funds and for fees; 
specifies the amount for additional rental subsidy due to 
unforeseen emergencies and portability; provides funding for 
public housing agencies with vouchers that were not in use 
during the previous 12 month period in order to be available to 
meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13); provides 
funding for incremental vouchers for homeless veterans; and 
provides for adjustments in allocations for PHAs that 
participate in the Small Area Fair Market Rent demonstration.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' which provides 
funds for tenant protection vouchers; sets certain conditions 
for the Secretary to provide such vouchers; provides funds for 
residents of multi-family properties that would not otherwise 
have been eligible for tenant-protection vouchers; and sets 
eligibility requirements for multi-family properties to 
participate in the program.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' which provides 
funds for administrative and other expenses of public housing 
agencies to administer the section 8 tenant-based rental 
assistance program; sets an amount to be available to PHAs that 
need additional funds to administer tenant protection 
assistance, disaster related vouchers, Veterans Affairs 
Supportive Housing vouchers and other special purpose vouchers; 
establishes that ``Moving to Work'' (MTW) agencies be funded 
pursuant to their MTW agreements; provides funds for family 
self-sufficiency coordinators; and provides funds for section 
811 mainstream vouchers.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' which provides 
funds for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers, 
sets requirements for the administration of VASH vouchers, 
specifies that funds shall remain available for homeless 
veterans upon turn-over of such vouchers, and requires the 
Secretary separately track such vouchers.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Housing Certificate Fund'' which rescinds prior 
year funds; and allows the Secretary to use recaptures to fund 
project-based contracts and contract administrators.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Public Housing Capital Fund'' which limits the 
availability of funds; limits the delegation of certain waiver 
authorities and prohibits funds from being used for certain 
activities; specifies the total amount available for certain 
activities; specifies an amount for ongoing Public Housing 
Financial and Physical Assessment activities of the Real Estate 
Assessment Center; specifies an amount for emergency capital 
needs; specifies the amount for support services, service 
coordinators and congregate services; specifies the amount to 
support the costs of administrative and judicial receiverships; 
and makes funds available for bonuses for high performing PHAs.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Public Housing Operating Fund'' which sets the 
basis for the allocation of funds and prohibits the use of 
funds under certain conditions, and provides the Secretary with 
the authority to take into account changes in requirements on 
PHAs in the administration of the section 8 voucher program.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Native American Housing Block Grants'' which 
limits the availability of funds; specifies the formula for 
allocation; specifies the amounts for technical assistance and 
capacity building to support the inspection of Indian housing 
units, administrative expenses, to subsidize the total 
principal amount of any notes, and the cost of guaranteed 
notes, which are defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program 
Account'' which limits the availability of funds; specifies how 
to define the costs of modifying loans; specifies the amount 
and availability of funds to subsidize total loan principal; 
and provides a dedicated amount for administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS'' 
which limits availability of funds and sets forth certain 
requirements for the allocation and renewal of funds and 
contracts.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Community Development Fund'' which limits the 
use and availability of certain funds; specifies the allocation 
of certain funds; specifies the amount made available for 
grants to federally-recognized Indian tribes, emergencies, 
Economic Development Initiatives with certain restrictions, and 
Neighborhood Initiatives with certain restrictions and the 
Sustainable Communities Initiative.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Community Development Loan Guarantees Program 
Account'' which limits the availability of funds; specifies how 
to define the costs of modifying loans; and specifies the 
amount and availability of funds to subsidize total loan 
principal.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Home Investment Partnerships Program'' which 
limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of 
certain funds for certain purposes; and directs HUD to notify 
formula grantees no later than 60 days after enactment of the 
Act.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity 
Program'' which limits the availability of funds; specifies the 
allocation of certain funds for certain purposes; and directs 
HUD to issue a NOFA not later than 60 days after enactment of 
the Act.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Homeless Assistance Grants'' which limits the 
availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain 
funds for certain purposes; specifies matching requirements; 
directs the Secretary to renew contracts under certain 
conditions; requires grantees to integrate homeless programs 
with other social service providers.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'' which limits 
the availability of funds and specifies the allocation of 
certain funds for certain purposes; and allows the Secretary to 
recapture residual receipts from certain properties.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Housing for the Elderly'' which limits the 
availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain 
funds; designates certain funds to be used only for certain 
grants; allows the Secretary to waive certain provisions 
governing contract terms; and allows the Secretary to recapture 
residual receipts from certain properties.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Housing for Persons with Disabilities'' which 
limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of 
certain funds; and allows funds to be used to renew certain 
contracts.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Housing Counseling Assistance'' which limits the 
availability of funds and specifies amounts to be used for 
administrative contract services.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Payment to Manufactured Housing Fees Trust 
Fund'' which limits the availability of funds and permits fees 
to be assessed, modified, and collected, and permits temporary 
borrowing authority from the General Fund of the Treasury.
    Language is included under the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, ``Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program 
Account'' which sets a loan principal limitation; limits the 
obligations to make direct loans; specifies funds for specific 
purposes; allows for the transfer of certain funds; allows for 
additional contract expenses as guaranteed loan commitments 
exceed certain levels.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``General and Special Risk Program Account'' which 
sets a loan principal limitation; limits the obligations to 
make direct loans; specifies funds for specific purposes; and 
allows for the transfer of funds.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Government National Mortgage Association'' which 
limits new commitments to issue guarantees, provides funds for 
salaries and expenses, and allows for additional salaries and 
expenses as guaranteed loan commitments exceed certain levels.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Policy Development and Research'' which limits 
the availability of funds and specifies authorized uses.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity'' which 
limits the availability of funds; authorizes the Secretary to 
assess and collect fees; places restrictions on the use of 
funds for lobbying activities; and provides funds for programs 
that support the assistance of persons with limited English 
proficiency.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy 
Homes'' which limits the availability of funds; specifies the 
amount of funds for specific purposes; specifies the treatment 
of certain grants, specifies a matching requirement for grants, 
requires certification of grantee capacity, and allows for a 
reallocation of grant funds based on demand for such grants.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Management and Administration: Working Capital 
Fund'' which limits the availability and purpose of funds, 
including funds transferred, provides funds for the development 
of information technology systems, and restricts the amount 
provided until the Secretary submits an expenditure plan for 
such systems.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Office of Inspector General'' which specifies 
the use of funds and directs that the IG shall have independent 
authority over all personnel issues within the office.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Transformation Initiative'' (TI) which provides 
funds for research, evaluation, program metrics and 
demonstrations, and requires a match from participants in such 
agreements.
    Section 201 relates to the division of financing adjustment 
factors.
    Section 202 prohibits available funds from being used to 
investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair 
Housing Act.
    Section 203 corrects an anomaly in the HOPWA formula that 
results in the loss of funds for certain states.
    Section 204 requires funds appropriated to be distributed 
on a competitive basis in accordance with the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989.
    Section 205 establishes the availability of funds subject 
to the Government Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act 
of 1950.
    Section 206 sets requirements on the allocation of funds in 
excess of the budget estimates.
    Section 207 sets requirements regarding the expenditure of 
funds for corporations and agencies subject to the Government 
Corporation Control Act.
    Section 208 requires the Secretary to provide quarterly 
reports on uncommitted, unobligated and excess funds in each 
departmental program and activity.
    Section 209 requires that the Administration's budget and 
the Department's budget justifications for fiscal year 2014 
shall be submitted in the identical account and sub-account 
structure provided in this Act.
    Section 210 exempts PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and 
Mississippi and the County of Los Angeles from public housing 
resident representation requirement.
    Section 211 authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use 
agreements from an obsolete project to a viable project, 
provided that no additional costs are incurred, and other 
conditions are met.
    Section 212 prohibits the IG from changing the basis on 
which the audit of GNMA is conducted.
    Section 213 sets requirements for eligibility for Section 8 
voucher assistance, and includes consideration for persons with 
disabilities.
    Section 214 requires the distribution of Native American 
housing block grant funds to the same Native Alaskan recipients 
as 2005.
    Section 215 authorizes the Secretary to insure mortgages 
under Section 255 of the National Housing Act.
    Section 216 instructs HUD on managing and disposing of any 
multifamily property that is owned by HUD.
    Section 217 requires the Secretary to report quarterly on 
HUD's use of all sole source contracts.
    Section 218 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain 
requirements on adjusted income for certain assisted living 
projects for counties in Michigan.
    Section 219 allows the recipient of a section 202 grant to 
establish a single-asset nonprofit entity to own the project 
and may lend the grant funds to such entity.
    Section 220 allows amounts provided under the Section 108 
loan guarantee program may be used to guarantee notes or other 
obligations issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement 
communities in the State, and that regulations shall be 
promulgated within 60 days of enactment.
    Section 221 instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 
400 units or fewer of public housing are exempt from asset 
management requirements.
    Section 222 restricts the Secretary from imposing any 
requirement or guideline relating to asset management that 
restricts or limits the use of capital funds for central office 
costs, up to the limit established in QHWRA.
    Section 223 requires that no employee of the Department 
shall be designated as an allotment holder unless the CFO 
determines that such allotment holder has received training.
    Section 224 provides that funding for indemnities is 
limited to non-programmatic litigation and is restricted to the 
payment of attorney fees only.
    Section 225 sets requirements regarding Notice of Funding 
Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication.
    Section 226 authorizes the Secretary to transfer up to 5 
percent of funds appropriated under the title ``Personnel 
Compensation and Benefits.''
    Section 227 allows the Disaster Housing Assistance Programs 
to be considered a program of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development for the purpose of income verifications and 
matching.
    Section 228 sets limitations on funds used for PHA salary 
levels.
    Section 229 allows critical access hospitals to be insured 
under section 242 of the National Housing Act.
    Section 230 allows the Secretary to increase loan guarantee 
fees under the Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program.
    Section 231 allows evictions in HOME-funded properties when 
necessary to ensure safety and that allows recaptured HOME 
technical assistance funding to be redistributed in the formula 
program.
    Section 232 extends the availability of Hope VI funds 
appropriated in prior years.
    Section 233 requires annual, rather than quarterly, 
reporting by the Secretary regarding duplication of benefits in 
Community Development Fund disaster funding.
    Section 234 repeals paragraphs under the heading ``Flexible 
Subsidy Fund.''

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

    Language is included for the Access Board, ``Salaries and 
Expenses'' that allows for the credit to the appropriation of 
funds received for publications and training expenses.
    Language is included for the Federal Maritime Commission, 
``Salaries and Expenses'' that provides funds for services 
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, the hire of passenger motor 
vehicles, uniforms and allowances, and official reception and 
representation expenses.
    Language is included for the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation, Office of Inspector General, ``Salaries and 
Expenses'' to provide funds for an independent, objective unit 
responsible for detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, 
and violations of law and promoting economy, efficiency and 
effectiveness at Amtrak.
    Language is included for the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation, Office of Inspector General, ``Salaries and 
expenses'' which requires the IG to submit its budget request 
concurrently with the President's budget and in a similar 
format.
    Language is included under National Transportation Safety 
Board, ``Salaries and expenses'' that provides funds for hire 
of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft, services authorized 
by 5 U.S.C. 3109, uniforms or allowances therefore, and for 
official reception and representation expenses.
    Language is included under National Transportation Safety 
Board, ``Salaries and expenses'' that allows funds provided in 
this Act to be used to pay for costs associated with a 2001 
capital lease.
    Language is included in the Neighborhood Reinvestment 
Corporation (NRC), ``Payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment 
Corporation'' which limits the availability of funds; specifies 
theallocation of funds to certain activities; and specifies the 
terms and conditions surrounding NRC activities.
    Language is included for the United States Interagency 
Council on Homelessness, ``Operating Expenses'' that provides 
funds for salaries, travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
rental of conference rooms, and the employment of experts and 
consultants.

                 TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT

    Section 401 requires pay raises to be funded within 
appropriated levels in this Act or previous appropriations 
Acts.
    Section 402 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-
Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings 
funded in this Act.
    Section 403 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal 
year and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so 
provided herein.
    Section 404 limits consulting service expenditures of 
public record in procurement contracts.
    Section 405 specifies reprogramming procedures by 
subjecting the establishment of new offices and reorganizations 
to the reprogramming process.
    Section 406 provides that fifty percent of unobligated 
balances may remain available for certain purposes.
    Section 407 requires a report from all agencies and 
departments funded under this Act to the Committees on 
Appropriations on all sole source contracts by no later than 
July 30, 2010.
    Section 408 prohibits Federal training not directly related 
to the performance of official duties.
    Section 409 prohibits funds from being used for any project 
that seeks to use the power of eminent domain unless eminent 
domain is employed only for a public use.
    Section 410 prohibits the transfer of funds made available 
in this Act to any instrumentality of the United States 
Government except as authorized by this Act or any other 
appropriations Act.
    Section 411 prohibits funds in this Act from being used to 
permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his past 
occupation after the completion of military service.
    Section 412 prohibits funds in this Act from being used 
unless the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American 
Act.
    Section 413 prohibits funds from being appropriated or made 
available to any person or entity that has been found to 
violate the Buy American Act.
    Section 414 prohibits funds for first-class airline 
accommodations in contravention of section 301-10.122 and 301-
10.123 of title 41 CFR.
    Section 415 prohibits funds in this Act or any prior Act 
from going to the group ACORN or any of its affiliates, 
subsidiaries, or allied organizations.
    Section 416 prohibits convicted felons from receiving 
certain Federal funds.
    Section 417 prohibits funding to corporations with any 
unpaid Federal tax liability.
    Section 418 establishes a spending reduction account.

                  APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

    The Committee, in a number of instances, has found it 
necessary to recommend funding for ongoing activities and 
programs for which authorizations have not been enacted to 
date. These include some of the programs under the Department 
of Transportation, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
and related agencies. Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying 
bill which are not authorized by law for the period concerned:

                        APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW AND EXPIRING AUTHORIZATIONS
                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Appropriations in
                  Program                     Last year of   Authorization      last year of      Appropriations
                                             authorization       level          authorization      in this bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary of Transportation:
    Research and Development\1\............  .............  ...............  ..................         $13,670
Federal Highway Administration:
    Federal-aid Highways\2\................           2012     $39,446,216         $39,143,583       39,143,583
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
 Administration:
    Motor Carrier Safety Operations and               2012         244,144             247,724          244,144
     Programs\2\...........................
    Motor Carrier Safety Grants\2\.........           2012         307,000             307,000          307,000
National Highway Traffic Safety
 Administration:
    Operations and Research--General Fund..           2009         157,400             127,000          152,000
    Operations and Research--Highway Trust            2012         108,244             105,500          118,244
     Fund\2\...............................
    National Driver Register--Highway Trust           2012           4,116               4,000            4,166
     Fund\2\...............................
    Highway Traffic Safety Grants\2\.......           2012         550,328             550,328          501,828
Federal Transit Administration:
    Administrative Expenses\2\.............           2012          98,713              98,713          100,000
    Research and University Research                  2012          44,000              44,000           44,000
     Centers\2\............................
    Capital Investment Grants\2\...........           2012       1,955,000           1,950,000        1,816,993
    Formula & Bus Grants\2\................           2012       8,360,565           8,360,565        8,360,565
Maritime Administration:
    Operations and Training................           2012         164,158             156,258          145,753
    Ship Disposal..........................           2012          18,500               5,500            4,000
    Title XI...............................           2012          14,260               3,740            3,750
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
 Administration:
    Hazardous Materials Safety.............           2009          32,000              32,000           42,546
    Emergency Preparedness Grants..........           2009          30,000              28,318           28,318
Surface Transportation Board:
    Surface Transportation Board...........           1998          12,000              13,853           31,250

                              TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Rental Assistance:
    Section 8 Contract Renewals and                   1994       8,446,173           5,458,106        8,440,400
     Administrative Expenses...............
    Contract Administrators................  .............  ...............  ..................         260,000
    Public Housing Capital Fund............           2003       3,000,000           2,712,555        1,985,000
    Public Housing Operating Fund..........           2003       2,900,000           3,576,600        4,524,000
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund.........           2007            (\3\)              6,000            6,000
Housing Opportunity for Persons with AIDS..           1994         156,300             156,000          330,000
Community Development Fund:
Community Development Block Grant..........           1994       4,168,000           4,380,000        3,404,000
Home Investment Partnership................           1994       2,173,612           1,275,000        1,200,000
Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program           2000  ...............             53,500           60,000
Homeless Assistance........................           2011            (\3\)          1,905,000        2,000,000
Housing for the Elderly....................           2003  ...............            783,286          425,000
Housing for Persons with Disabilities......           2003  ...............            250,515          165,000
FHA General and Special Risk Program
 Account:
    Limitations on Guaranteed Loans........           1995  ...............        (20,885,072)     (25,000,000)
    Limitation on Direct Loans.............           1995  ...............           (220,000)         (20,000)
    Credit Subsidy.........................           1995  ...............            188,395   ...............
    Administrative Expenses................           1995  ...............            197,470          215,000
GNMA Mortgage Backed Securities Loan
 Guarantee Program Account:
    Limitations on Guaranteed Loans........           1996    (110,000,000)       (110,000,000)    (500,000,000)
    Administrative Expenses................           1996  ...............              9,101           20,500
Policy Development and Research............           1994          36,470              35,000           52,000
Fair Housing Activities, Fair Housing                 1994          26,000              20,481           68,000
 Program...................................
Lead Hazard Reduction Program..............           1994         276,000             185,000          120,000
Salaries and Expenses......................           1994       1,029,496             916,963        1,326,614
Transformation Initiative..................  .............  ...............  ..................          50,000

                                           TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES
National Transportation Safety Board.......           2008          96,625              91,000          102,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Research and Development was previously appropriated in the Research and Innovative Technology Administration
  and has been appropriated through the Office of the Secretary in this bill.
\2\For surface transportation programs, the authorized level in this table is actually the annualized level of
  authorization provided in P.L. 112-102, which goes through June 30, 2012.
\3\Such sums as necessary.

                 COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares 
the levels of new budget authority and outlays provided in the 
bill with the appropriate allocations made under section 302(b) 
of the Budget Act:

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     302(b) Allocation           This Bill
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                    Budget                  Budget
                                                                   Authority    Outlays    Authority    Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to
 its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and
 Urban Development, and Related Agencies
    Discretionary...............................................      51,606     115,161      51,606  \1\114,864
    Mandatory...................................................           0           0           0          0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

                      FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII and section 
308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
following table contains five-year outlay projections 
associated with the budget authority provided in the 
accompanying bill, as provided to the Committee by the 
Congressional Budget Office:

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     302(b) Allocation           This Bill
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                    Budget                  Budget
                                                                   Authority    Outlays    Authority    Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to
 its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and
 Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2013........................................................        n.a.        n.a.        n.a.   \1\37,955
    2014........................................................        n.a.        n.a.        n.a.      32,021
    2015........................................................        n.a.        n.a.        n.a.      13,838
    2016........................................................        n.a.        n.a.        n.a.       5,973
    2017 and future years.......................................        n.a.        n.a.        n.a.      6,965
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
n.a.: not applicable.

               ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII and section 
308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Congressional Budget Office has provided the following 
estimates of new budget authority and outlays provided by the 
accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local 
governments:

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     302(b) Allocation           This Bill
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                    Budget                  Budget
                                                                   Authority    Outlays    Authority    Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to
 its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and
 Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2013....        n.a.        n.a.      32,162  \2\30,359
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
n.a.: not applicable.

                        CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

    Pursuant to section 6(e) of the rules of the Committee on 
Appropriations, the following statement is submitted regarding 
the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to 
enact the accompanying bill:
    The principal constitutional authority for this legislation 
is clause 7 of section 9 of article I of the Constitution of 
the United States (the appropriation power), which states: ``No 
Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of 
Appropriations made by Law . . .'' In addition, clause 1 of 
section 8 of article I of the Constitution (the spending power) 
provides: ``The Congress shall have the Power . . . to pay the 
Debts and provide for the common Defense and general welfare of 
the United States . . .'' Together, these specific 
constitutional provisions establish the congressional power of 
the purse, granting Congress the authority to appropriate 
funds, to determine their purpose, amount, and period of 
availability and to set forth terms and conditions governing 
their use.

      Comparative Statement of New Budget (Obligational) Authority

    The following table provides a detailed summary, for each 
department and agency, comparing the amounts recommended in the 
bill with fiscal year 2012 enacted amounts and budget estimates 
presented for fiscal year 2013:
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


                             MINORITY VIEWS

    Despite an inadequate allocation and a broken authorization 
process, Chairman Latham and Chairman Rogers have made a 
respectable effort to draft a bill that acknowledges the 
transportation and housing needs facing our nation.
    The agreement obtained in last year's Budget Control Act 
was hard fought but fair. Unfortunately, the House Republicans 
have walked away from the bipartisan, bicameral discretionary 
spending levels that were established for fiscal year 2013. The 
Committee's overall discretionary allocation for fiscal year 
2013 falls $19 billion below the $1.047 trillion level that was 
agreed to by a majority of the House Republican conference less 
than a year ago. By reneging on the agreement, House 
Republicans put themselves at odds with House Democrats, the 
White House, Senate Democrats, and Senate Republicans. This has 
created uncertainty about the discretionary allocation, and 
about whether the House majority will threaten to shut down the 
government. This uncertainty will slow down the appropriations 
process and the austere House allocation, if it stands, will 
stall economic growth and impede job creation.
    With a looming June 30th expiration date on the surface 
transportation reauthorization bill, the Congress will likely 
be forced to pass the tenth short-term extension or shut down 
the highway and transit programs during the height of 
construction season. The stalled authorization process has 
compelled the Chairman to freeze funding for roads, bridges and 
public transportation systems at last year's levels at a time 
when unemployment in the construction sector stands at 14.2 
percent and our infrastructure is in desperate need of repair 
and expansion.
    On the housing side of this bill, the situation isn't much 
better. Many programs in this area have been unauthorized for 
more than a decade. Of note, the authorizing committee has 
considered reform proposals to the Section Eight program since 
the 108th Congress. This bill assumes savings contained in the 
most current version of that proposal. We urge the authorizing 
committee to report a bipartisan reform bill this Session. If 
the authorizing committee fails to act, many programs contained 
in this bill will be short funded. We will continue to monitor 
the progress of this legislation and will work with the 
Chairman to develop alternatives if this legislation fails to 
materialize.
    The funding levels in this bill keep some key programs 
moving ahead but miss many opportunities to boost the economy 
by investing in our deteriorating infrastructure. DOT's most 
recent Conditions and Performance Report quantified the annual 
investment gap to maintain our current system of highways and 
bridges in a state of good repair at $27 billion and an annual 
gap of $96 billion to expand the system to meet the needs of a 
population that grows 10 percent each decade. The state of 
transit isn't much better, where the estimated state of good 
repair backlog is nearly $78 billion.
    As our metropolitan areas continue to grow, we must build 
public transportation alternatives that allow people to get 
from home to work seamlessly and efficiently. While the bill 
provides adequate funding to advance major transit projects 
currently under construction, it effectively shuts downs the 
planning and development pipeline for new subway, light rail 
and fixed guideway transit systems. We will work to improve the 
funding levels for the Federal Transit Administration's capital 
investment grant program as the bill moves through the process.
    The funding level for Project-Based Rental Assistance 
(PBRA) is a clear example of the consequences of the lower 
spending cap. The Administration requested $8.7 billion to 
renew PBRA contracts. Fully funding these contracts would 
require an additional $1.2 billion. The Administration's 
proposal would fund one third of the contracts for a full year 
and two thirds for less than a year. The bill endorses this 
shortsighted approach; we do not.
    Partial year contracts for PBRA merely shift costs from one 
fiscal year to the next--a larger amount is due next year. When 
Congress adopted this policy in the past, it resulted in a $2 
billion hole; funds included in the Recovery Act made this 
account whole. Partial year contracts create uncertainty for 
the businesses that own these properties and their employees. 
Uncertainty commands a high cost in the market. It makes little 
sense for Congress to endorse a policy that increases costs and 
threatens our nation's economic recovery. We look forward to 
working with the Chairman to correct this error as we move 
forward.
    We are also disappointed that the bill provides zero 
funding for the Sustainable Communities Initiative. This 
program provides resources to perform regional planning 
activities that are not eligible under other existing HUD 
programs such as Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). The 
first two years of this program have demonstrated its 
versatility. Communities that overlap local and state 
governmental boundaries have partnered and utilized the 
flexibility of the Sustainable Communities planning grants to 
determine what the right mix of housing, transportation and 
infrastructure investments are within their region. This 
approach fosters job growth and meets the demands of a growing 
population.
    The Chairman should be commended for some noteworthy bright 
spots in a number of transportation and housing programs. 
First, the bill makes important investments in the operating, 
capital and research activities of the Federal Aviation 
Administration. Our air traffic control system is operating 
with equipment and facilities that are, in many instances, more 
than forty years old. The bill provides adequate resources to 
advance key programs within the FAA's NextGen program to ensure 
that the United States remains a global leader in aviation. In 
addition, the bill includes critical funding to expand the 
research on engines, airframes and fuels to improve the 
efficiency of aircraft.
    We strongly support the funding levels in the bill for 
Amtrak. The Chairman has established an innovative new $500 
million grant program to make state of good repair investments 
on rail lines that serve both intercity and commuter rail 
passengers. These funds will help put construction workers on 
the job, repair aging bridge and tunnel infrastructure, and 
ultimately improve the service and reliability for those 
Americans that rely on rail travel.
    The bill fully funds the next round of the successful 
Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program at $75 million and 
moves America forward in our goal of ending veterans' 
homelessness. The $3.3 billion for Community Development Block 
Grants and $1.2 billion for the HOME program will provide 
needed funds to rebuild and strengthen our communities. Robust 
allocations for the Housing for the Elderly and Disabled 
programs will provide needed new units.
    Finally, we are pleased that the Committee adopted an 
amendment offered by Mr. Price which would reallocate $83.5 
million in unspent magnetic levitation deployment funds to 
eliminate hazards at railway-highway grade crossings on high 
speed rail corridors. Last year, there were 236 crashes at 
railway-highway grade crossings which resulted in more than 260 
fatalities. These funds will help improve safety at grade 
crossings and increase rail speeds on high speed rail 
corridors.
    We thank Chairman Latham for his work on this bill. The 
Chairman has encouraged an open and collaborative process to 
include views from all members of the subcommittee and we 
commend him for that. We look forward to perfecting this bill 
as the process moves forward.

                                   Norman D. Dicks.
                                   John W. Olver.