H. Rept. 112-718 - 112th Congress (2011-2012)
December 21, 2012, As Reported by the Transportation and Infrastructure 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 112-718 - (112-113) SUMMARY ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS




[House Report 112-718]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


                                                 Union Calendar No. 521

112th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 112-718

                               (112-113)

                                     

   SUMMARY ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND 
                 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS



                               __________

                      ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

                             second session

                     July 9, 2012-December 14, 2012


                               __________

             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>

                                     

 December 21, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed


             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                    JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska                    NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin           PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina         JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee       ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey            Columbia
GARY G. MILLER, California           JERROLD NADLER, New York
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois         CORRINE BROWN, Florida
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania           ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio                   TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan          RICK LARSEN, Washington
DUNCAN HUNTER, California            MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington    RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois             GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania           DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota             MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas              JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana               TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BILLY LONG, Missouri                 HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
BOB GIBBS, Ohio                      STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania         LAURA RICHARDSON, California
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York           ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana         DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida        VACANCY
JEFF DENHAM, California
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, 
    Tennessee
VACANCY
                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION

                  THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin, Chairman
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina         JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee       RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey        DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio                   EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois             LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota, Vice       TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
    Chair                            MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas              MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BILLY LONG, Missouri                 STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania         ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida            Columbia
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)     (Ex Officio)
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin            VACANCY
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, 
    Tennessee
VACANCY

        SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

                FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska                    RICK LARSEN, Washington
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina         ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                CORRINE BROWN, Florida
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota             TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas              MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana,        MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
  Vice Chair                         NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)     (Ex Officio)
VACANCY
 SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY 
                               MANAGEMENT

                   JEFF DENHAM, California, Chairman
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois         ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,               Columbia
    Arkansas,                        HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
  Vice Chair                         MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois             RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania           TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BOB GIBBS, Ohio                      DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania         NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York             (Ex Officio)
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,    VACANCY
    Tennessee
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)

                  SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT

                JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska                    PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin           JERROLD NADLER, New York
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina         LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey        TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
GARY G. MILLER, California           MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois         MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania           MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio                   TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan          HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  LAURA RICHARDSON, California
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington    ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania           DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas              EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana               ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
BILLY LONG, Missouri                 NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
BOB GIBBS, Ohio                        (Ex Officio)
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York, Vice     VACANCY
    Chair
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
VACANCY
     SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

                  BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman
GARY G. MILLER, California           CORRINE BROWN, Florida
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 JERROLD NADLER, New York
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  RICK LARSEN, Washington
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio                   TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan          MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington    GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois             DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania           JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana               TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BILLY LONG, Missouri                 LAURA RICHARDSON, California
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania         ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York           PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana         JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JEFF DENHAM, California              NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin              (Ex Officio)
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, 
    Tennessee
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
            SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

                       BOB GIBBS, Ohio, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska                    TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee       JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
GARY G. MILLER, California           ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois             Columbia
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania           RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan          CORRINE BROWN, Florida
DUNCAN HUNTER, California            EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington,   JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
    Vice Chair                       STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota             LAURA RICHARDSON, California
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana               MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana         NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
JEFF DENHAM, California                (Ex Officio)
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             VACANCY
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                                                                   Page
Jurisdiction of the House Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure.................................................     1
Foreword.........................................................     3
Table of Bills Enacted into Law..................................     6
Table of Concurrent Resolutions Approved by both Chambers........     9
Table of Bills and Resolutions Passed by the House but not Acted 
  on by the Senate...............................................     9
Committee Organizational Meetings and Markups....................    10

Summary of Activities:
  Full Committee.................................................    15
  Subcommittee on Aviation.......................................    49
  Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation........    68
  Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and 
    Emergency Management.........................................    87
  Subcommittee on Highways and Transit...........................   117
  Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials..   125
  Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment................   131
Oversight Plan...................................................   145
  Summary of Actions Taken and Recommendations Made Regarding 
    Oversight Plan...............................................   146
  Summary of any Additional Oversight Activities Undertaken by 
    Committee or Recommendations or Actions......................   166
  Summary of Oversight Hearings Pursuant to Clauses 2(n), (o), 
    and (p) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
    Representatives..............................................   166
Oversight or Legislative Activity Conducted as Part of or as a 
  Result of the Inventory and Review of Existing, Pending, and 
  Proposed Regulations and Orders................................   175
Publications.....................................................   179
Minority Views...................................................   186
                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                 Washington, DC, December 21, 2012.
Hon. John A. Boehner,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to Clause 1(d) of Rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, I submit the final 
report on the activities of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure for the 112th Congress.
    The purpose of this report is to provide Members of 
Congress, Congressional staff, and the general public with an 
overview of the activities of the Committee. This report is 
intended as a general reference tool and not as a substitute 
for Committee hearing records, reports, and files.
            Sincerely,
                                              John L. Mica,
                                                          Chairman.
    Enclosure.


                                                 Union Calendar No. 521
112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     112-718

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



 
   SUMMARY ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND 
                 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

 December 21, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Mica, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

 PROVISIONS OF THE RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPLICABLE TO 
     COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES; JURISDICTION OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON 
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                                ``Rule X


                      ``ORGANIZATION OF COMMITTEES

            ``Committees and their legislative jurisdictions

    ``1. There shall be in the House the Following standing 
committees, each of which shall have the jurisdiction and 
related functions assigned by this clause and clauses 2, 3, and 
4. All bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to 
subjects within the jurisdiction of the standing committees 
listed in this clause shall be referred to those committees, in 
accordance with clause 2 of rule XII, as follows:
    ``(r) Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    ``(1) Coast Guard, including lifesaving service, 
lighthouses, lightships, ocean derelicts, and the Coast Guard 
Academy.
    ``(2) Federal management of emergencies and natural 
disasters.
    ``(3) Flood control and improvement of rivers and harbors.
    ``(4) Inland waterways.
    ``(5) Inspection of merchant marine vessels, lights and 
signals, lifesaving equipment, and fire protection on such 
vessels.
    ``(6) Navigation and laws relating thereto, including 
pilotage.
    ``(7) Registering and licensing of vessels and small boats.
    ``(8) Rules and international arrangements to prevent 
collisions at sea.
    ``(9) The Capitol Building and the Senate and House Office 
Buildings.
    ``(10) Construction or maintenance of roads and post roads 
(other than appropriations therefor).
    ``(11) Construction or reconstruction, maintenance, and 
care of buildings and grounds of the Botanic Garden, the 
Library of Congress, and the Smithsonian Institution.
    ``(12) Merchant marine (except for national security 
aspects thereof).
    ``(13) Purchase of sites and construction of post offices, 
customhouses, Federal courthouses, and Government buildings 
within the District of Columbia.
    ``(14) Oil and other pollution of navigable waters, 
including inland, coastal, and ocean waters.
    ``(15) Marine affairs, including coastal zone management, 
as they relate to oil and other pollution of navigable waters.
    ``(16) Public buildings and occupied or improved grounds of 
the United States generally.
    ``(17) Public works for the benefit of navigation, 
including bridges and dams (other than international bridges 
and dams).
    ``(18) Related transportation regulatory agencies (except 
the Transportation Security Administration).
    ``(19) Roads and the safety thereof.
    ``(20) Transportation, including civil aviation, railroads, 
water transportation, transportation safety (except automobile 
safety and transportation security functions of the Department 
of Homeland Security), transportation infrastructure, 
transportation labor, and railroad retirement and unemployment 
(except revenue measures related thereto).
    ``(21) Water power.

                                FOREWORD

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has 
jurisdiction over the Nation's critical infrastructure, which 
impacts the daily lives of every American in many ways. For 
example, there are more than four million miles of public roads 
in the United States, 19,700 civil airports, and over 138,000 
miles of freight rail in the United States. Amtrak maintains 
over $17 billion dollars worth of infrastructure assets, and 
726 public transit agencies receive Federal assistance. The 
General Services Administration owns or leases 9,600 assets and 
maintains an inventory of more than 362 million square feet of 
space. There are approximately 1,700 miles of levees, 650 dams 
and 383 major lakes and reservoirs, 12,000 miles of commercial 
inland channels, and 75 hydropower generating facilities owned 
by the Federal Government. The United States also operates and 
maintains waterways leading to 926 coastal, Great Lakes, and 
inland harbors and 241 individual lock chambers at 195 sites 
nationwide.
    With such an array of Federal agencies and programs 
receiving billions of dollars each year, the potential for 
waste and mismanagement of resources is considerable. The 
Committee continually has sought responsible reforms and 
increased transparency of the programs and agencies in its 
jurisdiction in order to be proper stewards of the taxpayers' 
money.
    At the beginning of the 112th Congress, the Nation was 
struggling with high rates of unemployment and home 
foreclosures, out-of-control government spending, and a hostile 
regulatory environment for businesses and job-creators. As the 
Federal Government continued to amass trillion-dollar deficits, 
the American people faced tremendous uncertainty about the 
future.
    The country's infrastructure also faced uncertain times and 
in order to provide the basis for a stronger, more vibrant 
economy, Congress needed to renew and reform many important 
Federal programs for improving transportation in the United 
States.
    As the new Congress began, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure met the difficult challenges before it with 
renewed energy, recognizing the necessity for measures to 
create jobs, cut red tape in Federal programs, reduce the size 
of a too-intrusive government, and wisely invest the taxpayers' 
hard-earned money. Guided by these objectives, the Committee 
strived to help provide for the safe transportation of people 
and the unimpeded flow of commerce across the country.
    In moving these goals forward, the Committee focused on all 
aspects of its jurisdiction, which includes all modes of 
transportation: aviation, maritime and waterborne 
transportation, roads, bridges, mass transit, and railroads. 
The Committee also has jurisdiction over other aspects of our 
national infrastructure, such as clean water and waste water 
management, the transport of resources by pipeline, the 
management of federally owned real estate, flood damage 
reduction, the development of economically depressed rural and 
urban areas, and disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and 
mitigation. The Committee's broad oversight portfolio includes 
many Federal agencies, including those within the Department of 
Transportation, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the General Services 
Administration, Amtrak, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. 
Coast Guard, and others.
    As part of its legislative and oversight agenda, the 
Committee held 13 markups, one organizational meeting, 114 
hearings, 10 listening sessions, 11 roundtables, and one 
symposium. In addition, the Committee reported 19 bills, issued 
five investigative reports on the Transportation Security 
Administration and Amtrak, and approved the Committee Oversight 
Plan and the Budget Views and Estimates. A total of 55 bills 
under the Committee's jurisdiction have passed the House; 30 of 
these bills have been signed into law by the President.
    The passage of multiple major transportation measures into 
law has made the 112th Congress one of the most productive for 
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in decades.
    Major Committee legislative initiatives that became law in 
the last 24 months include:
    The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (P.L. 
112-141) was signed into law July 6, 2012, the result of the 
dedicated efforts of this Committee and the Conference 
Committee. The Act, also known as MAP-21, reauthorizes Federal 
highway, transit and highway safety programs through the end of 
fiscal year 2014. It includes significant reforms to cut 
Federal red tape and bureaucracy, consolidate and eliminate 
duplicative programs or programs which are not in the Federal 
interest, and ensure that states have more flexibility to focus 
funding on their most critical needs. The Act contains no 
earmarks and does not add to the deficit. The measure provides 
$105 billion over two years (2013 and 2014) for Federal 
highway, transit, and highway safety programs.
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-95) 
was signed into law February 14, 2012, successfully concluding 
a five-year effort to reauthorize Federal aviation programs. 
This Act facilitates job creation by providing long-term 
stability for the aviation industry. It provides responsible 
funding for FAA safety programs, air traffic control 
modernization, and operations, holding spending at fiscal year 
2011 levels through 2015. It provides for unprecedented reform 
of the National Mediation Board; limits efforts to over-
regulate the aviation industry; and reforms the Essential Air 
Service program by eliminating the most egregious subsidies and 
prohibiting new entrants to the program.
    The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation 
Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-90) reauthorized Federal pipeline safety 
programs through FY 2015. It provides for enhanced safety and 
reliability in pipeline transportation and ensures regulatory 
certainty, which will help create a positive environment for 
job development. The legislation was enacted into law on 
January 3, 2012.
    The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act 
of 2011 (P.L. 112-200) protects the sovereignty of the United 
States, without infringing upon other nations' right to impose 
taxes within their own borders. Signed by the President on 
November 27, 2012, the law prohibits the United States' 
participation in a unilaterally imposed European Union scheme 
to tax emissions of American aircraft operators and air 
carriers, as well as those of other nations, outside of EU 
airspace.
    On December __, 2012, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-__) became law, 
instituting common sense reforms and upholding the United 
States Coast Guard's ability to carry out its important and 
diverse missions. This two-year authorization includes 
provisions that will give service members and dependents of the 
Coast Guard--the Nation's first line of defense for maritime 
safety and security--greater parity with their counterparts in 
the other armed services. The measure reforms and improves 
Coast Guard administration and eliminates obsolete authorities, 
and encourages job growth in the maritime sector by reducing 
regulatory burdens on small businesses, fishermen and port 
workers.
    The John F. Kennedy Center Reauthorization Act of 2012 
(P.L. 112-131), signed into law June 8, 2012, is a fiscally 
responsible authorization of the capital repair and maintenance 
program of the Kennedy Center and allows for the raising of 
private funds to construct a new annex for this national 
treasure.
    These laws held the line on federal spending and contain 
provisions that will reduce waste and prevent government-
imposed burdens and red tape on American businesses. Along with 
thorough oversight activities to uncover waste in the General 
Services Administration's management of Federal property, 
improve intercity passenger rail service under Amtrak, and 
ensure a more reasoned regulatory approach by the Environmental 
Protection Agency and other agencies, these legislative 
initiatives will help in putting our Nation's infrastructure on 
a path to a state of good repair, put our Nation on better 
economic footing, and ensure that much-needed job creation is 
not stifled or curtailed.
    The Committee could not have achieved these accomplishments 
without the bipartisan leadership and dedication of each of the 
Members of the Committee, particularly Ranking Member Nick J. 
Rahall II, and the Chairs and Ranking Members of each of the 
Subcommittees. The Subcommittee Chairs have diligently laid the 
foundation for the Committee's accomplishments by conducting 
hearings and guiding bills and resolutions through each of 
their respective Subcommittees.
    With great pride in our Committee's work, I hereby submit 
the fourth semiannual report on the Legislative and Oversight 
Activities of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure for the 112th Congress. This summary highlights 
accomplishments that will create jobs, save money for the 
taxpayers, and shrink the size of the Federal Government, all 
while improving the safety, security, and efficiency of the 
country's transportation systems and infrastructure in the 
coming years.
                                    John L. Mica, Chairman,
                    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

                                             BILLS ENACTED INTO LAW
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Public Law No.              Date Enacted                 Bill No.                        Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.L. 112-2..........  February 17, 2011.............  S. 188..............  A bill to designate the United
                                                                             States courthouse under
                                                                             construction at 98 West First
                                                                             Street, Yuma, Arizona, as the
                                                                             ``John M. Roll United States
                                                                             Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-5..........  March 4, 2011.................  H.R. 662............  To provide an extension of Federal-
                                                                             aid highway, highway safety, motor
                                                                             carrier safety, transit, and other
                                                                             programs funded out of the Highway
                                                                             Trust Fund pending enactment of a
                                                                             multiyear law reauthorizing such
                                                                             programs.
P.L. 112-7..........  March 31, 2011................  H.R. 1079...........  To amend the Internal Revenue Code
                                                                             of 1986 to extend the funding and
                                                                             expenditure authority of the
                                                                             Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to
                                                                             amend title 49, United States Code,
                                                                             to extend the airport improvement
                                                                             program, and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-11.........  April 25, 2011................  S. 307..............  A bill to designate the Federal
                                                                             building and United States
                                                                             courthouse located at 217 West King
                                                                             Street, Martinsburg, West Virginia,
                                                                             as the ``W. Craig Broadwater
                                                                             Federal Building and United States
                                                                             Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-16.........  May 31, 2011..................  H.R. 1893...........  To amend the Internal Revenue Code
                                                                             of 1986 to extend the funding and
                                                                             expenditure authority of the
                                                                             Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to
                                                                             amend title 49, United States Code,
                                                                             to extend the airport improvement
                                                                             program, and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-21.........  June 29, 2011.................  H.R. 2279...........  To amend the Internal Revenue Code
                                                                             of 1986 to extend the funding and
                                                                             expenditure authority of the
                                                                             Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to
                                                                             amend title 49, United States Code,
                                                                             to extend the airport improvement
                                                                             program, and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-27.........  August 5, 2011................  H.R. 2553...........  To amend the Internal Revenue Code
                                                                             of 1986 to extend the funding and
                                                                             expenditure authority of the
                                                                             Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to
                                                                             amend title 49, United States Code,
                                                                             to extend the airport improvement
                                                                             program, and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-30.........  September 16, 2011............  H.R. 2887...........  To provide an extension of surface
                                                                             and air transportation programs,
                                                                             and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-31.........  September 23, 2011............  S. 846..............  A bill to designate the United
                                                                             States courthouse located at 80
                                                                             Lafayette Street in Jefferson City,
                                                                             Missouri, as the ``Christopher S.
                                                                             Bond United States Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-61.........  November 29, 2011.............  H.R. 3321...........  To facilitate the hosting in the
                                                                             United States of the 34th America's
                                                                             Cup by authorizing certain eligible
                                                                             vessels to participate in
                                                                             activities related to the
                                                                             competition, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-78.........  December 23, 2011.............  H.R. 3765...........  To extend the payroll tax holiday,
                                                                             unemployment compensation, Medicare
                                                                             physician payment, provide for the
                                                                             consideration of the Keystone XL
                                                                             pipeline, and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-85.........  January 3, 2012...............  H.R. 1264...........  To designate the property between
                                                                             the United States Federal
                                                                             Courthouse and the Ed Jones
                                                                             Building located at 109 South
                                                                             Highland Avenue in Jackson,
                                                                             Tennessee, as the ``M.D. Anderson
                                                                             Plaza'' and to authorize the
                                                                             placement of a historical/
                                                                             identification marker on the
                                                                             grounds recognizing the
                                                                             achievements and philanthropy of
                                                                             M.D. Anderson.
P.L. 112-90.........  January 3, 2012...............  H.R. 2845...........  To amend title 49, United States
                                                                             Code, to provide for enhanced
                                                                             safety and environmental protection
                                                                             in pipeline transportation, to
                                                                             provide for enhanced reliability in
                                                                             the transportation of the Nation's
                                                                             energy products by pipeline, and
                                                                             for other purposes.
P.L. 112-91.........  January 31, 2012..............  H.R. 3800...........  To amend the Internal Revenue Code
                                                                             of 1986 to extend the funding and
                                                                             expenditure authority of the
                                                                             Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to
                                                                             amend title 49, United States Code,
                                                                             to extend authorizations for the
                                                                             airport improvement program, and
                                                                             for other purposes.
P.L. 112-95.........  February 14, 2012.............  H.R. 658............  To amend title 49, United States
                                                                             Code, to authorize appropriations
                                                                             for the Federal Aviation
                                                                             Administration for fiscal years
                                                                             2011 through 2014, to streamline
                                                                             programs, create efficiencies,
                                                                             reduce waste, and improve aviation
                                                                             safety and capacity, to provide
                                                                             stable funding for the national
                                                                             aviation system, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-96.........  February 22, 2012.............  H.R. 3630...........  To provide incentives for the
                                                                             creation of jobs, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-100........  March 14, 2012................  S. 2234.............  To authorize the St. Croix River
                                                                             Crossing Project with appropriate
                                                                             mitigation measures to promote
                                                                             river values.
P.L. 112-101........  March 14, 2012................  S. 1710.............  A bill to designate the United
                                                                             States courthouse located at 222
                                                                             West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska,
                                                                             as the ``James M. Fitzgerald United
                                                                             States Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-102........  March 30, 2012................  H.R. 4281...........  To provide an extension of Federal-
                                                                             aid highway, highway safety, motor
                                                                             carrier safety, transit, and other
                                                                             programs funded out of the Highway
                                                                             Trust Fund pending enactment of a
                                                                             multiyear law reauthorizing such
                                                                             programs.
P.L. 112-113........  May 15, 2012..................  H.R. 2668...........  To designate the station of the
                                                                             United States Border Patrol located
                                                                             at 2136 South Naco Highway in
                                                                             Bisbee, Arizona, as the ``Brian A.
                                                                             Terry Border Patrol Station''.
P.L. 112-119........  May 15, 2012..................  S. 1302.............  A bill to authorize the
                                                                             Administrator of General Services
                                                                             to convey a parcel of real property
                                                                             in Tracy, California, to the City
                                                                             of Tracy.
P.L. 112-131........  June 8, 2012..................  H.R. 4097...........  To amend the John F. Kennedy Center
                                                                             Act to authorize appropriations for
                                                                             the John F. Kennedy Center for the
                                                                             Performing Arts, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-140........  June 29, 2012.................  H.R. 6064...........  To provide an extension of Federal-
                                                                             aid highway, highway safety, motor
                                                                             carrier safety, transit, and other
                                                                             programs funded out of the Highway
                                                                             Trust Fund pending enactment of a
                                                                             multiyear law reauthorizing such
                                                                             programs.
P.L. 112-141........  July 6, 2012..................  H.R. 4348...........  To authorize funds for Federal-aid
                                                                             highways, highway safety programs,
                                                                             and transit programs, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-153........  August 3, 2012................  S. 1335.............  To amend title 49, United States
                                                                             Code, to provide rights for pilots,
                                                                             and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-180........  October 5, 2012...............  H.R. 1791...........  To designate the United States
                                                                             courthouse under construction at
                                                                             101 South United States Route 1 in
                                                                             Fort Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto
                                                                             Lee Adams, Sr., United States
                                                                             Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-184........  October 5, 2012...............  H.R. 3556...........  To designate the new United States
                                                                             courthouse in Buffalo, New York, as
                                                                             the ``Robert H. Jackson United
                                                                             States Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-187........  October 5, 2012...............  H.R. 4347...........  To designate the United States
                                                                             courthouse located at 709 West 9th
                                                                             Street in Juneau, Alaska, as the
                                                                             ``Robert Boochever United States
                                                                             Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-196........  October 19, 2012..............  S. 3624.............  To amend section 31311 of title 49,
                                                                             United States Code, to permit
                                                                             States to issue commercial driver's
                                                                             licenses to members of the Armed
                                                                             Forces whose duty station is
                                                                             located in the State.
P.L. 112-200........  November 27, 2012.............  S. 1956.............  To prohibit operators of civil
                                                                             aircraft of the United States from
                                                                             participating in the European
                                                                             Union's emissions trading scheme,
                                                                             and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-...........  December 20, 2012.............  H.R. 2838...........  To authorize appropriations for the
                                                                             Coast Guard for fiscal years 2013
                                                                             through 2014, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-...........  ..............................  S. 3311.............  A bill to designate the United
                                                                             States courthouse located at 2601
                                                                             2nd Avenue North, Billings,
                                                                             Montana, as the ``James F. Battin
                                                                             United States Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-...........  ..............................  S. 3687.............  To amend the Federal Water Pollution
                                                                             Control Act to reauthorize the Lake
                                                                             Pontchartrain Basin Restoration
                                                                             Program, to designate certain
                                                                             Federal buildings, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
P.L. 112-...........  ..............................  H.R. 4310...........  To authorize appropriations for
                                                                             fiscal year 2013 for military
                                                                             activities of the Department of
                                                                             Defense, for military construction,
                                                                             and for defense activities of the
                                                                             Department of Energy, to prescribe
                                                                             military personnel strengths for
                                                                             such fiscal year, and for other
                                                                             purposes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS APPROVED BY BOTH CHAMBERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Resolution No.                    Title                        House Passage              Senate Passage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Con. Res. 16....  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    May 11, 2011..............  May 12, 2011.
                      Grounds for the Greater Washington
                      Soap Box Derby.
H. Con. Res. 46....  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    May 11, 2011..............  May 12, 2011.
                      Grounds for the National Peace
                      Officers' Memorial Service.
H. Con. Res. 67....  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    September 7, 2011.........  September 8, 2011.
                      Grounds for the District of
                      Columbia Special Olympics Law
                      Enforcement Torch Run.
H. Con. Res. 93....  Providing for a correction to the     December 14, 2011.........  December 15, 2011.
                      enrollment of the bill H.R. 2845.
H. Con. Res. 106...  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    May 7, 2012...............  May 9, 2012.
                      Grounds for the Greater Washington
                      Soap Box Derby.
H. Con. Res. 117...  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    May 7, 2012...............  May 9, 2012.
                      Grounds for the National Peace
                      Officers' Memorial Service.
H. Con. Res. 118...  Authorizing the use of the Capitol    May 7, 2012...............  May 9, 2012.
                      Grounds for the District of
                      Columbia Special Olympics Law
                      Enforcement Torch Run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY THE HOUSE BUT NOT ACTED ON BY THE SENATE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Bill No.                Title              Date of House Passage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 872..........  To amend the Federal    March 31, 2011.
                     Insecticide,
                     Fungicide, and
                     Rodenticide Act and
                     the Federal Water
                     Pollution Control Act
                     to clarify
                     Congressional intent
                     regarding the
                     regulation of the use
                     of pesticides in or
                     near navigable
                     waters, and for other
                     purposes.
H.R. 897..........  To provide authority    August 1, 2012.
                     and sanction for the
                     granting and issuance
                     of programs for
                     residential and
                     commuter toll, user
                     fee and fare
                     discounts by States,
                     municipalities, other
                     localities, and all
                     related agencies and
                     departments, and for
                     other purposes.
H.R. 1171.........  To reauthorize and      August 1, 2012.
                     amend the Marine
                     Debris Research,
                     Prevention, and
                     Reduction Act.
H.R. 1734.........  To decrease the         February 7, 2012.
                     deficit by
                     realigning,
                     consolidating,
                     selling, disposing,
                     and improving the
                     efficiency of Federal
                     buildings and other
                     civilian real
                     property, and for
                     other purposes.
H.R. 1938.........  To direct the           July 26, 2011.
                     President to expedite
                     the consideration and
                     approval of the
                     construction and
                     operation of the
                     Keystone XL oil
                     pipeline, and for
                     other purposes.
H.R. 2018.........  To amend the Federal    July 13, 2011.
                     Water Pollution
                     Control Act to
                     preserve the
                     authority of each
                     State to make
                     determinations
                     relating to the
                     State's water quality
                     standards, and for
                     other purposes.
H.R. 2105.........  To provide for the      December 14, 2012.
                     application of
                     measures to foreign
                     persons who transfer
                     to Iran, North Korea,
                     and Syria certain
                     goods, services, or
                     technology, and for
                     other purposes.
H.R. 2594.........  To prohibit operators   October 24, 2011.
                     of civil aircraft of
                     the United States
                     from participating in
                     the European Union's
                     emissions trading
                     scheme, and for other
                     purposes.
H.R. 2903.........  To reauthorize the      September 19, 2012.
                     programs and
                     activities of the
                     Federal Emergency
                     Management Agency.
H.R. 3158.........  To direct the           August 1, 2012.
                     Administrator of the
                     Environmental
                     Protection Agency to
                     change the Spill
                     Prevention, Control,
                     and Countermeasure
                     rule with respect to
                     certain farms.
H.R. 3742.........  To designate the        July 23, 2012.
                     United States
                     courthouse located at
                     100 North Church
                     Street in Las Cruces,
                     New Mexico, as the
                     ``Edwin L. Mechem
                     United States
                     Courthouse''.
H.R. 5797.........  To exempt the owners    August 1, 2012.
                     and operators of
                     vessels operating on
                     Mille Lacs Lake,
                     Minnesota, from
                     certain Federal
                     requirements.
H.R. 6166.........  To designate the        December 19, 2012.
                     United States
                     courthouse located at
                     333 West Broadway
                     Street in San Diego,
                     California, as the
                     ``James M. Carter and
                     Judith N. Keep United
                     States Courthouse''.
H.R. 6633.........  To designate the        December 19, 2012.
                     United States
                     courthouse located at
                     101 East Pecan Street
                     in Sherman, Texas, as
                     the ``Paul Brown
                     United States
                     Courthouse''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                  COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETINGS AND MARKUPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Date of Organizational Meeting or
              Markup                 Full or Subcommittee               Agenda                     Outcome
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 26, 2011..................  Full Committee.......  Organizational Meeting           ....................
February 16, 2011.................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           Committee resolution to reduce   Approved by voice
                                                            facility costs by                vote.
                                                            consolidating National Gallery
                                                            of Art and Federal Trade
                                                            Commission operations in the
                                                            District of Columbia
                                                           H.R. 690, Federal Trade          Ordered reported as
                                                            Commission and National          amended by voice
                                                            Gallery of Art Facility          vote.
                                                            Consolidation, Savings and
                                                            Efficiency Act of 2011
                                                           
 Norton amendment to
                                                            H.R. 690
                                                           
 Denham amendment to
                                                            H.R. 690
                                                           H.R. 362, to re-designate the    Ordered reported by
                                                            Federal building and United      voice vote.
                                                            States Courthouse located at
                                                            200 East Wall Street in
                                                            Midland, Texas, as the
                                                            ``George H. W. Bush and George
                                                            W. Bush United States
                                                            Courthouse and George Mahon
                                                            Federal Building''
                                                           H.R. 658, the FAA                Ordered reported as
                                                            Reauthorization and Reform Act   amended by recorded
                                                            of 2011                          vote 34-25.
                                                           
 Mica manager's
                                                            amendment
                                                           
 Costello amendment
                                                           
 Shuster amendment
                                                           
 Hirono amendment
                                                            (OSHA)
                                                           
 Hirono amendment
                                                            (flight attendant fatigue)
                                                           
 Michaud amendment
                                                           
 Lipinski amendment
                                                           H.R. 662, the Surface            Ordered reported by
                                                            Transportation Extension Act     voice vote.
                                                            of 2011
March 16, 2011....................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Views    Approved by voice
                                                            and Estimates of the Committee   vote.
                                                            on Transportation and
                                                            Infrastructure
                                                           S. 307, A bill to designate the  Ordered reported by
                                                            Federal building and United      voice vote.
                                                            States Courthouse located at
                                                            217 West King Street,
                                                            Martinsburg, West Virginia, as
                                                            the ``W. Craig Broadwater
                                                            Federal Building and United
                                                            States Courthouse''
                                                           H.R. 872, Reducing Regulatory    Ordered reported by
                                                            Burdens Act of 2011              voice vote.
                                                           
 Schmidt manager's
                                                            amendment
                                                           
 Bishop amendment,
                                                            offered and withdrawn
                                                           H.R. 1079, Airport and Airway    Ordered reported by
                                                            Extension Act of 2011            voice vote.
May 25, 2011......................  Subcommittee on        The Subcommittee considered the  ....................
                                     Economic               following measures:
                                     Development, Public
                                     Buildings, and
                                     Emergency Management.
                                                           H.R. 1734, The Civilian          Approved for Full
                                                            Property Realignment Act, a      Committee action.
                                                            bill to establish a framework
                                                            through which a BRAC-like
                                                            commission would independently
                                                            review Federal properties and
                                                            make recommendations for
                                                            consolidations, co-locations,
                                                            redevelopment, selling or
                                                            other actions to minimize
                                                            costs
                                                           
 Rep. Denham amendment
                                                            in the nature of a substitute
June 22, 2011.....................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 1073, To designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            United States courthouse to be   voice vote.
                                                            constructed in Jackson,
                                                            Mississippi, as the ``R. Jess
                                                            Brown United States
                                                            Courthouse''
                                                           H.R. 1264, To designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            property between the United      voice vote.
                                                            States Federal Courthouse and
                                                            the Ed Jones Building located
                                                            at 109 South Highland Avenue
                                                            in Jackson, Tennessee, as the
                                                            ``M.D. Anderson Plaza'' and to
                                                            authorize the placement of a
                                                            historical/identification
                                                            marker on the grounds
                                                            recognizing the achievements
                                                            and philanthropy of M.D.
                                                            Anderson
                                                           H.R. 1791, To designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            United States courthouse under   voice vote.
                                                            construction at 101 South
                                                            United States Route 1 in Fort
                                                            Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto
                                                            Lee Adams, Sr., United States
                                                            Courthouse''
                                                           H.R. 2018, The Clean Water       Ordered to be
                                                            Cooperative Federalism Act of    Reported (Amended)
                                                            2011                             by the Yeas and
                                                                                             Nays: 35-19.
                                                           Summary of Legislative and
                                                            Oversight Activities Committee
                                                            Report
September 8, 2011.................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 2594, To prohibit           Ordered reported by
                                                            operators of civil aircraft of   voice vote.
                                                            the United States from
                                                            participating in the European
                                                            Union's emissions trading
                                                            scheme, and for other purposes
                                                           H.R. 2838, To authorize          Ordered reported as
                                                            appropriations for the Coast     amended by voice
                                                            Guard for fiscal years 2012      vote.
                                                            through 2015, and for other
                                                            purposes
                                                           H.R. 2839, To suppress the       Ordered reported by
                                                            threat of piracy on the high     voice vote.
                                                            seas, and for other purposes
                                                           H.R. 2844, To authorize the      Ordered reported by
                                                            Administrator of General         voice vote.
                                                            Services to convey a parcel of
                                                            real property in the District
                                                            of Columbia to provide for the
                                                            establishment of a National
                                                            Women's History Museum and
                                                            direct the Administrator of
                                                            General Services to transfer
                                                            administrative jurisdiction,
                                                            custody, and control of the
                                                            building located at 600
                                                            Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., in
                                                            the District of Columbia, to
                                                            the National Gallery of Art,
                                                            and for other purposes
                                                           H.R. 2845, To amend title 49,    Ordered reported as
                                                            United States Code, to provide   amended by voice
                                                            for enhanced safety and          vote.
                                                            environmental protection in
                                                            pipeline transportation, to
                                                            provide for enhanced
                                                            reliability in the
                                                            transportation of the Nation's
                                                            energy products by pipeline,
                                                            and for other purposes
                                                           General Services Administration  Approved by voice
                                                            Capital Investment and Leasing   vote.
                                                            Program Resolutions
October 13, 2011..................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 1734, To decrease the       Ordered reported as
                                                            deficit by realigning,           amended by voice
                                                            consolidating, selling,          vote.
                                                            disposing, and improving the
                                                            efficiency of Federal
                                                            buildings and other civilian
                                                            real property, and for other
                                                            purposes
                                                           H.R. 2840, To amend the Federal  Ordered reported by
                                                            Water Pollution Control Act to   voice vote.
                                                            regulate discharges from
                                                            commercial vessels, and for
                                                            other purposes
                                                           H.R. 2919, To eliminate the      Ordered reported as
                                                            reimbursement requirement for    amended by voice
                                                            certain tornado shelters         vote.
                                                            constructed with Federal
                                                            assistance, and for other
                                                            purposes
                                                           H.R. 2668, To designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            station of the United States     voice vote
                                                            Border Patrol located at 2136
                                                            South Naco Highway in Bisbee,
                                                            Arizona, as the ``Brian A.
                                                            Terry Border Patrol Station''
February 2, 2012..................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 7, The ``American Energy    Ordered to be
                                                            and Infrastructure Jobs Act''    Reported (Amended)
                                                                                             by the Yeas and
                                                                                             Nays: 29-24.
March 1, 2012.....................  Subcommittee on        The Subcommittee considered the  ....................
                                     Economic               following measures:
                                     Development, Public
                                     Buildings, and
                                     Emergency Management.
                                                           H.R. 2903, the FEMA              Approved for Full
                                                            Reauthorization Act of 2011,     Committee action.
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Amendment in the
                                                            Nature of a Substitute to H.R.
                                                            2903, approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Barletta Amendment to
                                                            the Amendment in the Nature of
                                                            a Substitute, approved by
                                                            voice vote
                                                           
 Carnahan Amendment to
                                                            the Amendment in the Nature of
                                                            a Substitute, offered and
                                                            withdrawn
                                                           H.R. 3182, a bill to designate   Approved for Full
                                                            the courthouse in Anchorage as   Committee action.
                                                            the ``James M. Fitzgerald
                                                            United States Courthouse,''
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 3556, a bill to designate   Approved for Full
                                                            the courthouse in Buffalo as     Committee action.
                                                            the ``Robert H. Jackson United
                                                            States Courthouse,'' approved
                                                            by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 4097, the John F. Kennedy   Approved for Full
                                                            Center Reauthorization Act of    Committee action.
                                                            2012, approved by voice vote
March 8, 2012.....................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Views    Approved by voice
                                                            and Estimates of the Committee   vote.
                                                            on Transportation and
                                                            Infrastructure, approved by
                                                            voice vote
                                                           H.R. 2903, the FEMA              Ordered reported as
                                                            Reauthorization Act of 2011      amended by voice
                                                            (Committee Print incorporating   vote.
                                                            amendments from Subcommittee
                                                            markup), approved by voice
                                                            vote
                                                           
 Hanna Amendment #26,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Rahall Amendment #37,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Carnahan Amendment
                                                            #74, approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Richardson Amendment
                                                            #104, approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Crawford Amendment
                                                            #19, offered and withdrawn
                                                           H.R. 4097, the John F. Kennedy   Ordered reported by
                                                            Center Reauthorization Act of    voice vote.
                                                            2012, approved by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 3556, a bill to designate   Ordered reported by
                                                            the courthouse in Buffalo as     voice vote.
                                                            the ``Robert H. Jackson United
                                                            States Courthouse,'' approved
                                                            by voice vote
                                                           GSA Resolutions, approved en     Approved by voice
                                                            bloc by voice vote               vote.
June 7, 2012......................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 4965, to preserve existing  Ordered Reported
                                                            rights and responsibilities      (Amended) by the
                                                            with respect to waters of the    Yeas and Nays 33-
                                                            United States, and for other     18.
                                                            purposes
                                                           
 Gibbs Amendment,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Norton Amendment,
                                                            offered, non-germane
                                                           H.R. 5887, the Coast Guard and   Ordered reported
                                                            Maritime Transportation          (Amended) by voice
                                                            Authorization Act of 2012        vote.
                                                           
 Young Amendment,
                                                            Landry Amendment 1 and Landry
                                                            Amendment 2, approved en bloc
                                                           
 Harris Amendment,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Cravaack Amendment,
                                                            withdrawn
                                                           H.R. 1171, Marine Debris Act     Ordered reported
                                                            Reauthorization Amendments of    (Amended) by voice
                                                            2011                             vote.
                                                           
 LoBiondo amendment in
                                                            the nature of a substitute,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Larsen Amendment, not
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 3742, to designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            United States courthouse         voice vote.
                                                            located at 100 North Church
                                                            Street in Las Cruces, New
                                                            Mexico, as the ``Edwin L.
                                                            Mechem United States
                                                            Courthouse''
                                                           H.R. 4347, to designate the      Ordered reported by
                                                            United States courthouse         voice vote.
                                                            located at 709 9th Street in
                                                            Juneau, Alaska, as the
                                                            ``Robert Boochever United
                                                            States Courthouse''
                                                           Summary of Legislative and       Ordered reported by
                                                            Oversight Activities Committee   voice vote.
                                                            Report
July 26, 2012.....................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           General Services Administration  Approved by voice
                                                            Capital Investment and Leasing   vote.
                                                            Program Resolutions, thirteen
                                                            resolutions
                                                           H.R. 5797, Mille Lacs Lake       Ordered reported
                                                            Freedom to Fish Act of 2012      (Amended) by voice
                                                                                             vote.
                                                           
 Cravaack Amendment,
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 3158, Farmers Undertake     Ordered reported by
                                                            Environmental Land Stewardship   voice vote.
                                                            Act
August 1, 2012....................  Full Committee.......  The Committee considered the     ....................
                                                            following measures:
                                                           H.R. 2541, Silviculture          Ordered reported by
                                                            Regulatory Consistency Act,      voice vote.
                                                            approved by voice vote
                                                           
 Larsen Amendment
                                                           H.R. 4278, Preserving Rural      Ordered reported
                                                            Resources Act of 2012            (Amended) by
                                                                                             recorded vote 30-
                                                                                             19.
                                                           
 Edwards Amendment,
                                                            defeated by recorded vote
                                                            (Roll call vote)
                                                           
 Bishop Amendment,
                                                            defeated by recorded vote
                                                            (Roll call vote)
                                                           
 Napolitano Amendment,
                                                            defeated by voice vote
                                                           H.R. 5806, Outreach to People    Ordered reported by
                                                            with Disabilities During         voice vote.
                                                            Emergencies Act
                                                           
 Richardson Amendment
                                                           H.R. 5961, Farmer's Privacy Act  Ordered reported by
                                                            of 2012                          voice vote.
                                                           
 Capito Amendment
                                                           
 Landry Amendment
September 20, 2012................  Subcommittee on        The Subcommittee considered the  ....................
                                     Economic               following measures:
                                     Development, Public
                                     Buildings, and
                                     Emergency Management.
                                                           H.R. 6430, the Public Buildings  Approved for Full
                                                            Reform Act of 2012               Committee action by
                                                                                             voice vote.
                                                           
 Denham amendment
                                                           
 Carnahan amendment 103
                                                           
 Carnahan amendment 104
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES

                             Full Committee

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Developing True High-Speed Rail in the Northeast 
Corridor--Stop Sitting on our Federal Assets: Grand Central 
Station, Northeast Balcony, New York, New York
    Date: January 27, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony regarding the potential 
development of high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor (NEC), 
highlighting the importance of economic development, 
opportunities and incentives for private sector investment, and 
the need for competition and public-private partnerships.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the City of New 
York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Governor of Pennsylvania 
Ed Rendell, the New York regional transportation planning 
organization, a national high-speed rail advocacy organization, 
an infrastructure investment company, and a representative of 
rail labor. Discussions centered on the need to develop 
improved and increased intercity passenger rail services in the 
NEC, including real high-speed rail, and why the NEC is the 
premier corridor in the United States for development of high-
speed rail.
    The NEC serves the most densely populated region in the 
United States, connecting the major cities of Washington, 
District of Columbia, Philadelphia, New York City and Boston. 
As one of the most valuable transportation assets in the United 
States, providing the only continuous physical link, along with 
I-95, between the largest population centers, the NEC is mostly 
owned and controlled by Amtrak, the government-subsidized 
intercity passenger rail provider. Of the 437 total miles of 
the NEC, Amtrak owns and operates on 363 miles, with states 
controlling the remaining track. The Northeast region's 
population density, economic productivity, transit 
connectivity, and crippling congestion on the roads and in the 
air make the NEC the best opportunity for real high-speed rail 
in the United States.
    However, despite recent capital improvement projects by 
Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the NEC 
still fails to meet international standards for high-speed 
rail, with the Acela (Amtrak's high-speed service) averaging 
only 83 miles per hour between the District of Columbia and New 
York and 65 miles per hour from New York to Boston. 
Internationally, high-speed trains can average 150 miles per 
hour and many nations are upgrading their trains to reach top 
speeds of 220 miles per hour.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia, Field Hearing
    Date: February 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local 
area surrounding Beckley. Pursuant to the belief that the best 
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local 
governments know their needs best, the Committee held multiple 
field hearings and listening sessions across the country in 
order to gather specific policy proposals for reauthorization 
of the Federal surface transportation programs.
    Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's 
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs 
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received 
testimony from the West Virginia secretary of transportation, 
an executive director of a contractors association, an 
executive director of an expressway authority, an executive 
director of a highway authority, an executive director of a 
county redevelopment authority, and a program director of a 
transportation institute. The witnesses discussed specific 
suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform the 
Nation's surface transportation programs.
    The Department of Transportation (DOT) currently 
administers over 100 highway, transit, and highway safety 
programs, many of which serve duplicative purposes or are no 
longer needed. The hearing focused on ways to consolidate or 
eliminate these duplicative or unnecessary programs and study 
performance management approaches that increase the 
accountability and transparency of Federal surface 
transportation funds, as well as creative financing solutions 
and private sector investment into transportation projects.
    With the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) expected to run out of 
money in 2013, innovative financing tools and private sector 
investment in financing surface transportation projects were 
methods the Committee discussed with the witnesses and will 
explore to help the Federal government and states find ways to 
do more with less and better leverage existing revenue sources. 
The hearing also focused on potential reforms to the project 
delivery process and explored what improvements could be made 
to existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio, Field Hearing
    Date: February 19, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of Ohio, and the local area 
surrounding Columbus. Pursuant to the belief that the best 
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local 
governments know their needs best, the Committee held multiple 
field hearings and listening sessions across the country in 
order to gather specific policy proposals for reauthorization 
of the Federal surface transportation programs.
    Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's 
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs 
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received 
testimony from the State Director of the Ohio Department of 
Transportation, a president of a local construction company, a 
local county engineer, a local mayor, a chairman of a railcar 
company, and several other witnesses representing different 
interests within the transportation community. The witnesses 
discussed specific suggestions and policy proposals to improve 
and reform the Nation's surface transportation programs.
    With the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) expected to run out of 
money in 2013, innovative financing tools and private sector 
investment in financing surface transportation projects were 
methods the Committee discussed with the witnesses and will 
explore to help the Federal government and states find ways to 
do more with less and better leverage existing revenue sources. 
The hearing also focused on potential reforms to the project 
delivery process and explored what improvements could be made 
to existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
    Date: February 23, 2011
    Committee: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on 
Highways and Transit and the Senate Committee on Environment 
and Public Works.
    Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing with the 
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in Los 
Angeles, California, on the local transportation challenges 
facing southern California and the State of California. This 
bi-cameral field hearing was part of the Committee's effort to 
gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs 
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011.
    Summary: Pursuant to the belief that the best ideas come 
outside of Washington, and that state and local governments 
know their needs best, the Committee held this hearing in 
conjunction with the Senate Committee on Environment and Public 
Works in an effort to receive testimony from a number of 
representatives from different transportation industries. The 
Committee received testimony from the Mayor of Los Angeles, the 
State Director of the California DOT, a chief executive officer 
of a county transportation authority, two executive directors 
of local transportation commissions, and several other 
transportation industry representatives.
    At the hearing, the witnesses provided the Committee with 
specific suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform 
the Nation's surface transportation programs. Witnesses 
testified on the cash balance in the Highway Account of the 
Highway Trust Fund (HTF). The Highway Account had a balance of 
$22.55 billion at the end of fiscal year 2000. The balance 
dropped to $13 billion by the expiration of TEA 21--the 
previous six-year surface transportation authorization--at the 
end of fiscal year 2003. In September, 2008 the balance in the 
Highway Account decreased to a level requiring Congress to 
transfer $8 billion into the HTF from the General Fund. 
Subsequent General Fund transfers to the HTF in 2009 and 2010 
totaled $26.5 billion. Current projections show the cash 
balance in the Highway Account of the HTF will be depleted 
sometime in 2013 and the Mass Transit Account will be depleted 
sometime in 2014.
    With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses 
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private 
investment to finance surface transportation projects. These 
are methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal 
government and states find ways to do more with less and better 
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also 
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery 
process and explored what improvements could be made to 
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
    DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative 
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee discussed with 
the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or eliminate 
duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Committee will study 
performance management approaches that increase the 
accountability and transparency of Federal surface 
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their 
effectiveness.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Field Hearing
    Date: February 24, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of Oklahoma, and the local area 
surrounding Oklahoma City. Pursuant to the belief that the best 
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local 
governments know their needs best, the Committee held multiple 
field hearings and listening sessions across the country in 
order to gather specific policy proposals for reauthorization 
of the Federal surface transportation programs.
    Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's 
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs 
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received 
testimony from the Governor of Oklahoma, the State Secretary of 
the Oklahoma DOT, presidents of local construction groups, a 
president of a safety group, and a transportation revenue 
group. The witnesses discussed specific ideas, suggestions and 
policy proposals to improve and reform the nation's surface 
transportation programs.
    At the hearing, witnesses testified on the cash balance in 
the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). The 
Highway Account had a balance of $22.55 billion at the end of 
fiscal year 2000. The balance dropped to $13 billion by the 
expiration of TEA 21--the previous six-year surface 
transportation authorization--at the end of fiscal year 2003. 
In September, 2008 the balance in the Highway Account decreased 
to a level requiring Congress to transfer $8 billion into the 
HTF from the General Fund. Subsequent General Fund transfers to 
the HTF in 2009 and 2010 totaled $26.5 billion. Current 
projections show the cash balance in the Highway Account of the 
HTF will be depleted sometime in 2013 and the Mass Transit 
Account will be depleted sometime in 2014.
    With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses 
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private 
investment to finance surface transportation projects. These 
are methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal 
government and states find ways to do more with less and better 
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also 
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery 
process and explored what improvements could be made to 
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
    DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative 
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee discussed with 
the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or eliminate 
duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Committee will study 
performance management approaches that increase the 
accountability and transparency of Federal surface 
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their 
effectiveness.

    Title: American Presidential Libraries: Their Mission and 
Their Future
    Date: February 28, 2011
    Purpose: A joint hearing between the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform to receive testimony on 
Presidential libraries.
    Summary: The Committees received testimony from the 
Archivist of the United States, directors of Presidential 
libraries, a family member of a former President, and a 
historian. With over two million visitors per year, the 
Presidential libraries are national treasures that serve as 
centers for the study of the executive branch and individual 
Presidents by historians, students, and the general public. 
Testimony from witnesses focused on the relationship between 
the Federal government and our Nation's public and private 
Presidential libraries. Witnesses examined the future role of 
the government and other cooperative relationships that will 
assist these vital institutions. Specific topics of discussion 
included the digitalization of Presidential materials and the 
role of newer technology in the mission of the libraries. 
Presidential library directors also elaborated on how the 
enormous volume of Presidential correspondence, memoranda, and 
other documents are processed by archivists. The cost of 
maintaining library facilities throughout the Nation by the 
Federal government was also discussed. Relating to this topic, 
the benefits and shortfalls of a central repository for 
Presidential materials located in the District of Columbia were 
debated by the participants.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Central Florida Field Hearing
    Date: March 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing Florida, and the Greater Orlando area. 
Pursuant to the belief that the best ideas come outside of 
Washington, and that state and local governments know best what 
they need, the Committee held multiple field hearings and 
listening sessions across the country in order to gather 
specific policy proposals for reauthorization of the Federal 
surface transportation programs.
    Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's 
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs 
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received 
testimony from an engineer from the Florida DOT, a president of 
a transportation builders association, a local county chairman, 
a local staff director of a metropolitan planning organization, 
a president of a high-speed rail company, a representative of 
the transportation disadvantaged community, and a partner from 
a national law firm. The witnesses discussed specific ideas, 
suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform the 
nation's surface transportation programs.
    With the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) expected to run out of 
money in 2013, innovative financing tools, including private 
investment for surface transportation projects were discussed 
to help the Federal government and states find ways to do more 
with less and better leverage existing revenue sources. The 
witnesses also testified on potential reforms to the project 
delivery process and what improvements could be made to 
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
    DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative 
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee, with the 
witnesses, discussed approaches that would consolidate or 
eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs. Moving forward, 
the Committee will study performance management approaches that 
increase the accountability and transparency of Federal surface 
transportation funds to ensure their effectiveness.

    Title: Biometric IDs for Pilots and Transportation Workers: 
Diary of Failures
    Date: April 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the inclusion of biometric 
identifiers on identification for airline pilots and other 
transportation workers, as well as the state of Federal 
biometric standards and uses.
    Summary: The Committee continued oversight of the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) pilot license program. The FAA 
has ignored Congressional and Administrative guidance on 
issuing biometric credentials to airline pilots. In section 
4022 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 
2004 (P.L. 108-458), Congress mandated that not later than one 
year after the date of enactment, the FAA must begin to issue 
improved pilot licenses consistent with the requirements of 
title 49, United States Code, and title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations. The Act further specified the improved pilot 
licenses would be resistant to tampering, alteration, and 
counterfeiting, include a photograph of the individual to whom 
the license is issued, and be capable of accommodating a 
digital photograph, a biometric identifier, or any other unique 
identifier that the FAA considered necessary. Six years later, 
the FAA still has not included biometric identifiers or 
photographs on pilot licenses. Once the photograph mandate is 
implemented, a pilot license will be an acceptable 
identification card to use at airport checkpoints and, 
according to existing Federal standards for personal identity 
verification cards, a pilot license may be used to quickly and 
electronically verify pilot identification at airport 
checkpoints, allowing pilots to bypass physical screening.
    The Committee heard testimony from Peggy Gilligan, 
Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety at the FAA, 
regarding FAA's current pilot license and FAA's progress in 
developing a pilot license that includes biometric identifiers. 
Ms. Gilligan also testified regarding FAA's desire to cooperate 
with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in 
creating a biometric pilot license and FAA's desire to avoid 
duplicating the existing biometric standards promulgated by the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The 
Committee heard testimony from Cita Furlani, Director of the 
Information Technology Laboratory, NIST, regarding Federal 
standards for biometric identifiers, the types of biometric 
identifiers in use, and the implementation and interoperability 
of these identifiers. The Committee invited testimony from John 
Pistole, Administrator, TSA, and John Schwartz, Transportation 
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Program Manager, TSA, 
but they refused to attend.
    The hearing demonstrated that the FAA ignored Congressional 
mandates regarding the inclusion of biometric identifiers on 
Federal pilot licenses. The Committee's oversight of this 
important issue will increase the security of the country's 
aviation system by ensuring that future pilot licenses are 
secure, tamper-resistant, and contain biometric identifiers.

    Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
    Date: May 4, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony, pursuant to the Committee-
approved Oversight Plan and House Rule XI, Clause 2(n), to 
examine the audit work performed by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of Transportation 
Inspector General (DOT IG), and the Environmental Protection 
Agency Inspector General (EPA IG) on implementation of the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. GAO and the two IGs 
performed extensive audit work on the implementation of funded 
programs from the Department of Transportation (DOT), including 
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA), the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA), and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The audits uncovered 
significant lapses in oversight by the implementing agencies, 
mismanagement of grants and funds, and lack of transparency.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from DOT IG Calvin 
L. Scovel III, EPA IG, Arthur A. Elkins, Jr., and the GAO 
directors on transportation and infrastructure projects, 
Phillip Herr and David Trimble, on their extensive audit work 
regarding the implementation of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act, particularly areas of grant mismanagement, 
poor project selection, and lack of transparency. Roy Kienitz, 
Under Secretary for Policy at DOT, also testified.

    Title: Opening the Northeast Corridor to Private 
Competition for Development of High-Speed Rail
    Date: May 26, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony regarding the development of 
high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor (NEC) through private 
competition using a public-private partnership.
    Summary: Witnesses at the hearing were United States 
Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-New Jersey), a representative 
from the Reason Foundation, an infrastructure investor, a 
national real estate development and investment representative, 
a national high-speed rail advocacy organization, and two rail 
labor representatives. Discussions centered on how private 
sector rail infrastructure management and passenger rail 
operations expertise, as well as private sector financing, can 
be made part of the strategy to improve and expand passenger 
rail services, including real high-speed rail, on the NEC.
    Public-private partnerships share financing, management, 
and operational responsibilities for a project between public 
entities and private investors or partners. Private sector 
financing and participation would allow high-speed rail and 
other intercity passenger rail projects on the NEC to be 
developed and constructed quickly and more efficiently. Several 
international examples of successful and profitable rail 
development and operations through private sector partnering 
were discussed.
    An alternative strategy to Amtrak's expensive and slow 
proposal, a ``Vision for High-Speed Rail in the Northeast 
Corridor,'' was discussed at the hearing, and would allow 
Northeastern states to manage the Northeast Corridor 
infrastructure and operations under a public-private 
partnership model. This plan would use a request for proposals 
solicitation to attract competitive bids to finance, design, 
build, operate, and maintain high-speed and enhanced intercity 
passenger rail service on the NEC. Federal support for this 
project would still be needed, but competition will ensure that 
taxpayer dollars are used as efficiently as possible.

    Title: How Best to Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's 
Highways
    Date: June 13, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the 
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing 
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal 
surface transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired 
on September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30, 
2011.
    Summary: As a result of recent high profile bus accidents 
in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York, questions regarding the 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) 
effectiveness in keeping unsafe ``rogue'' bus operators off the 
Nation's highways were raised. The Committee received testimony 
from Anne S. Ferro, the Administrator of the FMCSA, Major David 
Palmer of the Texas Department of Public Safety on behalf of 
the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, Peter Pantuso, 
President and Chief Executive Officer of the American Bus 
Association, Victor Parra, President and Chief executive 
Officer of the United Motorcoach Association, and Jaqueline S. 
Gillan, Vice President of the Advocates for Highway and Auto 
Safety. The witnesses offered ideas and specific suggestions 
for improving and reforming motorcoach safety and the 
effectiveness of DOT in keeping unsafe operators off the 
nation's highways.
    As part of its Motorcoach Safety Action plan, the FMCSA and 
its state and local law enforcement partners conducted more 
than 3,000 surprise passenger carrier safety inspections over a 
two-week period in May 2011, that resulted in 442 unsafe buses 
or drivers being removed from the Nation's highways. The strike 
force issued out-of-service citations to 127 drivers and 315 
vehicles during the unannounced inspections. In addition to the 
strike force inspections, the FMCSA and state safety 
investigators initiated 38 full safety compliance reviews on 
commercial passenger bus companies. According to the FMCSA, 
from 2005 to 2010, it doubled the number of unannounced bus 
safety inspections and comprehensive safety reviews of the 
estimated 4,000 over-the-road bus companies. Roadside safety 
inspections of motorcoaches jumped from 12,991 in 2005 to 
25,703 in 2010, while compliance reviews rose from 457 in 2005 
to 1,042 in 2010.
    Realizing that bus transportation is one of the safest 
modes of travel, the Committee discussed ideas that ensure 
Federal safety laws are effectively enforced, particularly to 
prevent continued operations by bad actors in the industry. In 
2009, more than 35,000 buses provided 723 million passenger 
trips and traveled more than 58 billion passenger miles. The 
hearing focused on ways to curb accidents related to driver 
fatigue and error, and focused on specific policy provisions 
for the Committee's consideration to make highways safer for 
the traveling public.
    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
is charged with improving safety on the National Highway System 
by reducing the number of accidents and the consequences of 
those accidents that do occur. According to NHTSA's 2009 
Traffic Safety Facts FARS/GES Annual Report, 0.6 percent of all 
traffic crashes involved buses and these crashes resulted in 
less than 50 fatalities. Although the agency does not regulate 
the operation of motorcoaches, NHTSA is responsible for issuing 
and enforcing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, which set 
performance criteria that every new motorcoach must meet. These 
standards include crash avoidance protection measures and 
occupant restraint systems. The witnesses discussed the 
effectiveness of these safety measures and whether or not the 
performance criteria for new motorcoach companies is stringent 
enough to prevent future bad actors from operating on the 
highways.

    Title: Legislative Hearing on the Committee Print, 
``Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America''
    Date: June 22, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on managing Amtrak's Northeast 
Corridor business unit as a public-private partnership, as 
envisioned in the draft legislation, Competition for Intercity 
Passenger Rail in America at the request of Ranking Member Nick 
J. Rahall (D-West Virginia) and Subcommittee Ranking Member 
Corrine Brown (D-Florida).
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the President 
of Amtrak, Joseph Boardman, an adjunct scholar from the 
American Enterprise Institute, the Executive Director of the 
Council of Northeast Governors, the Vice President of 
Government Affairs and General Counsel of the United States 
High Speed Rail Association, and the President of the 
Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO.
    On June 15, 2011, Chairman John L. Mica and Subcommittee on 
Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials Chairman Bill 
Shuster sponsored a public roll-out and discussion of their 
draft bill, Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America 
Act of 2011. Shortly after, a legislative hearing was requested 
to further discuss and fine-tune the proposal and gather 
commentary and concerns from other Members and affected 
parties.
    The Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America 
draft offers a new plan for high-speed and intercity passenger 
rail on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) by leveraging private 
sector investment and increasing competition in the form of 
public-private partnerships. It would separate the NEC from 
Amtrak, transferring titles from Amtrak to the United States 
Department of Transportation in consideration for all but one 
share of the Amtrak's preferred stock and forgiveness of all 
Amtrak's mortgages and liens held by the Secretary. The draft 
bill would also create a NEC Executive Committee to whom the 
Secretary would lease the NEC for 99 years and whose role is to 
manage the NEC infrastructure and operations.
    After the legislative hearing, the comment and review 
period for the draft bill was left open for thirty calendar 
days in order to gain more submissions and commentary from the 
public.

    Title: NextGen: Leveraging Public, Private, and Academic 
Resources
    Date: November 7, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on ways the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) can leverage public, private, and academic 
resources to deliver the operational efficiency and safety 
benefits of the agency's air traffic control modernization 
program.
    Summary: The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
held a field hearing in Daytona Beach, Florida, on air traffic 
control modernization (NextGen). The hearing was held on the 
campus of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University where the FAA's 
Florida NextGen Test Bed is located in partnership with the 
university, the Daytona Beach International Airport, and 
various aerospace industry partners. At the hearing, panelists 
discussed the benefits of early industry involvement and how 
technologies and capabilities developed at the Test Bed would 
be integrated into the Nation's airspace. Panelists also 
discussed the unique research and development capabilities 
available to the FAA through its partnership with Embry-Riddle. 
The Committee heard testimony from FAA Administrator, J. 
Randolph ``Randy'' Babbitt, the Government Accountability 
Office, and several industry witnesses, some of whom are 
participants in the Florida NextGen Test Bed.

    Title: The Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and 
Intercity Passenger Program: Mistakes and Lessons Learned
    Date: December 6, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Federal Railroad 
Administration's (FRA) High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail 
(HSIPR) Program which was funded in the 2009 American Recovery 
and Reinvestment Act and in fiscal year 2010, but has not 
received funding in fiscal year 2011 and 2012.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the Secretary 
of Transportation, Ray LaHood, along with four other 
witnesses--the Chairman of the Northeast Corridor 
Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission, the Editor 
and Publisher of Innovation NewsBrief, the American Enterprise 
Institute, and the President of the National Association of 
Railroad Passengers.
    Using that framework set forth in the Passenger Rail 
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allocated $8 billion in 
Federal funding used to launch the FRA's HSIPR program in June 
2009. The ARRA combined two separate PRIIA grant programs, the 
State Capital Grants for Intercity Passenger Rail Service 
(title 49 U.S.C. section 24402), and the High-Speed Rail 
Corridor Development Program (title 49 U.S.C. section 26106), 
which had different purposes and criteria. The State Capital 
Grants were available to expand or improve intercity passenger 
rail transportation, regardless of speed; the High-Speed Rail 
Corridor program was targeted to designated high-speed rail 
corridors only for corridors that reach speeds of at least 110 
miles per hour. In fiscal year 2010, the two programs were once 
again combined under HSIPR, and $2 billion in funding was 
appropriated. However, in fiscal years 2011 and 2012, Congress 
has not funded the HSIPR Program, and the fiscal year 2011 
Omnibus actually rescinded $400 million of unobligated HSIPR 
funds. The hearing examined the status of the program, what 
types of passenger rail projects were funded, very few of which 
were high-speed projects--and why certain states rejected 
funding.
    The commentary from Members and some witnesses also 
stressed the importance of significant investment in the 
Northeast Corridor, specifically for high-speed rail. With its 
heavy population, crowded highways and airports, and a record-
setting year for Amtrak riders in the Northeast, this corridor 
is the best candidate in the nation for high-speed rail 
investment.

    Title: Restoring Jobs, Coastal Viability, and Economic 
Resilience in the Gulf of Mexico: H.R. 3096, the Resources and 
Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived 
Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2011
    Date: December 7, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from the gulf coast region on 
H.R. 3096, the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist 
Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States 
Act of 2011 (RESTORE Act). The Subcommittee was also interested 
in an update on uncompensated claims from damages occurring as 
a result of the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill and how H.R. 
3096 might affect claims made under Section 1012 of the Oil 
Pollution Act of 1990.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from three 
separate panels. The first panel was made up of Members of the 
House from Gulf Coast States. Congressmen Pete Olson (R-Texas), 
Jeff Miller (R-Florida), Steven M. Palazzo (R-Mississippi), Jo 
Bonner (R-Alabama), and Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) testified 
on the first panel. The second panel included Mr. Craig 
Bennett, Director of the National Pollution Funds Center at the 
United States Coast Guard, and Mr. Tony Penn, Deputy Chief of 
the Assessment and Restoration Division in the Office of 
Response and Restoration at the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration. The last panel consisted of the 
Honorable Garret Graves, Chair of the Coastal Protection and 
Restoration Authority of Louisiana, the Honorable Robert Craft, 
Mayor of the City of Gulf Shores, Alabama, the Honorable Bill 
Williams, Commissioner on the Gulf County Board of 
Commissioners, Mr. Julian MacQueen, Chief Executive Officer at 
Innisfree Hotels, Inc, Dr. Robert Weisberg, Professor at 
University of South Florida, and Mr. Mike Voisin of Motivatit 
Seafoods in Houma, Lousiana.
    The RESTORE Act of 2011 was introduced by Congressman Steve 
Scalise (R-Louisiana) and a bipartisan group of 24 Members 
representing gulf coast districts. The bill was also 
sequentially referred to the Natural Resources Committee and 
the Science, Space and Technology Committee. If enacted, the 
legislation would establish a Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund 
in the Treasury and a Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. 
It would also redirect 80 percent of any Clean Water Act 
administrative and civil penalties paid by those responsible 
for the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill to the five Gulf Coast 
states (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas) to 
aid in economic and ecological recovery following the explosion 
and sinking of the DEEPWATER HORIZON mobile offshore drilling 
unit in April, 2010. Witnesses from the Administration fielded 
a number of questions regarding their position on H.R. 3096, 
while the majority of witnesses on the last panel focused on 
the remaining damage from the spill and the benefits this 
legislation may provide for their respective communities.

    Title: California's High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing 
Costs and Project Concerns
    Date: December 15, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the constant 
increasing cost of building a high-speed rail system in 
California. While the 800-mile statewide project was originally 
estimated to be $43 billion in 2008, the total cost estimate 
has more than doubled to $98.5 billion and the project 
completion date has been extended 13 years.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the 
Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), 
Joseph Szabo, the CEO of California High Speed Rail Authority, 
the Mayor of Tustin, California, the Mayor of Fresno, 
California, the Director of the Kings County Community 
Development Agency, the Co-founder of the Californians 
Advocating Responsible Rail Design, and the Vice President of 
Preserve Our Heritage.
    The California High-Speed Rail project is the largest 
beneficiary of Federal funding from the High-Speed Intercity 
Passenger Rail (HSIPR) grant program under the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5) and the fiscal year 
2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-117). In total, 
the project has been awarded $3.896 billion ($2.952 billion 
from the Recovery Act, and $945 million from the fiscal year 
2010 Appropriations bill). This represents almost 39 percent of 
the total HSIPR grant funding awarded by the FRA. All of the 
$3.896 billion awarded to the California High-Speed Rail 
project has been obligated and is under contract. However, only 
$142 million has actually been spent: $47 million for 
environmental studies and preliminary engineering work and $95 
million for Transbay Terminal train box design and 
construction. All Federal funds provided through the Recovery 
Act must be completely spent by September 30, 2017, under the 
Federal appropriations law ``five-year rule'' (31 United States 
Code, Section 1552).
    During this hearing, Members raised concerns about the 
project, including the projected increased costs and 
lengthening timeline, a pending lawsuit against the California 
High Speed Rail Authority, and eroding citizen support.

    Title: TSA Oversight Part III: Effective Security or 
Security Theater?
    Date: March 26, 2012
    Committee: A joint hearing between the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform.
    Purpose: The Committees received testimony that examined 
the successes and challenges associated with Advanced Imaging 
Technology (AIT), the Screening of Passengers by Observation 
Techniques (SPOT) program, the Transportation Worker 
Identification Credential (TWIC), and other security 
initiatives administered by the Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA).
    Summary: The Committee continued oversight of the 
effectiveness and reported shortcomings of TSA's security 
initiatives. The Committee heard testimony from Christopher L. 
McLaughlin, TSA, Assistant Administrator for Security 
Operations, Stephen Sadler, TSA, Assistant Administrator for 
Intelligence and Analysis, Rear Admiral Paul F. Zukunft, United 
States Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, 
Security and Stewardship, and Stephen M. Lord, United States 
Government Accountability Office, Director, Homeland Security. 
Discussion centered on TSA's difficulties in implementing cost-
effective aviation security programs including delays in the 
implementation of card readers for the TWIC program.
    The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) 
required TSA to create regulations ``preventing individuals 
from having unescorted access to secure areas of MTSA-regulated 
facilities and vessels unless they possess a biometric 
transportation security card and are authorized to be in such 
an area.'' Accordingly, the TWIC program was designed to employ 
these biometric requirements.
    Members and witnesses evaluated the TSA's difficulties in 
implementing its major security initiatives, including the TWIC 
reader pilot report, and the current status of the rulemaking 
process required before card reader procurement. Additionally, 
Members and witnesses discussed TSA's plans for future 
deployment of AIT machines as well as their difficulties in 
maximizing the utilization of AITs currently deployed. The 
hearing also explored the validity of the SPOT program for 
antiterrorism purposes.

    Title: TSA Oversight Part IV: Is TSA Effectively Procuring, 
Deploying, and Storing Aviation Security Equipment and 
Technology?
    Date: May 9, 2012
    Purpose: A joint hearing between the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform to receive testimony that 
examined issues associated with the procurement, deployment, 
and storage of airport security related equipment.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from Mr. David R. 
Nicholson, Assistant Administrator for Finance and 
Administration and Chief Financial Officer, TSA, Mr. Charles K. 
Edwards, Acting Inspector General, Department of Homeland 
Security, and Mr. Stephen M. Lord, Director, Homeland Security 
and Justice Issues, Government Accountability Office. 
Discussion centered on TSA's inefficient management of its 
technology procurement programs.
    Under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, 
TSA is required to prescribe standards and regulations 
necessary to screen all passengers and property traveling from 
and within the United States by commercial aircraft. To comply 
with this mandate, TSA is constantly acquiring and deploying 
new technology to fulfill aviation security needs. Similarly, 
TSA has created layers of security, which include the 
utilization of technology such as AIT, Explosive Trace 
Detectors, Explosive Detection Systems, metal detectors, and 
other security related equipment. TSA's acquisition of these 
security related technologies and equipment represents billions 
of dollars in costs to the taxpayer and air traveler.
    The commentary from Members and witnesses evaluated TSA's 
procurement of excessive quantities of technology and extended 
periods of delay prior to deployment, which point to an 
inefficient and poorly managed operation. Additionally, Members 
and witnesses discussed TSA's intentional delay of 
Congressional oversight of its Transportation Logistics Center 
warehouses, including the Agency intentionally providing 
inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading information to Congress 
in order to conceal its continued mismanagement of warehouse 
operations.

    Title: A Review of the Delays and Problems Associated with 
TSA's Transportation Worker Identification Credential
    Date: June 28, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to review the status of the 
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) Transportation 
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from Rear Admiral 
Joseph Servidio, United States Coast Guard Assistant Commandant 
for Preparedness, Ms. Kelli Ann Walther, Acting Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Policy/Screening, Department of 
Homeland Security, Mr. Joseph Lawless, Director of Maritime 
Security at the Massachusetts Port Authority testifying on 
behalf of the American Association of Port Authorities, and Mr. 
Robert McEllrath, President of the International Longshore and 
Warehouse Union.
    The Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) of 2002 
(P.L. 107-295--title 46 United States Code, Section 70105) 
requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to prescribe 
regulations requiring individuals needing unescorted access to 
secure areas of certain vessels and maritime facilities to be 
issued a biometric identification. Accordingly, the TWIC 
program was designed to implement this requirement. The TSA and 
the Coast Guard both play a role in the TWIC program. TSA's 
responsibilities include enrolling TWIC applicants, conducting 
background checks to assess the individual's security threat, 
and issuing TWICs. The Coast Guard is responsible for 
developing TWIC-related security regulations and ensuring that 
MTSA regulated facilities and vessels are in compliance with 
these regulations. The TSA began issuing TWICs in October 2007. 
Credentials have been issued to over 2.1 million workers 
required to have access to secure areas of MTSA regulated 
facilities and to all United States mariners.
    Despite having over ten years to implement the program, 
TWIC remains rife with problems. Until Congress passed the 
Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010, merchant mariners not 
needing unescorted access to secure areas were still required 
by the Coast Guard to enroll in the TWIC program, thereby 
requiring mariners to go through a burdensome and costly 
process for unnecessary identification. Even with Congress 
eliminating the need for all credentialed mariners to carry a 
TWIC, a number of other issues still plague the program. These 
problems include a cumbersome requirement for TWIC applicants 
to appear twice in person at a TWIC enrollment center, the 
absence of TWIC readers at port facilities and aboard vessels, 
and an overall lack of effectiveness in implementing the 
program, as reported by the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) in 2011. Committee Members sought an update from the 
Coast Guard and DHS on the status of the program and what 
actions were being taken to correct the various problems 
discovered by GAO. Additionally, the Committee sought feedback 
from the private sector on the effects of the program and 
suggestions for improving its implementation.

    Title: GSA: A Review of Agency Mismanagement and Wasteful 
Spending--Part 2
    Date: August 1, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the General Services 
Administration Inspector General (GSA IG) and GSA focusing on 
reviewing the mismanagement and wasteful spending of GSA. 
Specifically, the hearing examined new information on GSA 
conferences, travel and bonuses as well as GSA's decision to 
enter into a lease without Committee authorization. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from The Honorable Brian 
Miller, the Inspector General of the General Services 
Administration, and Ms. Cynthia Metzler, the Chief 
Administrative Services Officer of the General Services 
Administration. The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 
2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement 
of government programs.
    On April 2, 2012, the GSA spent $822,751 on a Las Vegas 
conference that ignited criticism on the agencies use of 
taxpayer dollars. There were approximately 300 attendees at the 
event which spent $35,000 on picture frames and $20,000 on 
drumsticks for attendees, $104,000 for an outside consultant, 
and $136,000 on eight pre-trip scouting trips. Since then, it 
has come to light that the GSA also spent $268,732 on a one day 
awards ceremony in the Washington, District of Columbia area. 
At the ceremony, $20,000 was spent on catering, $35,800 on 
picture frames, $7,600 on a Commissioner reception, and $20,000 
on drumsticks for attendees. These two events highlight the 
wasteful spending habits that the Agency has used on ceremonies 
and conferences, but the excessive spending does not end there. 
The GSA IG is currently investigating 77 other conferences and 
award ceremonies (over an 18 month period), and $44 million in 
unreported bonuses of the $439 million total employee bonuses 
in 2011. In 2011, the GSA, which has approximately one percent 
of all Federal employees, received ten percent of all the 
Federal government's bonuses.
    Also, the GSA broke a 40 year legal precedent by signing a 
$350 million lease in the World Trade Center without Committee 
authorization. GSA submitted an incomplete prospectus the day 
before the June 7, 2012 markup. The Committee requested the 
missing information with no response from GSA. The prospectus 
was not approved and a resolution permitting the lease was not 
granted. On July 17, 2012, the GSA proceeded to sign the lease 
without proper authorization anyway, costing the taxpayers $351 
million over twenty years. Despite a request for an explanation 
for signing the unauthorized lease, the GSA has failed to 
provide the Committee with answers.
    GSA mismanagement of assets is costing American taxpayers 
hundreds of millions of dollars annually. On top of excessive 
ceremonies, conventions, and bonuses, the GSA is failing to 
efficiently manage Federal buildings and property. Considerable 
amounts of vacant and underutilized properties amount to 
significant operations, maintenance, and security costs 
annually. For example, in fiscal year 2009, the Federal 
Government spent $1.7 billion in annual operating costs for 
under-utilized buildings and $134 million for excess buildings. 
In an effort to counter this waste, Chairman Denham introduced 
H.R. 1734, the ``Civilian Property Realignment Act''. This Bill 
attempts to sell unneeded properties, consolidate Federal 
spending, and minimize the Federal footprint.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part I: Mismanagement 
of Food and Beverage Services
    Date: August 2, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
food and beverage operation, specifically investigating its 
monetary losses.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the President 
of Amtrak, Joseph Boardman, Ted Alves, Inspector General of 
Amtrak, Patricia Quinn, Executive Director of the Northern New 
England Passenger Rail Authority, and Dwayne Bateman, an Amtrak 
food and beverage employee.
    Amtrak provides various levels of food and beverage service 
on its routes. Under Amtrak's general authorities listed in 
title 49 United States Code, section 24305, ``Amtrak may . . . 
provide food and beverage services on its trains only if 
revenues from the services each year at least equal the cost of 
providing the services''. This provision was first added to the 
Code as part of the Amtrak Improvement Act of 1981 to eliminate 
the deficit in Amtrak's onboard food and beverage operations by 
September 30, 1982. For nearly 30 years, Amtrak has been 
statutorily banned from providing food and beverage services 
unless its costs at least equal its revenues.
    In 2008, Congress passed the Passenger Rail Investment and 
Improvement Act (PRIIA), which among other things reformed 
Amtrak's operations. As of October 1, 2013, states will be 
required based on Section 209 of PRIIA to reimburse Amtrak for 
the operation costs of providing service, including food and 
beverage service, on state-supported routes. As a result, 
states will have the flexibility to determine who should 
provide food and beverage services, if any, on those routes. 
Some states such as Maine (the Downeaster) already successfully 
provide their own food and beverage services by contracting out 
to private companies.
    In separate reports, the Amtrak Inspector General (Amtrak 
IG) and General Accountability Office (GAO) found that Amtrak 
does not utilize industry-best practices in its food and 
beverage operations and needs to dramatically change how it 
delivers those services. According to both the Amtrak IG and 
GAO, Amtrak needs to determine the best practices that are 
appropriate for their operations and implement them. Based on 
witness testimony, steps can be taken to make this a more 
profitable service, perhaps even looking to the private sector 
as an example. In addition, based on testimony from the Amtrak 
IG, Amtrak must reform its Food and Beverage management to 
address its fragmented leadership. If these steps are taken, 
Amtrak can make significant progress in its ability to manage 
its funds.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part II: The High 
Cost of Amtrak's Monopoly Mentality in Commuter Rail 
Competitions
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
involvement in commuter rail operations, specifically regarding 
procurements.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the President 
of Amtrak, Joseph Boardman, Joe Giulietti, Executive Director 
of the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (Tri-
Rail), Chuck Harvey, Deputy CEO, Operations Administration of 
the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, Ray Chambers, 
Executive Director of the Association of Independent Passenger 
Rail Operators, and Ed Wytkind, President of the Transportation 
Trades Department, AFL-CIO.
    Commuter rail service, primarily designed to address a high 
volume of passengers requiring daily travel to and from work in 
city centers, is typically operated directly by a public 
transit agency or contracted to a private rail operator. Amtrak 
is one of the operators that provide contract commuter rail 
service. Over time, Amtrak expanded its operation to include 
State-supported routes, where states cover the cost of Amtrak 
operations and commuter rail operations, under contract to a 
public transit agency. However, in recent years, Amtrak has 
lost to private sector rail companies in competitive 
procurements for operating contracts on important commuter 
lines such as California Caltrain and the Virginia Railway 
Express. The hearing examined why Amtrak has not fared well as 
the frequency of competitions and the level of competitiveness 
with private operators for commuter rail have increased. 
Amtrak's inability to successfully adapt its nationwide model 
for intercity passenger rail to regional commuter rail markets 
has led to its failure to secure a single competitively-bid 
commuter rail operations contract over the past ten years.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part III: Examining 
41 Years of Taxpayer Subsidies
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
monetary losses associated with its operations; the hearing 
will also explore and compare Amtrak's level of Federal subsidy 
with the subsidies provided to other modes of passenger 
transportation and examine management deficiencies identified 
by the Amtrak Office of Inspector General.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the President 
of Amtrak, Joseph Boardman, Ted Alves, Inspector General of 
Amtrak, Peter Pantuso, President and CEO of the American Bus 
Association, Randal O'Toole, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute, and 
Ross Capon, Executive Director, National Association of 
Railroad Passengers.
    Funding for Amtrak's capital and operating expenses comes 
from operational revenues and appropriated funds. Amtrak's 
operations have never resulted in a net profit with most of its 
routes losing money. Over the past 41 years, Amtrak has 
received nearly $40 billion dollars of taxpayer subsidies. Even 
without considering the almost $1 billion per year in capital 
grants to Amtrak, the corporation operates at an ``above the 
rail'' operational loss. Amtrak's 15 long-distance routes have 
the highest losses, with the largest per passenger subsidy 
being the Sunset Limited, running from Los Angeles to New 
Orleans. Besides financial losses on its food and beverage 
service, Amtrak is spending more than it should on overtime, 
which based on an Amtrak Office of Inspector General report, 
has been over-utilized, exceeding a legislative cap on the 
number of overtime hours that Amtrak employees can work per 
year.
    Other forms of transportation receive taxpayer subsidies, 
but are at a much lower cost on a per-trip basis. Witnesses at 
the hearing gave testimony outlining a cross-modal comparison 
of Federal subsidies. Intercity commercial bus service had the 
lowest per-trip Federal subsidy, at 10 cents per trip. Mass 
transit was the next most cost effective on a per-trip basis, 
at 95 cents per passenger. Aviation was $4.28 per passenger 
trip, and Amtrak was by far the highest level of Federal 
subsidy, at an average of $46.33 per passenger trip. Although 
Amtrak ridership has been growing consistently over the last 
ten years, Amtrak continues to require a large annual Federal 
subsidy, more than $1.4 billion per year, which results in a 
high per-passenger cost.

    Title: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA): A 
Review of the Department of Transportation Inspector General's 
(DOT IG) Findings and Recommendations
    Date: November 16, 2012
    Purpose: To discuss the DOT IG's November 1, 2012 report on 
the policies, practices, and programs of the MWAA.
    Summary: The MWAA is a public body with a Board of 
Directors and nearly 1,400 employees that oversees Reagan 
National Airport (DCA), Dulles International Airport (IAD), and 
the Dulles Metrorail project. DCA and IAD are federally-owned 
airports that receive significant amounts of Federal funds. The 
Dulles Metrorail project is not federally owned, but it will 
receive billions in Federal funds. Recently, at the request of 
Congressmen Frank R. Wolf (R-Virginia) and Tom Latham (R-Iowa), 
the DOT IG completed a review of the Authority's management 
practices and policies, including its accountability, 
transparency, and governance. The committee held this hearing 
to learn the results of that review and to hear from the DOT 
IG, the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, and the 
MWAA Board Chairman and President and CEO.
    DOT IG's review uncovered serious problems at the MWAA. The 
Authority was limiting competition using categorical exceptions 
and sole source contracts and employees were accepting gifts 
from contractors, including tickets to the super bowl, baseball 
games, golf tournaments, and many other sporting events. Senior 
MWAA officials were improperly filling vacancies, awarding 
excessive salaries, providing unjustified hiring bonuses and 
questionable cash awards as well as giving preferential 
treatment to friends and relatives of Board members.
    In an interim May 2011 letter, the DOT IG reported several 
issues which led to Virginia, Maryland, and the District of 
Columbia mandating immediate reform of MWAA practices, 
including terminating all contracts with former Board members 
that were not competitively bid, strengthening their ethics 
code, and tightening Board travel procedures to eliminate 
wasteful spending. The Authority has also revised the Board's 
Freedom of Information policy, suspended the use of categorical 
exceptions, and enhanced screening to detect and prevent 
nepotism. DOT IG indicated that he remains concern because 
these actions have not been independently reviewed or fully 
implemented and DOT IG believes further actions are needed to 
fully address weaknesses. Accordingly, in the final report, the 
DOT IG made 12 recommendations for the MWAA to promote 
integrity and accountability in its management and governance.

    Title: Getting Back on Track: A Review of Amtrak's 
Structural Reorganization
    Date: November 28, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on the 
ongoing reorganization of the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation (Amtrak), the Committee heard testimony on what 
prompted the reorganization, the purpose of the reorganization, 
and what goals are to be achieved.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from Amtrak 
President, Joseph Boardman, Ted Alves, Amtrak Inspector 
General, and James Stem, National Legislative Director, United 
Transportation Union.
    Throughout its 41-year history, Amtrak has been the subject 
of many proposals for reform and revitalization of its 
structure and mission. It is currently undergoing a structural 
reorganization based largely upon its ``Strategic Plan for 
Fiscal Years 2011-2015'' (Strategic Plan). The Strategic Plan 
finds its roots in a 2005 Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) report and in a 2010 report on Amtrak's strategic 
planning by the Amtrak Inspector General.
    Amtrak's strategic planning process came to fruition in 
November 2011 when it released its Strategic Plan. The 
reorganization process is ongoing and subject to change as it 
develops; however, Amtrak expects that the process will be 
fully implemented by the end of fiscal year 2013. Amtrak 
officers have told Committee staff that, even as the 
reorganization is being put into place, the company is 
beginning to see performance and accountability improvements. 
Amtrak has begun to formulate an organizational chart, hire 
staff, and assign responsibilities to each ``business line'' as 
introduced by their Strategic Plan. The Committee heard from 
the Amtrak Inspector General on recommendations to improve the 
corporation's governance and financial performance, and 
explored how these recommendations are being addressed in 
Amtrak's structural reorganization.

    Title: A Review of the Preparedness, Response to and 
Recovery from Hurricane Sandy
    Date: December 4, 2012
    Purpose: To review preparedness and response to Hurricane 
Sandy, to receive information about the plan for redevelopment 
and recovery, and to examine the lessons learned by other 
States impacted by previous disasters. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for 
streamlining emergency management programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from The Honorable W. Craig 
Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA), Major General Michael Walsh, Deputy Commanding General, 
Civil and Emergency Operations, Army Corps of Engineers, Mr. 
Fred Tombar, Senior Advisor to the Secretary for Disaster 
Recovery, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 
Mr. Robert R. Latham, Jr., Executive Director, Mississippi 
Emergency Management Agency, Mr. Mark Riley, Deputy Director, 
Governor's Office of Homeland Security and Emergency 
Preparedness, State of Louisiana, and Mr. David Popoff, 
Emergency Management Coordinator for Galveston County, Texas.
    On October 29, 2012, Hurricane Sandy made landfall on the 
New Jersey coast, devastating the northeast region of the 
country. The so called ``Superstorm'' caused major disaster 
declarations in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Rhode 
Island, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, and New 
Hampshire. Sandy killed over 100 people, destroyed or damaged 
thousands of homes, and left more than eight million people 
without power. In an attempt to mitigate these damages as 
efficiently as possible, witnesses from Louisiana, Mississippi 
and Galveston, Texas highlighted lessons they have learned and 
problems they have experienced from previous disaster 
recoveries. The recovery process of Hurricanes Katrina and 
Irene are still ongoing due to bureaucratic red tape and 
burdensome paperwork. Addressing the mistakes made in these 
recoveries and the inefficiencies of the overall process are 
important to preventing a prolonged recovery from Sandy.
    Chairman Mica and Subcommittee Chairman Denham emphasized 
the provisions to the disaster recovery process made in H.R 
2903 the ``FEMA Reauthorization Act''. The bill makes permanent 
a Public Assistance Pilot Program, which is based on cost 
estimates and not actual damages, shortens the FEMA appeals 
process, makes temporary housing more accessible, and allows 
state administration of hazard mitigation programs. 
Streamlining the recovery programs is the ultimate goal, which 
is critical for saving lives and minimizing damages.
    Because of its existing programs and authorities, FEMA is 
traditionally the lead Federal agency in recovery efforts. Mr. 
Tombar provided specifics as to who will be in charge during 
the recovery process, as the President's announcement included 
no details.

    Title: An Update on the High Speed and Intercity Passenger 
Rail Program: Mistakes Made and Lessons Learned
    Date: December 6, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee received testimony regarding the 
Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and Intercity 
Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. In December, 2011, the 
Committee held a series of hearings on the HSIPR Program and 
this hearing will follow up on those meetings, providing an 
opportunity to receive an update on the HSIPR program, examine 
what projects are being developed and built with the Federal 
funding invested thus far, and discuss means of improving the 
program now that a majority of the funds have been obligated.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the Secretary 
of Transportation, the Honorable Ray LaHood, The Honorable 
Calvin L. Scovel, III, Inspector General, Department of 
Transportation, Susan A. Fleming, Director, Physical 
Infrastructure Team, Government Accountability Office, The 
Honorable Paula J. Hammond, P.E., Secretary of Transportation, 
Washington State, The Honorable Ann L. Schneider, Secretary of 
Transportation, State of Illinois, and Edward R. Hamberger, 
President and Chief Executive, Association of American 
Railroads.
    The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) 
authorized two passenger grant programs to States, one for 
capital improvements on traditional intercity passenger rail, 
and another for high-speed rail (greater than 110 mph) on 
designated HSR corridors. These two programs were combined in 
subsequent appropriations acts into the Federal Railroad 
Administration's HSIPR Program. Using that framework, the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allocated $8 billion in 
Federal funding. An additional $2.5 billion was appropriated 
for HSIPR in fiscal year 2010 (though $400 million was 
subsequently rescinded in fiscal year 2011). The President's 
stated vision for the HSIPR program was to provide 80 percent 
of Americans with access to high-speed rail within 25 years.
    The Committee held a series of hearings last year on the 
HSIPR Program. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) 
solicited applications for the $10.1 billion in remaining grant 
funding and received applications from 39 states, the District 
of Columbia, and Amtrak for over $75 billion. Since January, 
2010, the FRA has awarded all of the HSIPR Program funding and 
a majority of those funds have been obligated. Of the projects 
that have been awarded funding, only the California High-Speed 
Rail project would be true high speed rail, yet that project 
has recently seen its estimated costs more than double from an 
original estimate of $43 billion to $98.5 billion, while the 
estimated completion date has been extended another 13 years. 
Other than the California project and projects on the Northeast 
Corridor, all other HSIPR Program projects are being undertaken 
on freight rail property, which restricts passenger trains' 
speed and frequency.
    Numerous concerns have been raised regarding the project 
selection process at the FRA. In March, 2011, the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, completed at 
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman 
Mica's request, examining the extent to which the FRA applied 
its established criteria to select projects, following 
recommended practices for awarding discretionary grants, and 
communicated outcomes to the public, compared with selected 
other Recovery Act competitive grant programs. The GAO 
concluded that establishing a record that provides insight into 
why decisions were made, rather than merely restating general 
technical review and selection criteria, including amounts to 
be provided, would enhance the credibility of FRA's awards 
decisions to the extent that this record confirms that selected 
projects alighted with established criteria and goals. By not 
establishing this record, FRA has raised significant skepticism 
about the overall fairness of decisions.
    The HSIPR Program experienced strong opposition at the 
state level from the Governors of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Florida. 
Respectively, Governors Kasich, Walker, and Scott expressed 
concerns over a number of issues, including the potential costs 
to their states. These three States returned their HSIPR funds 
to the Department of Transportation, and those funds were 
redirected to other states.
    The hearing testimony focused on where the HSIPR program 
stands now that the funds are obligated, but few projects are 
yet under construction. The PRIIA authorization expires at the 
end of fiscal year 2013, and the witnesses and Committee 
Members explored what DOT and States envision for the next 
authorization of Federal intercity passenger rail grant 
programs.

    Title: Northeast Corridor Future: Options for High-Speed 
Rail Development and Opportunities for Private Sector 
Participation
    Date: December 13, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee received testimony regarding plans 
to develop improved and expanded intercity passenger rail on 
the Northeast Corridor (District of Columbia to Boston, 
Massachusetts), including options to 220-mph service to the 
corridor. This final full committee hearing in the 112th 
Congress follows up on the first hearing held by the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in this Congress, 
on January 27, 2011, ``Developing True High-Speed Rail in the 
Northeast Corridor: Stop Sitting on Our Federal Assets.''
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the Federal 
Railroad Administration's Deputy Administrator, Karen Hedlund, 
Amtrak's Vice President of Northeast Corridor Infrastructure 
and Investment Development, Stephen Gardner, the Northeast 
Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission 
Chairwoman, Joan McDonald, Partnership for New York City 
President and CEO, Kathryn Wylde, and Managing Director 
Infrastructure Banking for the Americas at Morgan Stanley, 
Perry Offutt.
    The Northeast Corridor (NEC) is one of the most valuable 
transportation assets in the United States, providing a 
continuous physical link between the major population centers 
of the District of Columbia, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York 
City, and Boston. The Northeast mega-region is the most densely 
populated area in the United States, with 18 percent of the 
Nation's population living in just two percent of its land 
area. Taken as a whole, the NEC region would be the sixth 
largest economy in the world with a GDP of $2.6 trillion.
    Amtrak owns and controls most of the NEC, though some short 
segments are owned by the States of New York, Connecticut, and 
Massachusetts. Amtrak's NEC trains are operationally 
profitable, however, the infrastructure is constrained and 
requires significant upgrading to simply maintain current 
levels of service, much less increase the number of trains or 
run at faster speeds. Internationally, high-speed trains 
average 150 mph, and many nations are upgrading systems to 
achieve top speeds of 220 mph. The NEC premium ``high-speed'' 
service, Acela, averages 83 mph between the District of 
Columbia and New York City.
    In February, 2012, the Federal Railroads Administration 
(FRA) initiated a scoping and environmental review process 
called ``NEC Future'', a comprehensive planning effort to 
define, evaluate and prioritize future investments in the NEC. 
These activities are being closely coordinated with activities 
of the NEC Infrastructure and Advisory Commission, which was 
authorized in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act 
of 2008 (PRIIA), and is made up of Northeastern States, Amtrak, 
DOT, and other users of the NEC, including commuter and freight 
railroads. The Advisory Commission is charged to advise 
Congress on the regional consensus on what the future NEC 
development should be.
    Amtrak has developed a $150 billion ``Vision Plan'' for 
future high-speed rail development in the NEC, much of it 
requiring new right-of-way. This plan is part of the range of 
alternatives that will be considered under the FRA's 
environmental analysis. New and faster rail service, and 
possible new alignments and rail station locations, will create 
opportunities for private sector financial investment, which 
will further grow the region's economy. The FRA plan will be 
completed by 2015, within the next authorization cycle for 
PRIIA, and future capital funding needs and policies to create 
private sector investment opportunities were discussed by the 
witnesses and Members of the Committee.

                     ACTIVITIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

    Report Title: TSA Ignores More Cost-Effective Screening 
Model
    Date: June 3, 2011
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the 
basis and rationale for the January 28, 2011, decision by John 
Pistole, Administrator, Transportation Security Administration 
(TSA), to halt the expansion of the Screening Partnership 
Program (SPP), the comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP 
screening, and the various screening models used in the 
international community.
    Summary: After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, 
Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 
2001 (ATSA) (P.L. 107-71), creating the TSA to regulate 
aviation security standards, among other purposes. ATSA also 
created the SPP to allow TSA-certified contractors, under 
Federal supervision and regulation, to conduct passenger and 
baggage screening at airports. The law provided airport 
authorities the option to ``opt-out'' of the Federal screening 
model. Since the creation of the SPP, a total of sixteen 
airports have chosen to opt-out of the Federal screening model 
and use private contractors for passenger and baggage 
screening.
    On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole 
announced that he would not expand the SPP and denied pending 
SPP applications from five airports. Administrator Pistole's 
announcement marked the first time in the program's ten-year 
history that an airport had been refused participation in the 
statutorily mandated program. Covert testing, anecdotal 
information, and independent evaluation have shown that 
utilizing private screening professionals under Federal 
regulation and oversight is the better and more cost-effective 
security option.
    The Committee Majority Staff conducted an investigation 
into the basis and rationale for Administrator Pistole's 
decision, the comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP 
screening, and the various screening models used in the 
international community. As a result of this investigation, the 
Committee Majority Staff made several key findings:
    1. Taxpayers would save $1 billion over five years if the 
Nation's top 35 airports operated as efficiently as San 
Francisco International Airport does under the SPP model.
    2. SPP screeners are 65 percent more efficient than their 
Federal counterparts.
    3. Taxpayers would save more than $38.6 million a year if 
Los Angeles International Airport joined the SPP.
    4. TSA concealed significant cost factors unique to the 
Federal screening model.
    5. TSA has hired 137,100 staff since the Agency's creation 
and spent more than $2 billion on recruiting and training 
costs.
    6. ``Clear and substantial advantage'' for approving five 
airport applications existed and were ignored by TSA when TSA 
denied their application to the SPP.
    7. TSA's SPP application and evaluation process is flawed.
    8. TSA does not have specific criteria to determine if a 
``clear or substantial advantage'' exists to order to evaluate 
SPP applications.
    9. There is evidence that TSA officials erroneously claimed 
no communication with union representatives about the SPP.
    10. TSA officials recommended abolishing the SPP.
    11. Most of the rest of the world utilizes a SPP-like 
screening model at airports.
    The Administration has often used cost as a justification 
for not promoting the SPP. In 2007, TSA claimed that SPP 
airports cost 17.4 percent more to operate than airports under 
the Federal security model. Committee Chairman John L. Mica 
requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
examine TSA's claim. As a result, GAO found that TSA's 
methodology for the cost assessment was flawed and identified 
multiple cost elements the Agency had excluded when performing 
the analysis. TSA then revised its cost assessment in January 
2011 to reflect a three percent higher operating cost at SPP 
airports than airports using Federal screeners. TSA's 2011 cost 
analysis has not been independently verified.
    The Committee Majority Staff conducted their own cost 
analysis using three cost metrics that have been dismissed in 
previous cost comparisons conducted by TSA: screener 
productivity, screener turnover, and use of the National 
Deployment Force (NDF). Assuming that all other costs related 
to screening operations at the SPP and non-SPP airport are 
equal, the Committee Majority Staff found that SPP screeners 
are 65 percent more efficient than non-SPP screeners, and 
additional costs associated with ineffective workforce 
management were 42 percent higher than similar costs under the 
SPP model. The Committee Majority Staff produced its finding in 
a report released on June 3, 2011.
    To see the report, please visit: http://republicans. 
transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/2011-06-03-
TSA_SPP_Report.pdf

    Report Title: A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform
    Date: November 16, 2011
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated TSA's 
operations ten years after its creation and provided 
recommendations to improve TSA operational efficiency.
    Summary: In the wake of September 11, 2001, President 
George W. Bush signed into law the Aviation and Transportation 
Security Act (ATSA; P.L. 107-71). Most notably, ATSA created 
the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). TSA has a 
vital and important mission and is critical to the security of 
the traveling public. To fulfill its mission, TSA employs many 
hard-working, dedicated personnel. It is the government's 
responsibility, however, to direct the Agency's mission and 
prevent a cumbersome bureaucracy from inhibiting TSA's ability 
to address and adapt to changing security needs. Almost all 
western countries have evolved their airport screening systems 
to meet current aviation threats through Federal oversight of 
private contract screeners. The United States must also evolve 
to provide the most effective transportation security system at 
the most reasonable cost to the taxpayer.
    This report is an examination and critical analysis of the 
development, evolution, and current status and performance of 
TSA ten years after its creation. Since its inception, TSA has 
lost its focus on transportation security. Instead, it has 
grown into an enormous, inflexible and distracted bureaucracy, 
more concerned with human resource management and consolidating 
power, and acting reactively instead of proactively. TSA must 
realign its responsibilities as a Federal regulator and focus 
on analyzing intelligence, setting screening and security 
standards based on risk, auditing passenger and baggage 
screening operations, and ensuring compliance with national 
screening standards.
    As a result of the investigation, the Committee Majority 
Staff made several key findings:
    1. With 21 other agencies housed within the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS), the status and mission of TSA have 
gradually eroded to make the Agency a tangential and inert unit 
within DHS's massive structure.
    2. The turnover of five Administrators in less than a 
decade, with periods of long vacancy between appointments, has 
obstructed TSA's ability to carry out its mission.
    3. With more than 65,000 employees, TSA is larger than the 
Departments of Labor, Energy, Education, Housing and Urban 
Development, and State, combined. TSA is a top-heavy 
bureaucracy with 3,986 headquarters personnel and 9,656 
administrative staff in the field.
    4. Since 2001, TSA staff has grown from 16,500 to over 
65,000, a near 400 percent increase. In the same amount of 
time, total passenger enplanements in the United States have 
increased less than 12 percent.
    5. Since 2002, TSA procured six contracts to hire and train 
more than 137,000 staff, for a total of more than $2.4 billion, 
at a rate of more than $17,500 per hire. More employees have 
left TSA than are currently employed at the agency.
    6. Over the past ten years, TSA has spent nearly $57 
billion to secure the United States transportation network, and 
TSA's classified performance results do not reflect a good 
return on this taxpayer investment.
    7. On average, there are 30 TSA administrative personnel--
21 administrative field staff and nine headquarters staff--for 
each of the 457 airports where TSA operates.
    8. TSA's primary mission, transportation security, has been 
neglected due to the Agency's constant focus on managing its 
enormous and unwieldy bureaucracy.
    9. TSA has failed to develop an effective, comprehensive 
plan to evolve from a one-size-fits-all operation--treating all 
passengers as if they pose the same risk--into a highly 
intelligent, risk-based operation that has the capacity to 
determine a traveler's level of risk and adjust the level of 
screening in response.
    10. TSA's operations are outdated--the primary threat is no 
longer hijacking, but explosives designed to take down an 
aircraft.
    11. TSA's passenger and checked baggage screening programs 
have been tested over the years, and while the test results are 
classified, their performance outcomes have changed very little 
since the creation of TSA.
    12. As recently reported by the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform, more than 25,000 security breaches have 
occurred at United States airports in the last decade, despite 
a massive TSA presence.
    13. Even though most of the serious terrorist attempts 
against the United States in the last decade have originated 
overseas, the number of TSA personnel that oversee key 
international departure points with direct flights into the 
United States is limited.
    14. TSA's behavior detection program, Screening of 
Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT), costs a quarter of 
a billion dollars to operate annually, employing almost 3,000 
behavior detection officer full-time equivalents (FTEs). In 
spite of this costly program, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) found that 17 known terrorists traveled on 24 
different occasions through security at eight airports where 
TSA operated this program.
    15. TSA has tested numerous pilot programs for trusted 
travelers, including its current PreCheck program, but has 
failed to develop an expedited screening program that utilizes 
biometrics to positively identify participants.
    16. TSA has failed to follow Congressional directives to 
establish biometric credentialing standards and biometric card 
reader standards. These standards are necessary for the FAA to 
implement a Congressionally-directed requirement for biometric 
pilot licenses.
    17. GAO found that TSA's implementation of the 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), which 
has cost over half-a-billion dollars, has been crippled by 
latent programmatic weaknesses. TSA still has not deployed TWIC 
card-readers to many of the Nation's ports.
    18. On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator Pistole halted 
the expansion of the Screening Partnership Program (SPP), 
despite the following evidence:
          a. An independent consultant found that ``private 
        screeners performed at a level that was equal to or 
        greater than that of Federal TSOs [Transportation 
        Security Officers].''
          b. GAO found that TSA analytics ignored critical data 
        relating to costs.
          c. USA Today uncovered covert TSA test results in 
        2007 that showed significantly higher screener 
        detection capabilities at an SPP airport than at an 
        airport where screening was provided by TSA.
    19. The Nation's 35 largest airports account for nearly 75 
percent of passenger traffic. TSA has failed to prioritize the 
deployment of in-line explosive detection systems (EDS) at 
these locations which would ensure the best baggage screening 
operations for a large portion of air travelers. Less than half 
of these 35 airports have complete in-line EDS, with some 
systems only configured to detect at TSA's 1998 explosive 
detection standards. Additionally, TSA has failed to reimburse 
airports for design costs incurred in the installation of in-
line EDS.
    20. TSA wasted $39 million to procure 207 Explosive Trace 
Detection Portals, but deployed only 101 because the machines 
could not consistently detect explosives in an operational 
environment. After lengthy and costly storage, TSA recently 
paid the Department of Defense $600 per unit to dispose of the 
useless machines.
    21. TSA deployed 500 Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) 
devices in a haphazard and easily-thwarted manner at a total 
cost of more than $122 million. By 2013, TSA estimates that the 
total cost to taxpayers for AIT deployment will reach almost 
half-a-billion dollars. In 2010, GAO examined the AIT devices 
and found that ``it remains unclear whether the AIT would have 
detected the weapon used in the December, 2009 [Underwear 
Bomber] incident.'' While TSA continues to use AIT machines, 
the effectiveness of these devices in detecting explosives is 
still under review and remains questionable.
    22. TSA warehouses are nearly at capacity, containing 
almost 2,800 pieces of screening equipment, including 650 
state-of-the-art AT-2 carry-on baggage screening machines 
costing approximately $97 million. TSA's failure to deploy this 
cutting-edge technology in a timely manner is yet another 
example of the agency's flawed procurement and deployment 
program.
    The Committee Majority Staff makes the following 
recommendations in the report:
    1. TSA must act with greater independence from the DHS 
bureaucracy. Terrorists constantly evolve their methods, and 
TSA must have similar flexibility to respond quickly and 
appropriately to any intelligence it receives. Without this 
ability, TSA will continue to be a solely reactive and 
ineffective agency that cannot ensure the security of United 
States travelers.
    2. The TSA Administrator's stature must be elevated. The 
constant turnover and long vacancy of this vital position has 
caused great disruption at TSA. With each new Administrator, 
there have been repeated changes in vision and direction of the 
Agency. In order for TSA to be an effective and successful 
Agency, it must have stable leadership that can make both 
short- and long-term plans for improving the Agency and 
providing effective and cost efficient aviation and 
transportation security. The TSA Administrator must be a 
priority appointment for the President, along with other agency 
heads and Cabinet-level Secretaries, and the length of the term 
of the TSA Administrator's appointment and compensation should 
be reexamined.
    3. TSA must function as a Federal regulator, analyzing 
intelligence, setting screening and security standards and 
protocols based on risk, auditing passenger and baggage 
screening operations, and enforcing national screening 
standards. TSA needs to focus on analyzing and disseminating 
intelligence information, developing a regulatory structure to 
secure the critical interests of the United States 
transportation sector, and enforcing these regulations to 
maintain a standardized set of practices throughout the 
country.
    4. TSA should expand and revise the Screening Partnership 
Program so that more airport authorities can transition airport 
screening operations to private contractors under Federal 
supervision.
    5. The TSA Administrator must set performance standards for 
passenger and baggage screening operations based on risk 
analysis and common sense. Detailed, specific, articulated 
metrics by which TSA will measure screening performance are 
critical to effective airport security operations. Without a 
clear list of standards, TSA will not be able to adequately 
measure and systematically improve screener performance.
    6. The number of TSA administrative personnel must be 
dramatically reduced. TSA's massive bureaucracy must be 
streamlined so that TSA can focus on analyzing intelligence and 
setting risk-based security standards without being bogged down 
by managing its bloated administration.
    7. The number of TSA personnel stationed abroad and the 
number of TSA personnel that oversee key international 
departure points with direct flights into the United States and 
are engaged with other governments and organizations must be 
adjusted in order to effectively respond to the international 
threat to the United States transportation network.
    8. TSA should require that the screening of all passengers 
and baggage on in-bound flights is equivalent to domestic 
screening standards. Rescreening passengers after an 
international flight lands in the United States does not avert 
the risk to American citizens, while en route to the United 
States.
    9. TSA must develop an expedited screening program using 
biometric credentials that would allow TSA to positively 
identify trusted passengers and crew members so that the agency 
can prioritize its screening resources based on risk. TSA will 
never be able to function as a truly risk-based organization 
until the agency can differentiate between passengers based on 
levels of risk.
    10. TSA performance results should be made public after 24 
months or when deemed appropriate for security purposes, so 
that passengers can know the level of security they receive. 
Public reporting of performance evaluations provides 
transparency and will incentivize TSA to operate at the highest 
standards.
    11. A qualified outside organization must conduct a 
comprehensive, independent study of TSA's management, 
operations, and technical capabilities, and make 
recommendations to increase TSA's efficacy and its ability to 
better analyze intelligence and set risk-based, common sense 
security standards.
    To see the report, please visit: http://republicans. 
transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/2011-11-16-
TSA_Reform_Report.pdf

    Report Title: Airport Insecurity: TSA's Failure to Cost-
Effectively Procure, Deploy and Warehouse its Screening 
Technologies
    Date: May 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated TSA's 
management of its procurement, deployment, and storage of 
screening technologies
    Summary: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, led 
to dramatic reforms in how the Federal government protects the 
traveling public and the Nation's transportation sector. 
Securing commercial aviation became a top priority for Congress 
and resulted in the development and passage of the Aviation and 
Transportation Security Act of 2001 (ATSA). ATSA created the 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and directed the 
Agency to secure travelers through improved passenger and 
baggage screening operations. To successfully carry out its 
mission, TSA utilizes many layers of security, including 
screening technology.
    This report is a critical examination and analysis of TSA's 
procurement, deployment, and storage of screening technologies. 
During the past ten years, TSA has struggled to cost-
effectively utilize taxpayer funding to procure and deploy 
security equipment at the Nation's 463 airports where TSA 
provides screening operations. The report makes recommendations 
emphasizing TSA's need to more effectively develop its 
deployment strategy prior to the procurement of screening 
technologies. In addition, TSA must look for ways to reduce 
significant shipping costs for the thousands of pieces of 
equipment it deploys annually.
    As a result of the investigation, the Committee Majority 
Staff made several key findings:
    1. TSA is wasting hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars 
by inefficiently deploying screening equipment and technology 
to commercial airports.
    2. As of February 15, 2012, TSA stored approximately 5,700 
pieces of security equipment in warehouses at TSA's 
Transportation Logistics Center (TLC) in Dallas, Texas.
    3. As of February 15, 2012, the total value of TSA's 
equipment in storage was, according to TSA officials, estimated 
at $184 million. However, when questioned by Committee staff, 
TSA's warehouse staff and procurement officials were unable to 
provide the total value of equipment in storage.
    4. TSA's annual costs for leasing and managing the TLC are 
more than $3.5 million.
    5. Committee staff discovered that 85 percent of the 
approximately 5,700 major transportation security equipment 
currently warehoused at the TLC had been stored for longer than 
six months; 35 percent of the equipment had been stored for 
more than one year. One piece of equipment had been in storage 
more than six years--60 percent of its useful life.
    6. Committee staff discovered that TSA had 472 Advanced 
Technology 2 (AT2) carry-on baggage screening machines at the 
TLC and that more than 99 percent have remained in storage for 
more than nine months; 34 percent of AT2s have been stored for 
longer than one year.
    7. Committee staff estimate that the delayed deployment of 
TSA's state-of-the-art screening technologies has resulted in a 
massive depreciated loss of equipment utility at an estimated 
cost to taxpayers of nearly $23 million.
    8. TSA warehouse staff was unable to provide the total 
annual cost for disposition of equipment.
    9. The limited use of direct shipping from manufacturer to 
deployment location has resulted in the overutilization of the 
TLC and excessive annual deployment costs of between $50 and 
$100 million.
    10. TSA is failing to effectively procure screening 
technology and equipment for use at commercial airports.
    11. TSA knowingly purchased more ETDs than were necessary 
in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and 
baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management 
stated: ``[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a 
discount.''
    12. As of February 15, 2012, TSA possessed 1,462 ETDs in 
storage in its TLC warehouses. At approximately $30,000 per 
ETD, TSA's purchases equate to nearly $44 million dollars in 
excessive quantities of ETD machines.
    13. 492 of the ETDs had been in storage for longer than one 
year.
    14. When questioned, TSA officials were incapable of 
providing the deployment plan for these Explosive Trace 
Detectors.
    15. TSA intentionally delayed Congressional oversight of 
the TLC and provided inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially 
misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the 
Agency's continued mismanagement of warehouse operations.
    16. TSA willfully delayed Congressional oversight of the 
Agency's TLC twice in a failed attempt to hide the disposal of 
approximately 1,300 pieces of screening equipment from its 
warehouses in Dallas, Texas, prior to the arrival of 
Congressional staff.
    17. TSA potentially violated 18 United States Code, Sec. 
1001, by knowingly providing an inaccurate warehouse inventory 
report to Congressional staff that accounted for the disposal 
of equipment that was still in storage at the TLC during a site 
visit by Congressional staff.
    18. TSA provided Congressional staff with a list of 
disposed equipment that falsely identified disposal dates and 
directly contradicted the inventory of equipment in the 
Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report provided to Committee 
staff on February 13, 2012.
    The purpose of this report is to offer constructive 
recommendations for the improvement of TSA's procurement, 
deployment, and storage of screening technologies. 
Specifically, the Committee Majority Staff makes the following 
recommendations:
    1. Halt all equipment procurement unless there is a bona 
fide need.
    2. Require an extensive review of the TSA's management of 
technology procurement, deployment, redeployment of screening 
technology.
    3. Require an internal review performing a cost-benefit 
analysis of procurement and deployment for all screening 
technology.
    4. Require TSA to formulate a deployment plan prior to 
procurement of all screening technology.
    5. Require periodic reviews to ensure that TSA is 
effectively deploying screening technology.
    6. Require that screening technologies must be reviewed and 
approved by an independent group of scientists. The independent 
group of scientists must be entirely impartial and objective.
    7. Halt deployment of any screening technology prior to 
validation by an independent scientific community and a cost-
benefit analysis for utilizing the screening technology.
    8. Immediately implement--not simply concur with--all 
recommendations by the GAO related to the procurement, 
deployment, and storage of screening technology.
    9. Increase the frequency of direct shipping from the 
equipment manufacturer to the deployment location to reduce 
excessive shipping costs.
    10. Improve the management of technology deployment to 
limit excessive storage times and reduce the impact of 
technology depreciation.
    11. Review and adjust TSA's policies to ensure compliance 
with Congressional oversight.
    12. Ask the Department of Homeland Security Inspector 
General to review TSA's compliance with Congressional oversight 
during the 112th Congress.
    13. Mandate a review of TSA's production of inaccurate and 
misleading documents (Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report) to 
the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is 
responsible for oversight of TSA, on February 13, 2012.
    To see the report, please visit: http://
republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/
2012-05-09-Joint-TSA-Staff-Report.pdf

    Title: Amtrak Commuter Rail Service: The High Cost of 
Amtrak's Operations
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the high 
cost of Amtrak's Commuter Rail Service.
    Summary: Recent years have seen an increase in commuter 
rail ridership and the number of routes in operation. From 2005 
to 2010, ridership on commuter rail lines has increased more 
than 10 percent, or approximately 42 million passenger trips. 
In 2010, the Nation's commuter rail transportation system 
provided nearly 460 million passenger trips. With rising demand 
for service, it is critically important for commuter rail 
agencies to continue to look for ways to improve service while 
reducing costs. As a result, commuter rail agencies are looking 
to competitive contracting for commuter rail operations as a 
way to provide the highest level of service at the lowest 
costs.
    This report examines the process and benefits of 
competitive contracting for commuter rail operations. It 
reviews the current number of active commuter rail operations 
contracts obtained through competitive processes, as well as 
the National Railroad Passenger Corporation's (Amtrak) role in 
this industry, and its effectiveness in competing with private 
rail operators.
    As a result of the investigation, the Committee Majority 
Staff made several key findings:
    1. Amtrak's inability to adapt its nationwide model for 
intercity passenger rail to commuter rail regional markets has 
led to its failure to secure a single commuter rail operations 
contract over the past ten years.
    2. Since 2010, Amtrak's revenue from commuter rail service 
has decreased $59 million from $152 million to approximately 
$93 million.
    3. The decision to compete out commuter rail operations 
rather than contract directly with Amtrak will save these six 
transit agencies $107.8 million over the life of these 
contracts. This resulted in a net savings of 11.5 percent.
    4. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority--2002 
Competition: After 17 years of continued operation of MBTA's 
commuter service, Amtrak withdrew from the competition and 
forfeited its single largest commuter rail contract.
    5. North County Transit District Coaster Service--2005 
Competition: After 10 years of operating the Coaster service 
between San Diego and Oceanside, California, Amtrak lost a 
competitive operating and maintenance contract, scoring lower 
in every evaluation category with a higher total cost.
    6. New Mexico Rail Runner Express Service--2005 
Competition: Amtrak's ineffective proposal had an average 
annual cost that was $1.25 million greater than Herzog.
    7. Florida Tri-Rail--2007 Competition: Amtrak's proposal 
scored lower than Veolia for every evaluation criteria, 
including bid price that was 67 percent higher or $65.5 million 
more than Veolia's.
    8. Virginia Railway Express (VRE)--2009 Competition: Amtrak 
failed to win the competition despite a complete understanding 
of the facilities, customers, agency's desires, and costs of 
operations.
    9. Surprisingly, Amtrak's proposal included a $2.2 million 
dollar mobilization fee for a service it was already operating. 
Keolis' winning proposal included a mobilization fee of only 
$1.7 million
    10. California Caltrain--2010 Competition: After Amtrak's 
nearly 20 year incumbency and a comprehensive understanding of 
Caltrain's service needs and operational demands, Amtrak's 
proposal scored 13 points lower than Herzog's at a cost of more 
than $1 million dollars more annually.
    11. Amtrak spent millions of dollars on failed bids in 
response to commuter rail agency Requests for Proposals.
    12. Amtrak spent more than $2.1 million in a failed legal 
attempt to sue Veolia and disgorge Veolia of its profits from 
the operation of the Florida Tri-Rail commuter service.
    13. Amtrak's frivolous lawsuit against Veolia forced the 
private operator to spend nearly $3 million dollars to defend 
itself from Amtrak's federally subsidized pockets.
    14. After Amtrak's failed bid to operate the Virginia 
Railway Express (VRE) in 2009, it reportedly interfered with 
the transition to the winning bidder, Keolis, so much so that 
VRE officials began exploring legal action that could be taken 
against Amtrak.
    15. Amtrak's union allegedly told its workers they would be 
fired by Amtrak and blacklisted if they took a job with Keolis 
to operate Keolis's trains on the line.
    16. Amtrak refused to allow VRE engineers to ride with 
Amtrak crews to learn the route.
    17. Upon implementation of section 209 of PRIIA, States 
could potentially save, in aggregate, an estimated $91.3 
million annually if they choose to compete out the operational 
services on the Amtrak State-supported intercity routes.
    18. The potential savings of an estimated $91.3 million 
would cover much of the $120 million increase in costs that 
will be borne by these 19 States when section 209 of PRIIA is 
fully implemented in October 2013.
    The purpose of this report is to offer constructive 
recommendations for the improvement of Amtrak's Commuter Rail 
Operations. Specifically, the Committee Majority Staff makes 
the following recommendations:
    1. Amtrak should immediately cease expansion of its 
commuter rail operations and focus on its Congressionally 
mandated responsibilities and making the Northeast Corridor 
more cost efficient and effective.
    2. All commuter rail agencies should consider the benefits 
of contracting out its operational services through a 
competitive bid process.
    3. States should consider competing out the operational 
services on the State-supported routes upon implementation of 
section 209 of PRIIA.
    4. Amtrak should not use its Federal funds to file, 
litigate, or otherwise pursue in any Federal or State court any 
cause of action against a passenger rail service provider 
arising from a competitive bid process in which Amtrak and that 
passenger rail service provider both participated.
    5. Amtrak should not interfere in the transition to a new 
passenger rail provider and should actively cooperate with the 
incoming passenger rail providers and the public commuter rail 
agencies throughout the transition.
    To see the report please visit: http://republicans. 
transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Railroads/
Amtrak_Commuter_Rail_Competition_Report_FINAL.pdf

    Title: TSA Labor Agreement: Distraction from Core Mission
    Date: November 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the 
specific provisions of the labor contract between the American 
Federation of Government Employees, which represent baggage 
screeners, and the Transportation Security Administration.
    Summary: In February of 2011, Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA) Administrator John Pistole announced that 
TSA employees, should they elect a union to represent them, 
would be eligible to engage in collective bargaining. As a 
result of that decision, in August 2012 the TSA announced that 
it had negotiated an agreement with the American Federation of 
Government Employees (AFGE)--the union representing TSA 
screeners. The new collective bargaining agreement provides few 
real benefits to TSA employees and only further diverts focus 
from TSA's core functions of analyzing intelligence and 
ensuring the security of air travelers. TSA's contract with 
AFGE representing 45,000 screeners is the largest Federal 
bargaining unit agreement since World War II.
    The mission of the TSA is to protect the Nation's 
transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people 
and commerce. Rather than focus on this core mission, TSA has 
spent months negotiating a collective bargaining agreement that 
does very little to improve the organization of the TSA, but 
does succeed in increasing costs to tax payers. This new 
agreement focuses on inconsequential minutiae while providing 
limited benefits to the screeners. In the end, the TSA will 
only find itself furthered bogged down by its enormous and now 
convoluted human resource operation.
    Unfortunately, TSA screeners will see few true benefits 
from this new collective bargaining agreement and once again 
the focus of the Agency will be not on ensuring transportation 
security, but on whether a screener is allowed to expose a 
tattoo and what kind of patch or shirt can be used to cover 
tattoos. The agreement that TSA Administrator John S. Pistole 
said ``represents a significant milestone in our relationship 
with our employees,'' includes directions on how long tie bars 
can be and their color, as well as when a baseball cap can be 
worn, the brim direction and the patch allowed.
    TSA needs to devote its resources to reviewing the latest 
intelligence, analyzing threat risks, developing the best 
security standards, and auditing screener performance--not 
managing a bloated personnel system and worrying about whether 
screeners can wear their uniforms into bars and while standing 
at a craps table.
    The Administration's decision to grant collective 
bargaining rights to one of the largest blocks of Federal 
employees is expected to add millions annually to the cost of 
TSA operations, and continue to distract the Agency away from 
its important security mission. A labor agreement focused on 
cosmetics does not ensure screener job satisfaction or increase 
the efficiency and effectiveness of airport screening 
operations; rather it only serves as another diversion from 
ensuring the security of the traveling public.
    As a result of the investigation, the Committee Majority 
Staff made a number of findings on the TSA/AFGE Collective 
Bargaining Agreement:
    1. After approximately seven months of intense negotiation, 
TSA reached an agreement with AFGE that provides few true 
benefits to screeners and diverts TSA's focus from its core 
functions of analyzing intelligence and ensuring the security 
of air travelers. The Agreement continues the Agency's 
unfettered growth into an enormous and inflexible bureaucracy 
with an ever-expanding number of managers. TSA's focus on 
consolidating power and human resource management is an 
unnecessary distraction from its core mission of transportation 
security.
    2. The union agreement does not affect security operations, 
but it does get into trivial detail about uniforms and screener 
appearance. The following is a list of some of the provisions 
included in the TSA's ``historic'' labor agreement:
          a. Employees cannot wear uniforms while gambling or 
        consuming alcoholic beverages.
          b. Uniforms can be worn to buy a cup of coffee or go 
        grocery shopping while commuting.
          c. Employees can wear baseball caps with the brim 
        facing forward, and the cap must be navy blue in color 
        with the DHS or TSA patch affixed to the front of the 
        cap.
          d. Tattoos are not allowed and must be covered by a 
        plain, single-colored royal blue acceptable band or 
        sports sleeve that does not detract from the uniform.
          e. Employees can wear tie tacks, but they cannot 
        exceed \1/2\ inch diameter and must be plain gold or 
        silver in color.
          f. Employees tie bars must not exceed 3/8 inch in 
        width and be plain gold or silver tone metal.
          g. Employees' uniform allowance increases to $446 
        annually.
          h. The only jacket that can be worn at a security 
        checkpoint is the ``Ike'' jacket (named after former 
        President Dwight David Eisenhower). TSA will offer each 
        employee a onetime subsidy for the purchase of an Ike 
        jacket. Management will permit employees who serve as 
        Union officials to wear an AFGE pin to be designed and 
        paid for by the Union and subject to advanced TSA 
        review and approval.
    3. The increased uniform allowance included in the labor 
agreement for TSA screeners of $446 annually now dramatically 
exceeds the one-time uniform allowance for a combat Marine 
Lieutenant of $400. The cost to taxpayers of the increase in 
the TSA screeners' uniform allowance is an estimated $9.63 
million annually. Additionally, the collective bargaining 
agreement confirms that the TSA will be allowing, and paying, 
employees to serve official time on a full-time basis for the 
Union. The cost of these types of work arrangements is not 
known.
    To see the report please visit: http://
republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/
TSA%20Labor%20Report.pdf

                        Subcommittee on Aviation

    To date, the Subcommittee on Aviation, chaired by 
Congressman Thomas Petri (R-Wisconsin), with Congressman Jerry 
Costello (D-Illinois) serving as Ranking Member, held 12 
hearings, eight Member's roundtables, and a Classified Members' 
Briefing by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the 
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) airport 
checkpoint screening.
    The Subcommittee developed major legislation, H.R. 658, the 
FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, to reauthorize and 
reform the programs, funding, and organization of the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), and to provide $59.7 billion 
over four years for FAA programs. H.R. 658 passed the House on 
April 1, 2011. The Senate had previously passed its FAA 
Reauthorization bill, so the Senate and the House held pre-
conference meetings and negotiations in order to reconcile the 
differences between their two bills. House conferees were named 
and a formal conference meeting was held on January 31, 2012.
    On February 14, 2012, H.R. 658 became Public Law 112-95. 
This law provides responsible funding for FAA safety programs, 
air traffic control modernization (NextGen) efforts, and 
operations through 2015, and holds spending at fiscal year 2011 
levels through fiscal year 2015 ($63 billion over four years). 
Public Law 112-95 provides long-term stability for the aviation 
industry, and creates the environment to allow for the creation 
of high-paying and sustainable jobs. This law also accelerates 
deployment of NextGen technologies, and reforms FAA's oversight 
of NextGen, ensuring responsibility and setting milestones and 
metrics. Finally, it provides for unprecedented reform of the 
National Mediation Board; limits efforts by the Administration 
to over-regulate industry, including the lithium battery 
industry; reforms the Essential Air Service (EAS) program by 
eliminating the most egregious subsidies; establishes a 
balanced inspection regime for repair stations; establishes a 
process to address outdated and obsolete FAA air traffic 
control facilities; and enacts airline passenger improvements 
and protections.
    The Subcommittee also developed major legislation, H.R. 
2594, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition 
Act of 2011 to prohibit United States air carriers and other 
aircraft operators from participating in the European Union 
(EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). On October 24, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 2594. On December 7, 2011, S. 1956, the 
Senate companion legislation to H.R. 2594, was introduced in 
the Senate. On September 22, 2012, S. 1956 passed the Senate 
with an amendment. On November 13, 2012, the House passed S. 
1956, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition 
Act of 2011, as amended by the Senate. On November 27, 2012, S. 
1956 was signed by the President and became Public Law 112-200.
    The Committee also reported out S. 1335, the Pilot Bill of 
Rights. This bill was introduced in the Senate on July 6, 2011. 
A companion bill (H.R. 3816) was introduced in the House on 
January 14, 2012. S. 1335 was passed by unanimous consent in 
the Senate on June 29, 2012. It was taken up by the House and 
passed by voice vote under Suspension of the Rules on July 23, 
2012. It was signed by the President on August 3, 2012, and 
became Public Law No. 112-153.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: FAA Reauthorization of 2011: FAA Administrator
    Date: February 8, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the 
FAA. The hearing covered issues of funding and financing the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which helps fund the development 
of a nationwide airport and airway system. The Trust Fund also 
funds FAA investments in air traffic control facilities and 
airport grants, thereby creating jobs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from 
Administrator Randy Babbitt who testified on the importance of 
a long term reauthorization act, and offered his viewpoint on 
the issues to be addressed in the reauthorization bill. The 
hearing discussed the FAA's Facility and Equipment (F&E) 
program, which includes development, installation, and 
transitional maintenance of navigational and communication 
equipment to support aviation operations. The hearing looked at 
safety issues, commercial service to small communities through 
the Essential Air Service (EAS), and the importance of Next 
Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) to the future of 
aviation. The hearing also explored issues related to FAA 
regulation of the aviation industry and the importance of a 
long-term FAA bill to ensure a steady source of funding and 
create jobs.

    Title: FAA Reauthorization of 2011: Stakeholders
    Date: February 9, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the 
FAA from aviation stakeholders.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from airport and 
airline associations, labor unions, and manufacturers' 
associations. The seven witnesses testified on the importance 
of a long term reauthorization act and offered their advice on 
the issues to be addressed in the reauthorization process. The 
hearing covered issues of funding and financing for the EAS 
Program and the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The hearing 
discussed the importance of NextGen and the need to continue 
its implementation to remain competitive in the global 
marketplace in addition to addressing looming issues related to 
congestion and environmental impacts. The hearing addressed 
safety concerns, labor issues, and standardization of 
regulation interpretation. The hearing also explored areas 
where the industry believed there was excessive or unnecessary 
regulation that negatively impacted the ability of industry to 
grow economically and create jobs.

    Title: Roundtable--A Discussion of Airports and Fixed-Based 
Operator Issues
    Date: June 15, 2011
    Purpose: Discussed various issues regarding the 
relationship between airports and fixed-based operators (FBOs), 
including competition, the use of both Federal and private 
funds, and leases, as well as other issues.
    Summary: Earlier this Congress, Congressman John Duncan (R-
Tennessee) introduced H.R. 1474, the Freedom from Competition 
Act of 2011, which would prohibit any entity receiving Federal 
funding from using these funds to compete with a private 
business. This legislation resulted in debate on legislation's 
impact on the relationship between airports and FBOs. The 
Aviation Subcommittee invited representatives from associations 
representing FBOs and airports to discuss the issues.

    Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry 
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and 
Costly Government Burdens
    Date: June 23, 2011
    Purpose: A joint hearing on Global Positioning System (GPS) 
Reliability by the Subcommittees on Aviation and Coast Guard 
and Maritime Transportation to receive testimony on stakeholder 
concerns with GPS interference, the implications of that 
interference on GPS reliability, NextGen, aviation job 
creation, and the potential remedies to GPS interference.
    Summary: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is 
considering an application by a company called LightSquared to 
build nationwide broadband internet infrastructure. 
LightSquared has applied to have high-power internet broadcast 
stations across the country on the spectrum neighboring the 
low-powered GPS signal. A broad coalition of industry 
stakeholders who use GPS, including almost all of the aviation 
groups, have expressed concern the high-powered broadband 
signal will overpower and disable critical GPS navigation and 
timing functions. Initial testing by the Department of Defense 
(DoD) and DOT has validated some of these interference 
concerns. There are similar concerns related to how GPS 
interference might impact maritime safety. The Subcommittees 
will hear testimony from DOT, the DoD, the Coast Guard, 
LightSquared, the RTCA Inc., and representatives of airlines, 
manufacturers, and general aviation.

    Title: European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme: Violation 
of International Law
    Date: July 27, 2011
    Purpose: The hearing focused on the unilateral actions of 
the European Union (EU) in applying their Emissions Trading 
Scheme (ETS) to all civil aviation operations; the EU's actions 
and international law; and the impact of the EU's ETS on United 
States operators, the competitiveness of the aviation industry, 
and aviation jobs.
    Summary: The EU's ETS began in 2005 with the capping of 
emissions of carbon dioxide from more than 10,000 stationary 
sources within the EU. Under the ETS, the EU auctions a 
specified number of emissions allowances for each multi-year 
period, and distributes a certain number of allowances for 
free. Starting in January, 2012, civil aviation operators 
landing in or departing from the EU will be included in the 
ETS. This means that all segments of international flights to, 
within, and from the EU by American air carriers would be 
subject to the ETS, including those portions over the United 
States, Canada, and international waters. The United States 
government has filed its objection to the implementation of the 
EU ETS and believes that International Civil Aviation 
Organization (ICAO) is the appropriate forum to address climate 
change. The United States is not alone in its opposition. There 
is virtually universal international opposition to the 
implementation of the ETS. The Subcommittee received testimony 
from the Federal government and industry witnesses regarding 
the EU ETS.

    Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emissions Trading 
Scheme
    Date: September 21, 2011
    Purpose: As a follow-up to the Subcommittee's Hearing in 
July regarding the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme 
(EU ETS), the Subcommittee held a roundtable to be briefed on 
and discuss what actions had been taken by the United States 
Government, and to learn how discussions between the United 
States and the EU had progressed since the hearing. The 
Subcommittee invited representatives from the Department of 
Transportation (DOT), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 
and the Department of State to receive an update on actions 
regarding the EU ETS.
    Summary: The European Union has proposed the application of 
its Emissions Trading Scheme to civil aviation operators 
landing in or departing from the EU. This application of the 
ETS is a unilateral and illegal action by the EU that would 
result in American air carriers having to buy emissions 
allowances for all segments of a flight, not just segments of 
the flight over EU Member States. In July, the Subcommittee 
held a hearing to discuss the EU's actions and international 
law; and the impact of the EU's ETS on American operators, the 
competitiveness of the aviation industry, and aviation jobs. 
Since the hearing, actions have been taken by other countries 
and the United States related to the EU's ETS. The roundtable 
discussed the measures that have been taken by the DOT, State 
Department and FAA, as well as the ongoing negotiations between 
the concerned United States Federal agencies and the EU. The 
actions of other countries in opposition to the EU ETS were 
also discussed.

    Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program: 
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
    Date: October 5, 2011
    Purpose: An oversight hearing on the Next Generation Air 
Traffic Control System (NextGen) by the Subcommittee on 
Aviation to receive testimony on benefits, costs, and the 
progress of NextGen implementation.
    Summary: To meet future demands of air traffic on the 
National Airspace System (NAS), the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) is in the process of upgrading the current 
system of air traffic navigation and control via ground based 
navigation stations and radar to a modernized system that 
utilizes Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to provide 
navigation and separation. This project involves many different 
stakeholders from both the government and the private sector, 
and will provide many benefits from reduced flight time and 
congestion to environmental benefits from reduced emissions.
    The Subcommittee received testimony from the FAA, the 
Department of Transportation Inspector General's (DOT IG) 
office, the Government Accountability Office, the Air Line 
Pilots Association, the National Business Aviation Association, 
the Air Transport Association, and Deloitte, LLC. While the 
benefits from the NextGen project were not disputed, the 
problems in the execution of implementing such a large program 
were highlighted, primarily by the DOT IG. The project involves 
many individual components coming together to form one large 
system, and delays to those individual systems prohibit the 
benefits from the NextGen project from being realized. Those 
delays seem to not be as a result of a lack of funding, but 
rather from poor management from the FAA.
    The Subcommittee will use the testimony and problems as 
highlighted by the witnesses to continue to provide oversight 
of the entire NextGen project. The management problem in 
implementing NextGen systems is of particular concern to the 
Subcommittee, and soon to be enacted legislation will provide 
strict deadlines for implementing NextGen systems as well as 
help address the management issues that are adversely affecting 
implementation of the overall system.

    Title: Roundtable--A Discussion of Helicopter Issues: Air 
Tours, Safety Concerns and Noise
    Date: October 27, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met for a general discussion on 
helicopter issues, specifically addressing air tours, safety 
concerns, and noise over residential areas. The roundtable 
provided an opportunity for Members to learn about important 
helicopter issues and progress that has been made over the 
years to improve helicopter safety. The Helicopter Association 
International, Federal Aviation Administration, and National 
Transportation Safety Board all participated in the roundtable. 
Additionally, the Subcommittee invited three Members who are 
not on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to 
participate in the discussions given their interest in the 
topic.
    Summary: Helicopters play a unique and diverse role within 
the aviation system, providing a variety of services in a range 
of different environments. The unique nature of helicopter 
operations means they come with their own set of operational 
issues. In 2007, the FAA issued a final rule which set safety 
and oversight rules for a broad variety of sightseeing and 
commercial air tour flights. In the opinion of both Federal 
agencies and industry, the rule has greatly improved the safety 
of helicopter air tour operations. In addition, concerns about 
helicopter noise over residential areas was discussed. The 
roundtable provided an opportunity for Members and industry to 
discuss concerns regarding helicopter operations and to allow 
all interested parties to continue to work together in the 
future to address ongoing helicopter noise issues.

    Title: Roundtable--Terminal Area Safety
    Date: November 17, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to 
discuss the rise in terminal area air traffic control safety 
incidents in which aircraft pass too close to one another.
    Summary: Over the last few years, the number of incidents 
in which aircraft in terminal area airspace have gotten within 
too close proximity to one another as a result of air traffic 
controller errors has spiked at an alarming rate. The Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), during this same period of time, 
created two programs that are designed to better report and 
record terminal area safety incidents. Members and aviation 
safety stakeholders met to discuss whether the spike in 
incidents is because of the implementation of these new 
programs, or if there had been serious erosion in air traffic 
control safety.
    The Subcommittee Members met with representatives from the 
FAA, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Department 
of Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG), the National Air 
Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), and the FAA Managers 
Association. While the FAA and NATCA believe that the rise in 
reported incidents is because of the reporting programs the FAA 
is implementing, the DOT IG and the GAO have released reports 
recently that suggest that the new programs are not the sole 
explanation for the increase in reported operational errors. 
The Subcommittee Members will use the information gained during 
the roundtable to take a closer look at terminal area safety 
and continue to monitor the implementation of the FAA's 
reporting programs.

    Title: A Review of Issues Associated with Protecting and 
Improving our Nation's Aviation Satellite-based Global 
Positioning System Infrastructure
    Date: February 8, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee received testimony on how to best 
protect the Global Positioning System (GPS) infrastructure from 
disruption by incompatible uses of radio spectrum near the 
spectrum used by GPS.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from government 
and industry witnesses on GPS disruption and how to protect 
aviation users from the effects of GPS disruption. As the FAA 
transitions to the Next Generation Air Traffic Control System 
(NextGen), the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace 
System will become even more dependent on a reliable GPS 
infrastructure. High demand for radio spectrum to be repurposed 
for use by broadband internet providers led the Federal 
Communications Commission to consider repurposing spectrum 
adjacent to GPS. At the hearing, Deputy Secretary of 
Transportation John Porcari testified to the damaging 
incompatibility of the proposed new use, and testified that the 
Department of Transportation would work with the National 
Telecommunications and Information Agency to establish radio 
spectrum interference standards that broadcasters would be 
required to comply with so as to avoid future potential 
disruptions to GPS. Industry witnesses concurred with the 
Deputy Secretary's assessment of the FCC's proposed new use of 
spectrum, and agreed that GPS radio spectrum must be protected.

    Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emission Trading Scheme
    Date: March 28, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met in an open, but informal 
setting to discuss the European Union's (EU) Emissions Trading 
Scheme (ETS) and its impact on the United States aviation 
industry, international law, and global trade.
    Summary: The Subcommittee discussed with representatives of 
the State Department, Department of Transportation, aviation 
industry and labor the impact of and possible steps to be taken 
against the implementation of ETS to American air operators. In 
2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing and a roundtable 
addressing the implementation of the EU's illegal and 
unilateral ETS and the steps that the United States government 
and industry have taken in opposition. Beginning in January, 
2012, the EU's ETS began to take effect on all American air 
carriers. This roundtable was a discussion on actions taken by 
the government and industry since the last roundtable in 
September, 2011. In addition, the participants discussed 
possible actions to be taken going forward in response to the 
implementation of the ETS.

    Title: Roundtable--NextGen Benefits and Coalition Building
    Date: April 18, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met in a roundtable forum to 
discuss the benefits airports and communities will enjoy with 
the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) NextGen program. 
The purpose was to publicize benefits to incentivize 
participation in the NextGen program. With NextGen initiatives 
in place, the FAA claims improved airspace efficiency for 
operators, and reduced costs for the government.
    Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to 
hear from the FAA, the Government Accountability Office, the 
Port Authority of New York/New Jersey, JetBlue Airlines, and 
Airports Council International regarding the most desirable 
NextGen benefits for airports. Because the FAA will redesign 
airspace routes under NextGen, stakeholder buy-in will be 
critical to the process moving forward. In the past, FAA 
efforts to redesign airspace have met opposition. The FAA and 
airport officials stated that with the aggregate benefits 
associated with NextGen improvements, communities around 
airports will see improvements. Participants also discussed the 
aggregate economic benefits communities will see with NextGen 
as a result of the improved capacity at airports.

    Title: Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
    Date: April 25, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee received testimony on the safety 
of the United States aviation system and the Federal Aviation 
Administration's (FAA) oversight of the system. The hearing 
covered a broad spectrum of safety issues from operational 
errors, FAA oversight of repair stations, implementation of the 
pilot training requirements from Aviation Safety and Federal 
Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2012, and terminal 
area safety concerns.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the FAA, 
government, labor, industry, and other stakeholders as part of 
its continuing oversight of the safety of the aviation system. 
The witnesses emphasized the high level of safety that the 
United States aviation system is experiencing; however 
witnesses agreed that there is always room for improvement when 
it comes to safety. The Department of Transportation Inspector 
General (DOT IG), Government Accountability Office (GAO), and 
the FAA discussed the recent rise in operational errors and 
runway incursions, and potential causes and remedies of them. 
The witnesses discussed the FAA's changed approach to safety 
oversight, and its reliance upon a data collection systems and 
analysis. The witnesses addressed the progress the FAA has made 
in implementing the changes to pilot training that were 
contained in the Aviations Safety and Federal Aviation 
Administration Act of 2012. The witnesses also addressed the 
FAA's safety oversight of the aviation system, and presented 
areas where they believed FAA oversight could be improved.

    Title: Roundtable--FAA's Airport District Office 
Reorganization Plans
    Date: April 27, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee, in conjunction with Congressman 
Howard Coble (R-North Carolina) and the North Carolina 
Congressional Delegation, met in an informal setting to discuss 
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport District 
Office reorganization plans.
    Summary: Early in 2011, the FAA announced a proposal to 
reorganize their Airport District Offices (ADOs) in order to 
save money and streamline operations. Under the proposed plan, 
the State of North Carolina's ADO would change from Atlanta, 
Georgia to Memphis, Tennessee. The Members from North Carolina 
raised concerns about this proposal. They cited increased 
travel costs and the loss of longstanding relationships with 
current Atlanta ADO employees as their primary objections to 
the proposal. Also, the North Carolina delegation were 
concerned that some of the unique environmental conditions that 
exist in North Carolina were best handled through their 
longstanding relationship with the Atlanta ADO. The FAA was on 
hand and made their case for the proposed ADO reorganization, 
explaining how the streamlined operations would save money 
through decreased labor costs without sacrificing customer 
service. All sides agreed to continue working together to reach 
a solution that would allow the North Carolina airports to 
continue to voice their concerns and receive the best service 
possible while also allowing for the FAA to realize the cost 
savings through the ADO reorganization.

    Title: A Review of FAA's Efforts to Reduce Costs and Ensure 
Safety and Efficiency Through Realignment and Facility 
Consolidation
    Date: May 31, 2012
    Purpose: An oversight hearing on the Federal Aviation 
Administration's (FAA) facility consolidation and realignment 
plans and efforts.
    Summary: Given the age and condition of FAA facilities, the 
state of the Federal budget and need for cost savings, facility 
and infrastructure needs with the implementation of NextGen, 
and the planning requirements included in the recently enacted 
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, the FAA must pursue 
facility consolidation and realignment plans and efforts. The 
FAA is responsible for operations (such as controlling traffic) 
at all 542 terminal facilities. FAA uses its own staff at 292 
of the facilities and contractors for the 250 contract towers. 
The FAA is responsible for physically maintaining or replacing 
402 of the 542 facilities. The remaining 140 facilities are the 
responsibility of someone else--an airport authority, local 
government, private company, etc. Of the 402 facilities that 
the FAA is responsible for maintaining, the FAA owns 338 
facilities and has agreements to maintain 64 facilities that 
are staffed by FAA employees.
    In 2008, the Department of Transportation Inspector General 
(DOT IG) reported that while the average facility has an 
expected useful life of approximately 25 to 30 years, 59 
percent of FAA facilities were over 30 years old. During its 
audit, the DOT IG observed obvious structural deficiencies and 
maintenance-related issues at several locations. These included 
water leaks, mold, tower cab window condensation, deterioration 
due to poor design, and general disrepair. In addition to age 
and disrepair, the FAA has conducted numerous studies 
indicating the need to realign, consolidate and co-locate air 
traffic control facilities as the air traffic control system is 
modernized (NextGen). The recently enacted FAA Modernization 
and Reform Act of 2012 includes a provision which requires the 
Administrator to develop, in conjunction with the Chief NextGen 
Officer and Chief Operating Officer, a National Facilities 
Realignment and Consolidation Report within 120 days of 
enactment.
    Despite its understanding of the need to make decisions on 
facility requirements and to move ahead with realignments, and 
consolidations, the FAA has previously met parochial political 
resistance from Congress, and at times, its own workforce. If 
the FAA is to successfully implement NextGen and see the 
expected cost savings, cost avoidances, and safety 
improvements, it must work with labor, industry, and other 
stakeholders to develop clear facility requirements and sound 
business cases; comply with the mandates of the recently 
enacted Reform Act; and move ahead with needed realignments, 
consolidations, and maintenance plans in an expedited fashion.

    Title: Roundtable--A Review of Airline Ancillary Fees
    Date: June 27, 2012
    Purpose: A Roundtable to discuss airline ancillary fees and 
their impact on the travelling public.
    Summary: Members of the Subcommittee met with witnesses 
from the Department of Transportation as well as 
representatives of airlines, travel industry, and consumer 
advocacy groups in a closed setting to discuss the impact that 
airline fees are having on passengers and the airline industry. 
Ancillary fees have become a new reality, particularly with the 
razor thin profit margins currently seen in the airline 
industry. However, there is growing interest in ensuring proper 
transparency so that consumers can make educated decisions. 
There was agreement that the industry must ensure consumers 
have access to information when purchasing their tickets. How 
that is achieved must be resolved within the business community 
and the marketplace. Stakeholders participating in the 
roundtable, from airlines, travel industry, and consumer 
advocacy groups, agreed to work together to find ways to better 
inform consumers about what the fees are and how much their 
total flight will cost when the fees are included.

    Title: A Review of the FAA's Contract Tower Program
    Date: July 18, 2012
    Purpose: An oversight hearing to review the Federal 
Aviation Administration's (FAA) Contract Tower Program and 
receive testimony on the Department of Transportation Inspector 
General's (DOT IG) audit of the FAA's Contract Tower Program.
    Summary: Under the Contract Tower Program, the FAA 
contracts with private entities to provide air traffic control 
services at Visual Flight Rules (VFR) airports. The program is 
intended to reduce the cost of air traffic control services and 
to enhance aviation safety by providing air traffic services at 
airports where Federally-staffed towers would not be cost 
effective. Currently, 250 airports in over 45 states 
participate in the program. Contract towers handle 
approximately 28 percent of all air traffic control tower 
aircraft operations in the United States, but account for just 
14 percent of FAA's overall tower operations budget.
    In 2003, the DOT IG issued a report that provided an 
independent analysis of comparable cost and safety data at FAA-
staffed towers and contract towers. According to the 2003 DOT 
IG report, both contract towers and FAA-staffed towers had 
error rates that were well below FAA's fiscal year 2002 overall 
average of 6.70 operational errors for every million operations 
handled.
    The July hearing explored the DOT IG's work updating the 
2003 report. The DOT IG again provided an independent analysis 
of comparable cost and safety data at FAA-staffed towers and 
contract towers. Once again, DOT IG's work demonstrated that 
contract towers were just as safe and cost less to operate than 
comparable FAA-staffed towers.
    The 2012 DOT IG study of FAA contract towers compared 240 
contract towers and 92 FAA towers. The 92 FAA towers were 
towers that the FAA identified as comparable in terms of total 
operations. The IG found that in fiscal year 2010 contract 
towers reported both a lower number and rate of safety 
incidents than the FAA towers. There was some discussion of 
reporting requirements at FAA contract towers and the need to 
include contract controllers in the voluntary reporting program 
adopted by the FAA and controllers' union for FAA-staffed 
towers.
    In making cost comparisons during the 2012 contract tower 
work, the DOT IG selected 30 contract towers and compared them 
to 30 FAA towers with similar air traffic densities. The IG 
evaluated the fiscal year 2010 operating cost for each to 
determine the cost difference on a per year basis. Based on 
this sample, the IG determined that the average cost to operate 
a contract tower in fiscal year 2010 was about $537,000, 
compared to about $2.025 million to operate an FAA tower, a 
difference of $1.488 million.
    The subcommittee also heard from the FAA, the National Air 
Traffic Controllers Association, and representatives of the 
Contract Tower Association and the general aviation industry.

    Title: A Review of and Update on the Management of FAA's 
NextGen Program
    Date: September 12, 2012
    Purpose: To discuss the management and status of FAA's 
NextGen program.
    Summary: The United States air transportation system 
transports roughly 730 million passengers each year, and 
combined with general aviation activity, results in roughly 
70,000 flights over a 24-hour period. These numbers are 
expected to significantly increase over the next 10 to 15 
years. However, air traffic controllers and pilots use 
communication, navigation, and surveillance technologies that 
are outdated and inefficient, not so different from what was 
used during World War II.
    To transform the Nation's air traffic control system, the 
Federal government has invested billions of dollars in a 
modernization program, known as NextGen. NextGen includes 
programs to improve voice communications, enhance situational 
awareness, and increase efficiency. Since 2007, the FAA has 
spent nearly $3.7 billion to implement NextGen. The FAA has 
also invested in NextGen-enabling programs such as En Route 
Automation Modernization (ERAM). Although ERAM predates 
NextGen, it is widely accepted that you cannot have NextGen 
without ERAM. The FAA is currently spending on average $21 
million per month to implement ERAM.
    Taxpayer investments in NextGen are made with the promise 
of providing benefits, such as optimizing performance and 
improving operational productivity in the National Airspace 
System. Ultimately, this will increase capacity and efficiency 
and lower costs to airlines and consumers alike. Unfortunately 
the FAA has been slow to deliver on its promised benefits.
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act (P.L. 112-95) is the 
single largest reform of NextGen. This law establishes a new 
leadership position within the FAA, requires the FAA to create 
performance metrics, develop avionics equipage incentives, and 
keep Congress apprised of its progress. It also contains 
numerous deadlines and reporting requirements, which the FAA 
has missed.
    Given the significant taxpayer investment, FAA's inability 
to properly implement NextGen and NextGen-enabling programs and 
deliver promised benefits, and their outright failure to meet 
deadlines and other requirements set in law, the subcommittee 
held a hearing to hear from the FAA, government auditors and 
industry representatives on the status of NextGen and to 
explore FAA's management of this critical program.
    As NextGen is an ongoing program with enormous Federal 
investment, this hearing was the latest in a series of 
oversight hearings held by the subcommittee to receive 
testimony on the status of this vitally important 
infrastructure program.

    Title: Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario 
(California) International Airport
    Date: September 27, 2012
    Purpose: To discuss the economic impact of and future plans 
for the LA/Ontario International Airport.
    Summary: The LA/Ontario International Airport (Ontario 
Airport) dates back to 1923. In 1967, the City of Ontario 
signed an agreement with the City of Los Angeles Department of 
Airports to make Ontario Airport a part of Los Angeles' 
regional airport system. In 1985, ownership of Ontario Airport 
was transferred to the Los Angeles Department of Airports (now 
called Los Angeles World Airports or LAWA).
    A recent review of the Ontario International Airport 
operations has shown that passenger enplanements and landed 
cargo has declined in the past decade. Currently, there is an 
effort under way to transfer ownership of Ontario Airport from 
the City of Los Angeles to a new airport authority made up of 
representatives of the City of Ontario, the County of San 
Bernardino, and other stakeholders. The Subcommittee held a 
hearing in Ontario City Hall in California to hear from local 
stakeholders on the impact the transfer would have on Ontario 
International Airport and the local community.

    Title: How Best to Improve Our Nation's Airport Passenger 
Security System Through Commonsense Solutions
    Date: November 29, 2012
    Purpose: To look at the impact that the Transportation 
Security Administration (TSA) regulations and policies have on 
the aviation passenger experience and the free flow of aviation 
commerce.
    Summary: Since its inception in 2001, the Transportation 
Security Administration has been responsible for the day to day 
screening of commercial aviation passengers and their luggage. 
The TSA is also responsible for developing screening 
procedures, and the hiring, training, and oversight of 
screening personnel. This responsibility has a direct impact on 
the aviation passenger experience and the free flow of aviation 
commerce.
    Consumer advocacy groups have conducted surveys of 
passengers and discovered while a majority of fliers report an 
overall positive experience in flying, their most negative 
ratings go to security procedures. In addition, the surveys 
found that passengers would take one or more additional trips 
each year if the security procedures were improved. The 
aviation industry contributes roughly five percent of the 
United States' gross domestic product; therefore any negative 
impact on the aviation industry has a negative impact on the 
United States economy. Over the last decade, the TSA has taken 
steps to modify its screening procedures to adapt to 
intelligence, public feedback, and new technologies.
    The Subcommittee heard from government, industry, labor and 
consumer representatives on their assessment of TSA's screening 
policies and procedures and the impact they have on the 
passenger experience as well as aviation commerce. The 
Subcommittee also explored commonsense solutions proposed by 
the witnesses on how TSA policies can be altered to improve the 
passenger experience.

                              LEGISLATION

    Title: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-95 (February 14, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 658 (passed House on April 1, 2011)
    Summary: The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 
(FMRA) provides responsible funding for Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) safety programs, air traffic control 
modernization (NextGen) efforts, and operations through 2015, 
and holds spending at fiscal year 2011 levels through 2015 ($63 
billion over four years). It provides a total of $13.4 billion 
over the life of the bill for airport infrastructure projects, 
creating much needed jobs. FMRA provides long-term stability 
for the aviation industry, and creates the environment to allow 
for the creation of high-paying and sustainable jobs. This law 
also accelerates deployment of NextGen technologies, and 
reforms FAA's oversight of NextGen, ensuring responsibility and 
setting milestones and metrics. It addresses redundancies in 
positions and policies of the FAA and eliminates them, and also 
consolidates and realigns FAA air traffic control facilities in 
order to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete facilities. FMRA 
provides for unprecedented reform of the National Mediation 
Board. It limits efforts by the Administration to over-regulate 
the aviation industry, including the lithium battery industry. 
This law also reforms the Essential Air Service (EAS) program 
by eliminating the most egregious subsidies; prohibiting new 
communities from joining the program; and authorizing the 
appropriation of decreased funding levels. It establishes a 
balanced inspection regime for repair stations. FMRA also 
enacts airline passenger improvements and protections. It 
requires the Secretary to develop a plan for the safe 
integration of commercial unmanned aircraft systems into the 
national airspace system in an expedited fashion, and in 
coordination with other Federal agencies. FMRA increases the 
number of slots exempt from specified requirements and 
prohibitions concerning operation of an aircraft nonstop 
between Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and another 
airport more than 1,250 statute miles away (Perimeter Rule 
limit); revises FAA personnel management system requirements 
with respect to the mediation, alternative resolution, and 
binding arbitration of disputes between the Administrator and 
FAA employees about implementation of proposed changes to the 
system. It also extends the moratorium on FAA regulation of 
experimental space vehicles. Finally, this law improves the 
safe and efficient operation of our Nation's aviation system.

    Title: Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-7 (March 31, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 1079
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a 60-day extension of the FAA's authority 
to administer aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. 
The prior extension expired on March 31, 2011. H.R. 1079 
extended that authority through May 31, 2011. The bill extended 
the authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, 
excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of 
persons and property, and the expenditure authority of the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extended 
various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot 
program for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) 
small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall 
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport 
land use compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an 
airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, 
(5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the government 
share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project 
costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It also 
extended AIP projects and project grant authority.

    Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part 
II
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-16 (May 31, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 1893
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a 60-day extension of the FAA's authority 
to administer aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. 
The prior extension expired on May 31, 2011. H.R. 1893 extended 
that authority through June 30, 2011. The bill extends the 
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise 
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and 
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and 
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends various 
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program 
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small 
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands, 
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use 
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan 
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport 
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the 
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of 
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and 
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extends AIP 
projects and project grant authority.

    Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part 
III
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-21 (June 29, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 2279
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a 3-week extension of the FAA's authority 
to administer aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. 
The prior extension expired on June 30, 2011. H.R. 2279 
extended that authority through July 22, 2011. The bill extends 
the authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, 
excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of 
persons and property, and the expenditure authority of the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends 
various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot 
program for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) 
small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall 
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport 
land use compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an 
airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, 
(5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the government 
share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project 
costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It also 
extends AIP projects and project grant authority.

    Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part 
IV
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-27 (August 5, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 2553
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a 7-week extension of the FAA's authority 
to administer aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. 
The prior extension expired on July 22, 2011. H.R. 2553 
extended that authority through September 17, 2011. The bill 
extends the authorization of appropriations for aviation 
programs, excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation 
of persons and property, and the expenditure authority of the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends 
various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot 
program for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) 
small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall 
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport 
land use compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an 
airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, 
(5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the government 
share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project 
costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It also 
extends AIP projects and project grant authority. The bill also 
includes reforms to the Essential Air Service (EAS) Program. 
The first reform provision was adopted unanimously by the 
Senate and is included in its long-term FAA reauthorization 
bill. Under this reform, only airports that are 90 miles or 
more away from a large or medium hub airport would be eligible 
to participate in the EAS program. The second reform caps the 
subsidy for each passenger under the EAS Program at $1,000.00.

    Title: The Surface and Air Transportation Programs 
Extension Act of 2011
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-30 (September 16, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 2887
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a four and a half month extension of the 
FAA's authority to administer aviation programs and to receive 
tax proceeds. The prior extension expired on September 17, 
2011. H.R. 2887 extended that authority through January 31, 
2012. The bill extends the authorization of appropriations for 
both surface and air transportation programs. H.R. 2887 extends 
the aviation programs, excise taxes on aviation fuels and air 
transportation of persons and property, and the expenditure 
authority of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This 
legislation also extends, various airport development projects, 
including: (1) the pilot program for passenger facility fees at 
non-hub airports, (2) small airport grants for airports located 
in the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and 
local airport land use compatibility projects, (4) the 
authority of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to 
apply for an airport development grant and impose a passenger 
facility fee, (5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the 
government share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 
project costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It 
also extends AIP projects and project grant authority.

    Title: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme 
Prohibition Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2594 (passed House on October 24, 2011)
    Summary: This bipartisan bill prohibits American air 
carriers and other aircraft operators from participating in the 
European Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). It also 
directs the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) and other American officials 
to use their authority to negotiate and take other actions to 
ensure that United States operators are held harmless from any 
unilaterally established EU ETS.
    On January 1, 2012, all international flights operating to 
and from the EU will be included in the EU ETS, including 
flights between the United States and the EU. American airlines 
will be required to pay this European tax for all segments of 
the flight, for example from Los Angeles to its EU destination 
including portions of the flight over the United States, 
Canada, and International waters. The Air Transport Association 
estimated that this European Tax would cost American airlines 
and passengers more than $3.1 billion between 2012 and 2020, 
which could be used for more than 39,200 American airline jobs. 
The European Tax would be paid directly to EU Member States 
without obligation to use them to mitigate aviation emissions 
impacts. The Obama Administration testified before the House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that the 
European Tax is inconsistent with international aviation law. 
The EU ETS violates United States sovereignty by applying a tax 
to United States air carrier operations in the United States 
National Airspace System. In addition to the United States, 
other nations have voiced opposition the EU's scheme, including 
Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, India, 
Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, 
Paraguay, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, 
Singapore, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, and the 
member States of the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission 
(LACAC). Even EU Member States, including Italy, the 
Netherlands, France, Belgium, and Spain are calling for 
postponement of the EU ETS due to confusion over its 
implementation and opposition and potential retaliation from 
other nations.
    The proper forum to address international civil aviation 
emissions based on constructive negotiation and mutual 
agreement is the International Civil Aviation Organization 
(ICAO). Therefore, Chairmen Mica and Petri, along with Ranking 
Members Rahall (D-West Virginia) and Costello (D-Illinois), and 
other Members introduced H.R. 2594 to prohibit aviation 
operators in the United States from participating in the EU 
ETS. For further action on this legislation see S. 1956.

    Title: Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2012
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-91 (January 31, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 3800
    Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act, 
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th 
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement 
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April, 2011, the 
House passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act 
of 2011. In February, 2011, the Senate passed its own 
comprehensive FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two 
chambers time to negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization 
act, Congress passed a 17-day extension of the FAA's authority 
to administer aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. 
The prior extension expired on January 31, 2012. H.R. 3800 
extended that authority through February 17, 2012. The bill 
extends the authorization of appropriations for aviation 
programs, excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation 
of persons and property, and the expenditure authority of the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends 
various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot 
program for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) 
small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall 
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport 
land use compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an 
airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, 
(5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the government 
share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project 
costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It also 
extends AIP projects and project grant authority.

    Title: Pilot's Bill of Rights
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-153 (August 3, 2012)
    Bill Number: S. 1335 (passed the House on July 23, 2012)
    Summary: The Pilot's Bill of Rights is intended to restore 
fairness to airmen during an Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA) enforcement proceeding by providing airmen timely access 
to critical information and adding an additional way to appeal 
an FAA enforcement action. It also requires the FAA to improve 
the system of providing Notices to Airman (NOTAMs) and directs 
the FAA to review and improve the medical certification form.
    Pilots have complained that the burden of proof during an 
FAA enforcement proceeding is on an airman to prove his or her 
innocence rather than on the FAA to prove guilt. Further, 
pilots believe they are not adequately informed of their 
rights. The Pilot's Bill of Rights addresses these issues by 
requiring, to the extent practicable, FAA enforcement 
proceedings be conducted in accordance with the Federal Rules 
and Civil Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence; requiring 
the FAA to better inform and advise an airman who is the 
subject of an investigation of his or her rights; requiring air 
traffic data collected by a government contractor that is 
available to the FAA is also made available to the airman; 
eliminating language that expressly binds the National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to all validly adopted 
interpretations of laws and regulations of the FAA unless the 
NTSB finds an interpretation to be arbitrary, capricious, or 
otherwise not according to law--known as deference, and 
allowing an airman to appeal an NTSB decision to a United 
States District Court (currently an airman can only appeal to 
the United States Circuit Court of Appeals).
    Pilots can also be overwhelmed and confused by NOTAMs and 
medical certification standards and forms, which can ultimately 
lead to an FAA enforcement proceeding against an airman. The 
Pilot's Bill of Rights requires the FAA to improve NOTAMs by 
providing an airman with pertinent and timely information 
regarding the national airspace system. It also directs the FAA 
to work with industry to assess the medical certification 
process and standards, and report to Congress on the 
assessment, and take appropriate actions.
    Title: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme 
Prohibition Act of 2011
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-200 (November 27, 2012)
    Bill Number: S. 1956 (passed Senate, as amended, on 
September 22, 2012 and passed House, as amended by the Senate, 
on November 13, 2012)
    Summary: This bipartisan law was the Senate's companion 
bill to H.R. 2594. The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme 
Prohibition Act (EU Prohibition Act) gives the Secretary of the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) the authority to prohibit an 
operator of civil aircraft in the United States from 
participating in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme 
(EU ETS) if the Secretary determines the prohibition to be in 
the public interest. The Act also requires the Secretary to 
hold a public hearing at least 30 days before imposing any 
prohibition. The EU Prohibition Act directs the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), the DOT, and other appropriate 
officials to enter into international negotiations, including 
agreements to pursue a worldwide approach to address aircraft 
emissions, and to take appropriate measures under existing 
authorities to ensure United States air carriers are held 
harmless from any ETS unilaterally-imposed by the EU. The 
legislation also prohibits the use of FAA, DOT, Trust Fund or 
any other appropriated funds from being used to pay any tax or 
penalty imposed on an American operator pursuant to the EU ETS. 
Finally, the EU Prohibition Act allows the Secretary to 
reassess a determination that a prohibition is in the public 
interest at any time, and requires such a reassessment by the 
Secretary if the EU trading scheme is amended, an international 
alternative is agreed to, or the United States implements its 
own program to address aviation emissions.
    On January 1, 2012, all international flights operating to 
and from the EU were included in the EU ETS, including flights 
between the United States and the EU. American airlines will be 
required to pay this European tax for all segments of the 
flight, for example from Los Angeles to its EU destination 
including portions of the flight over the United States, 
Canada, and International waters. The Air Transport Association 
estimated that this European Tax would cost United States 
airlines and passengers more than $3.1 billion between 2012 and 
2020, which could be used for more than 39,200 American airline 
jobs. The European Tax would be paid directly to EU Member 
States without obligation to use them to mitigate aviation 
emissions impacts. The Obama Administration testified before 
the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that 
the European Tax is inconsistent with international aviation 
law. The EU ETS violates United States sovereignty by applying 
a tax to American air carrier operations in the United States 
National Airspace System. In addition to the United States, 
other nations have voiced opposition the EU's scheme, including 
Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, India, 
Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, 
Paraguay, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, 
Singapore, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, and the 
member States of the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission 
(LACAC). Even EU Member States, including Italy, the 
Netherlands, France, Belgium, and Spain have called for the 
postponement of the EU ETS due to confusion over its 
implementation and opposition and potential retaliation from 
other nations.
    On November 12, 2012, the European Commission announced 
that it would propose a temporary deferral from enforcing the 
obligations of aircraft operators of incoming and outgoing 
flights under the European Union's ETS. The Europeans made 
clear that this proposal is intended to give space for progress 
to be made at the ICAO Assembly that takes place in September 
2013. If clear and sufficient progress is made at the ICAO 
Assembly, the Commission will propose appropriate further 
legislative action.
    While this is a positive development, it is only a 
temporary deferment and not a complete withdrawal of the ETS. 
The proper forum to address international civil aviation 
emissions based on constructive negotiation and mutual 
agreement is the International Civil Aviation Organization 
(ICAO). Therefore, Chairmen Mica and Petri, along with Ranking 
Members Rahall and Costello, and other Members supported House 
passage of S. 1956 to send a clear message to the EU.

        Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation

    To date, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation, chaired by Congressman Frank A. LoBiondo (R-New 
Jersey) with Congressman Rick Larsen (D-Washington) serving as 
Ranking Member, held 22 hearings (91 witnesses and 
approximately 43 hours of testimony) covering a diverse 
portfolio of issues within the jurisdiction of the 
Subcommittee.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Improving Oil Spill Prevention and Response, 
Restoring Jobs, and Ensuring Our Energy Security: 
Recommendations from the National Commission on the BP 
DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
    Date: February 11, 2011
    Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast 
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment to receive testimony regarding 
improvements that can be made to oil spill prevention and 
response plans.
    Summary: In the wake of the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill, 
the National Commission on the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill 
and Offshore Drilling was created to find the root cause of the 
accident and issue recommendations on how to prevent such 
disasters and improve response in the future. The Commission's 
report, issued on January 11, 2011, contains 14 specific 
recommendations that fall under the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    The Subcommittees heard testimony from Dr. Donald F. Boesch 
and Mr. Terry D. Garcia, members of the National Commission on 
the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, as 
well as Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen (Ret.), who was the 
National Incident Commander for the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON oil 
spill response. The witnesses' testimonies revolved around the 
recommendations from the report, which ranged from creating an 
independent agency within the Department of Interior to enforce 
regulations on offshore drilling, to raising the liability cap 
on oil production facilities, to increasing communication 
between Federal agencies and local governments during a Spill 
of National Significance.

    Title: A Review of the Administration's FY 12 Budget 
Requests for the United States Coast Guard, Federal Maritime 
Commission, and Federal Maritime Administration: Finding Ways 
to Do More with Less
    Date: March 1, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee sought input from relevant agencies 
regarding the Administration's budget requests for fiscal year 
2012 for the Coast Guard, Federal Maritime Commission, and 
Maritime Administration.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Admiral 
Robert J. Papp, Jr., Commandant of the United States Coast 
Guard, Master Chief Michael P. Leavitt, Master Chief Petty 
Officer of the United States Coast Guard, the Honorable Richard 
A. Lidinsky, Jr., Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission, 
and the Honorable David T. Matsuda, Administrator of the 
Maritime Administration.
    The President released his annual budget requests for 
fiscal year 2012 in early March. The witnesses testified to the 
effects the budget requests would have on their agencies if 
enacted. Notable cuts to the Coast Guard's budget request 
include a 7.4 percent decrease in funding for the Acquisition, 
Construction and Improvements account from this fiscal year's 
Continuing Resolution, as well as a 20 percent decrease in the 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation account. In 
addition, the Administration requested one High Endurance 
Cutter be decommissioned as well as the USCGC POLAR SEA, one of 
the Coast Guard's two Class I icebreakers. The Subcommittee and 
the witnesses examined the direct and long-term effects on the 
Coast Guard's overall mission effectiveness as a result of 
these cuts.

    Title: Assuring the Freedom of Americans on the High Seas: 
The United States' Response to Piracy
    Date: March 15, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee sought recommendations on how to 
improve the Federal government's efforts to safeguard American 
lives and property on the high seas against acts of piracy, 
with specific attention being given towards the high volume of 
piratical attacks occurring off the Horn of Africa.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard 
Admiral Kevin Cook, Director of Prevention Policy for Marine 
Safety, Security, and Stewardship, William Wechsler, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global 
Threats, Kurt Amend, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
State for Political and Military Affairs, and Stephen L. 
Caldwell, Director of GAO's Maritime and Coast Guard Issues 
Team.
    The sailing vessel QUEST with four American citizens 
onboard was transiting the Gulf of Aden in early February 2011 
when it was attacked with the crew taken hostage. During the 
negotiations, all four American hostages were killed by the 
pirates. This incident, along with an estimated 87 other pirate 
attacks against vessels on the high seas this calendar year, 
led the Subcommittee to examine all aspects of pirate 
operations, from the land-based ``pirate academy'' that now 
exists on the coast of Somalia to pirate operations using 
larger ``mother ships'' that vastly expand the area in which 
they can attack vessels of opportunity. The State Department 
also testified in regard to the ransom process and ways in 
which the United States government can track ransom payments to 
find those profiting from acts of piracy on the high seas.

    Title: Improving and Streamlining the Coast Guard's 
Acquisition Program
    Date: April 13, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee sought an update on the status of the 
Coast Guard's acquisition programs, as well as a review of the 
policies and procedures the Service uses to determine mission 
needs requirements and select the assets based on those 
requirements.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard 
Vice Admiral John Currier, Deputy Commandant for Mission 
Support, and from Mr. John P. Hutton, Director of Acquisition 
and Sourcing Management for the GAO. The hearing focused on the 
Coast Guard's acquisition program since transitioning from the 
Deepwater program, started in 2002, which was essentially 
scrapped and replaced in 2007 with an in-house acquisitions 
directorate. The current acquisition program includes 
significant process improvements over the Lead System 
Integrator processes used under Deepwater. However, nearly all 
of the Coast Guard's major acquisitions still face significant 
cost overruns and schedule delays. Specifically, the 
Subcommittee questioned the Coast Guard on its unreasonable 
expectation of future funding. Additionally, the Subcommittee 
expressed its concern over the mismanagement of development and 
delivery of its National Security Cutters, which was a part of 
the original Deepwater program. The Subcommittee looked into 
the acquisition process that led to these delays and cost 
overruns.
    The Subcommittee also examined a report issued by the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the Coast Guard's 
acquisition process. In the report, the GAO made several 
recommendations to reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies within 
the Coast Guard's acquisition directorate to reduce cost 
overruns and delays. The Subcommittee questioned the Coast 
Guard and the GAO on ways to implement these recommendations.

    Title: Creating U.S. Maritime Industry Jobs by Reducing 
Regulatory Burdens
    Date: May 24, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee review of the Coast Guard maritime 
rulemaking process. The hearing focused on specific rules and 
regulations that are unnecessarily burdensome to the maritime 
industry.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard 
Rear Admiral Kevin Cook, Director of Prevention Policy, and 
from Mr. Calvin Lederer, Deputy Judge Advocate General of the 
Coast Guard. Members of the Subcommittee were particularly 
interested in a proposed rule by the Coast Guard that would 
expand the Notice and Arrival and Departure and Automatic 
Identification System requirements to many smaller commercial 
vessels operating in navigable waters of the United States. 
Members were concerned the regulation would seriously hinder 
the ability of smaller commercial vessels to conduct normal 
operations in the coastwise trade. Additionally, Members were 
concerned oil rigs operating offshore in need of short notice 
servicing would not be able to do so under the proposed 
regulation.
    The Subcommittee also looked at ways in which the Coast 
Guard can reduce its backlog of rulemaking projects as required 
by enacted laws. Despite the expansion of the rulemaking staff 
in the Coast Guard in 2009, there remains a significant backlog 
of proposed rules that have been required by previous 
legislation. This backlog creates uncertainty in the maritime 
industry and has a negative effect on domestic trade. The 
Subcommittee questioned the witnesses on ways to reduce this 
uncertainty that is dampening the creation of American maritime 
jobs.

    Title: Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S. Exports by 
Enhancing the Marine Transportation System
    Date: June 14, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee sought input from the United States 
maritime industry stakeholders and the head of the Maritime 
Administration on ways to increase American exports and 
commerce by increasing coastwise and international trade 
through the marine transportation system of the United States.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Honorable David Matsuda, Administrator of the Maritime 
Administration, Mr. Joseph J. Cox, President and CEO of the 
Chamber of Shipping of America, Mr. Michael Roberts, Chief 
Counsel of the Crowley Maritime Corporation testifying on 
behalf of the American Maritime Partnership, Mr. Augustin 
Tellez, Executive Vice President of the Seafarers International 
Union, and Mr. John Mohr, Executive Director of the Port of 
Everett, Washington.
    The witnesses suggested various ways to enhance and expand 
the domestic marine transportation system and create American 
maritime jobs without burdening the American taxpayer. The 
Jones Act was specifically targeted by both Members and 
witnesses alike as being a key component in preserving American 
maritime jobs and the shipbuilding industry in the United 
States. Other issues examined included Cargo Preference Laws 
that require certain percentage of government impelled cargo to 
be carried on vessels owned, flagged, crewed, and built in the 
United States.

    Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry 
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and 
Costly Government Burdens
    Date: June 23, 2011
    Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast 
Guard and Maritime Transportation and the Subcommittee on 
Aviation. Received testimony from eight different witnesses on 
the potential impact LightSquared's new network could have on 
Global Positioning System (GPS) technology used by maritime and 
aviation industries.
    Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from the 
Honorable Roy Kienitz, Undersecretary for Policy at Department 
of Transportation, the Honorable Teri Takai, Acting Assistant 
Secretary for Networks and Information Integration at 
Department of Defense, Rear Admiral Robert E. Day, Jr., 
Assistant Commandant for Command, Control, Communications, 
Computers and Information, Ms. Margaret Jenny, President of 
RTCA, Mr. Phil Straub, Vice President of Aviation Engineering 
at Garmin International, Mr. Craig Fuller, President of the 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Mr. Thomas L. 
Hendricks, Senior Vice President of Safety, Security, and 
Operations at the Air Transport Association, and Mr. Jeffrey J. 
Carlisle, Executive Vice President of Regulatory Affairs and 
Public Policy at LightSquared.
    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering 
an application by LightSquared to build nationwide broadband 
internet infrastructure. LightSquared has applied to have high-
power internet broadcast stations across the country on the 
spectrum neighboring the low-powered GPS signal. A broad 
coalition of industry stakeholders who use GPS have expressed 
concern the high-powered broadband signal will overpower and 
disable critical GPS navigation and timing functions. Initial 
testing by the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of 
Transportation (DOT) have validated some of these interference 
concerns. Witnesses at the hearing verified that there is 
insufficient data to demonstrate that LightSquared's planned 
nationwide broadband signal would not interfere with GPS 
signals, and the details would have to be thoroughly and 
independently tested before being safely implemented.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of 
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Commonsense Approach to 
Ballast Water Regulation
    Date: July 13, 2011
    Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast 
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment to hear testimony from important 
industry groups and government agencies on current rules 
governing the discharge of ballast water. The Subcommittees 
sought input from witnesses on how to best move forward with 
efforts to reform current ballast water discharge rules.
    Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from two 
separate panels. The first panel of witnesses included Vice 
Admiral Brian Salerno, United States Coast Guard Deputy 
Commandant for Operations, Mr. James Hanlon, Director of the 
Office of Wastewater Management at the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, Chair of the EPA's 
Science Advisory Board, and Dr. James Carlton, Chair of the 
Committee on Numeric Limits for Living Organisms in Ballast 
Water at the National Research Council. The second panel 
consisted of Mr. Thomas Allegretti, President of the American 
Waterways Operators, and Mr. Michael Jewell, President of the 
Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association.
    In order to maintain stability during transit, most ocean 
going vessels fill internal tanks with ballast water during the 
loading of cargo and then release it during unloading. Ballast 
water has long been recognized as one of several pathways by 
which invasive species are transported globally and introduced 
into coastal waters where they did not live before. Aquatic 
nuisance species have been introduced into waters of the United 
States via ballast water discharges. Discharges of ballast 
water are currently governed differently by the Coast Guard and 
the EPA, as well as by numerous state laws and regulations. As 
a result, vessels engaged in international and interstate 
commerce are required to meet several different standards for 
the treatment of ballast water, some of which are not 
technologically achievable or verifiable. Witnesses from 
private industry emphasized the importance of developing clear 
and consistent ballast water standards in order for the United 
States to continue being a leader in the international maritime 
trade. The EPA Science Advisory Board testified that the 
ballast water discharge standard established by the 
International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the only standard 
that is currently technologically achievable and verifiable. 
Finally, the EPA and the Coast Guard pledged to continue 
working with Congress to develop a more cost effective and 
sensible approach to regulating ballast water discharge.

    Title: How to Improve Operations and Implement Efficiencies 
for the United States Coast Guard
    Date: July 26, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee met to hear testimony on ways to 
improve Coast Guard operations and implement efficiencies in 
Coast Guard programs. Hearing was held in preparation for 
drafting legislation reauthorizing funding for Coast Guard 
operations and administration.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Congressman 
Sam Farr (D-California), Vice Admiral John Currier, United 
States Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Mission Support, Vice 
Admiral Brian Salerno, United States Coast Guard Deputy 
Commandant for Operations, and Dr. Holly Bamford, Deputy 
Assistant Administrator at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration.
    The authorization of appropriations for the Coast Guard was 
set to expire on September 30, 2011. In preparation for 
reauthorization legislation, the Subcommittee held this hearing 
to review ways to improve Coast Guard operations and 
administration. The Subcommittee examined capability gaps and 
delays in Coast Guard acquisitions projects, challenges in 
administration of Coast Guard programs, and parity issues 
between benefits and authorities available to members of the 
Coast Guard and the other armed services. The panel also 
focused on the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and 
Reduction Act (Public Law 109-449), which requires the Coast 
Guard to conduct outreach programs to boaters to increase 
awareness of problems associated with marine debris.

    Title: Review and Status of the Multi-Billion Dollar 
Department of Homeland Security Relocation Project in 
Washington, DC, and Its Impacts on the U.S. Coast Guard
    Date: September 23, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee convened to review the status of the 
Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) headquarters 
consolidation project, the proposal to move the Coast Guard's 
headquarters to the new location, and the impacts the move 
would have on the Service's budget and operations.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Honorable Donald Bathurst, Chief Administrative Officer at the 
Department of Homeland Security, Vice Admiral John Currier, 
United States Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Mission 
Support, and the Honorable Robert A. Peck, Public Buildings 
Service Commissioner at the General Services Administration.
    Current facilities housing the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) and its component agencies are spread among more 
than 61 buildings in 40 locations in the Washington, District 
of Columbia area. DHS prepared a National Capital Region 
Housing Master Plan to identify the housing needs of the 
Department, and found consolidating to a single campus would be 
beneficial to the Department. The General Services 
Administration (GSA) has determined the West Campus of the St. 
Elizabeth's Hospital to be the only federally controlled site 
available in the District of Columbia capable of meeting the 
needs of DHS. The consolidation is planned to take place over 
the course of the next ten years. The first phase of the 
project would move the Coast Guard headquarters to the site, 
but no funds have been provided thus far to undertake any 
additional departmental consolidation.
    Chairman LoBiondo and Members of the Subcommittee expressed 
concerns about several aspects of the proposed Coast Guard 
move, including adequacy of access to the facility, isolation 
of the Coast Guard if no other entities move to the campus, and 
any additional costs that would be borne by the Coast Guard to 
move to the new facility and to support its operations. Most 
importantly, the Subcommittee was concerned with the impact 
potential costs from the move will have on the ability of the 
Service to conduct their critical missions.

    Title: What Will It Cost? Protecting the Taxpayer from an 
Unachievable Coast Guard Acquisition Program
    Date: October 4, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee met to examine Coast Guard 
Acquisitions programs. This hearing was a follow up to the 
April 13, 2011, Subcommittee hearing on the same. This hearing 
reviewed issues raised in the July 2011 Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled ``Action Needed as 
Approved Deepwater Program Remains Unachievable''.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate 
panels. Mr. John Hutton of the Government Accountability Office 
testified on the first panel, and Admiral Robert J. Papp, 
Commandant of the United States Coast Guard testified on the 
second.
    The Coast Guard began a process of replacing its aging 
vessels and aircraft in the late 1990's. The program's focus 
was those assets that carry out missions farther than 50 miles 
from shore and the modernization of the information technology 
systems that the Service relies upon to coordinate its 
operations. The program was known as the Integrated Deepwater 
Program (Deepwater). To manage the acquisition program, the 
Coast Guard engaged a Lockheed Martin/Northrop Grumman team, 
called the Integrated Coast Guard System (ICGS). Deepwater 
encountered significant quality and cost issues. It was the 
subject to several hearings and an investigation by the 
Committee, and is the subject of continuing review by the GAO. 
The Coast Guard has terminated the Deepwater contract with ICGS 
and is now performing the acquisition functions in-house. The 
assets scheduled for recapitalization remain the same.
    Members of the Subcommittee had several questions regarding 
GAO's recommendations for keeping the Coast Guard acquisitions 
program on schedule. They also sought answers from the 
Commandant on steps taken by the Service to minimize cost 
overruns and prevent further delays.

    Title: Assuring the Safety of Domestic Energy Production: 
Lessons Learned from the DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill
    Date: November 2, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee convened to examine the lessons 
learned in the wake of the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill, 
review the latest investigations into the causes of the spill 
and the Coast Guard response to it, hear the recommendations of 
those involved in these investigations, and find out what 
actions the Coast Guard has taken or will take in response to 
those recommendations.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Rear Admiral 
Paul Zukunft, United States Coast Guard Assistant Commandant 
for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship, United States 
Coast Guard Vice Admiral (retired) Roger Rufe, Chairman of the 
Incident Specific Preparedness Review for the DEEPWATER HORIZON 
Oil Spill, and Mr. Stephen Caldwell, Director of Government 
Accountability Office's (GAO) Homeland Security and Justice 
Team. Mr. Caldwell was accompanied by Mr. Frank Rusco, Director 
of GAO's Natural Resources and the Environment Team.
    Subcommittee heard the recommendations of the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) and Coast Guard individuals who 
were involved in the investigations, and examined what actions 
the Service will need to take in response to those 
recommendations. Members questioned witnesses about findings 
from the three most recent reports on the spill, namely the 
Joint Investigative Team (JIT) Report, the Incident Specific 
Preparedness Review (ISPR), and the Federal On Scene 
Coordinator Report (FOSC).

    Title: Protecting U.S. Sovereignty: Coast Guard Operations 
in the Arctic
    Date: December 1, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee met to review the status of the Coast 
Guard's icebreaker fleet and explore options for meeting the 
Coast Guard's statutory obligations in the Arctic and assisting 
those in the maritime transportation and energy sectors take 
advantage of the significant economic opportunities in the 
region.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate 
panels. Admiral Robert J. Papp, Commandant of the United States 
Coast Guard, and the Honorable Mead Treadwell, Lieutenant 
Governor of Alaska, testified on the first panel. The second 
panel consisted of Dr. Kelly Falkner, Deputy Director of the 
National Science Foundation's Office of Polar Programs, Mr. 
Stephen Caldwell, Director of Government Accountability 
Office's (GAO) Homeland Security and Justice Issues Team, Mr. 
David Whitcomb, Vice President for Production Support at Vigor 
Industrial and testifying on behalf of the Shipbuilders Council 
of America, and Rear Admiral Jeffrey Garrett (United States 
Coast Guard retired).
    The Coast Guard maintains two Polar Class heavy 
icebreakers, however neither is currently operational. The 
POLAR SEA is being decommissioned and the POLAR STAR is 
undergoing significant repairs to extend its service life. 
Questions remain about how long the POLAR STAR will last after 
its repairs are complete, as well as whether the Service and 
the Administration are prepared to make critical decisions 
regarding our Nation's goals and objectives in the Arctic and 
provide Congress with a fiscally responsible plan to meet those 
goals and objectives. Members of the Subcommittee and witnesses 
all emphasized the importance of maintaining a United States 
icebreaker fleet for national security, scientific, and 
economic purposes.

    Title: Offshore Drilling in Cuba and the Bahamas: The U.S. 
Coast Guard's Oil Spill Readiness and Response Planning
    Date: January 30, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing in Sunny 
Isles Beach, Florida, to examine Cuban and Bahamian plans to 
drill in proximity to the United States Exclusive Economic Zone 
(EEZ) and review the Coast Guard's level of preparedness to 
handle oil spills occurring at these sites.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Honorable Jennifer Carroll, the Lieutenant Governor of Florida, 
Rear Admiral William Baumgartner, Commander of United States 
Coast Guard District Seven, Rear Admiral Cari Thomas, the 
United States Coast Guard's Director of Response Policy, Ms. 
Debbie Peyton, Chief of the Emergency Response Division at the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Mr. Lars 
Herbst, Gulf of Mexico Regional Director at the Department of 
Interior's Bureau of Safety and Environment Enforcement, and 
Dr. John Proni, Executive Director at Florida International 
University's Applied Research Center.
    In January of 2012, the Spanish-based company Repsol YPF 
began drilling an exploratory well in the North Cuba Basin, 
just 70 miles south of Key West, Florida. In addition to the 
contract with Repsol, the Cuban government has entered into 
agreements with five other companies for potential development 
of offshore blocks in the North Cuba Basin. Given the strained 
nature of diplomatic relations between the United States and 
Cuba, the Subcommittee was eager to hear not only about the 
Coast Guard and other Federal agencies' plans to prevent and 
respond to spills in the North Cuba Basin which reach United 
States waters, but also what enforcement mechanisms are at the 
United States' disposal to ensure the responsible party is held 
accountable for an extra-territorial spill. Witnesses from the 
Coast Guard and Department of Interior discussed their 
knowledge of the latest developments in Cuban and Bahamian 
drilling plans and updated the Subcommittee on the status of 
spill-response plans being developed between Federal, state, 
and local authorities. The topic of liability was also 
examined, specifically as it relates to oil spill penalties 
established under the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act of 
1990.

    Title: A Review of Cruise Ship Safety and Lessons Learned 
from the COSTA CONCORDIA Accident
    Date: February 29, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to examine the COSTA 
CONCORDIA accident and the safety of cruise vessels in general 
operating out of American ports.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from three 
separate panels. Testifying on the first panel was Vice Admiral 
Brian M. Salerno, the United States Coast Guard's Deputy 
Commandant for Operations. On the second panel were Mr. Sameer 
and Mrs. Divya Sharma, American survivors from the COSTA 
CONCORDIA accident. The third panel consisted of witnesses from 
the cruise line industry, including Ms. Christine Duffy, 
President and CEO of the Cruise Lines International Association 
(CLIA), accompanied by Mr. Michael Crye, Executive Vice 
President at CLIA, Mr. George Wright, Senior Vice President of 
Marine Operations at Princess Cruises, accompanied by Vicky 
Rey, Vice President of Guest Services and Support at Carnival 
Cruise Lines, Captain Evans Hoyt, Master of Norwegian Cruise 
Lines' NORWEIGAN SPIRIT and PRIDE OF AMERICA, and Mr. Brian 
Schoeneman, Legislative Director for the Seafarers 
International Union (SIU).
    On January 13, 2012, at approximately 9:40 p.m., the 
Italian-owned and operated cruise ship COSTA CONCORDIA struck a 
granite reef just off the coast of the Italian island of 
Giglio. The collision caused a 164-foot-long gash in the port 
side of the COSTA CONCORDIA. The vessel suffered flooding, 
causing it to list to its port side. Eventually, it came to 
rest on its starboard side in 45 feet of water along the shore 
of Giglio near the island's port. Extensive press reports at 
the time of the hearing indicated that the Captain of the COSTA 
CONCORDIA, Francesco Schettino, overrode a pre-programmed, 
owner-approved navigation track line in order to pass close to 
the island of Giglio. Thirty-two people died in this incident.
    The Subcommittee heard details about the accident related 
to the evacuation of the vessel, which was reported as chaotic 
and disorganized. Mr. and Mrs. Sharma shared their harrowing 
story about the lack of guidance provided by COSTA CONCORDIA 
crew members and the overall state of panic that pervaded the 
ship after it struck the reef. The Coast Guard discussed 
various aspects of current cruise line regulations and assured 
the Subcommittee that a high priority was being placed on 
ensuring ``vessels that visit the United States are in 
substantial compliance with applicable international and 
domestic standards.'' Lastly, representatives from the cruise 
line industry expressed confidence in American cruise line 
operators and encouraged Americans not to be dissuaded from 
taking cruises due to the COSTA CONCORDIA accident.

    Title: Protecting Maritime Jobs and Enhancing Marine Safety 
in the Post-Budget Control Act Fiscal Environment: A Review of 
the Administration's Fiscal Year 2013 Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Budget Request
    Date: March 7, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the 
fiscal year 2013 budget requests for the United States Coast 
Guard, Federal Maritime Commission, and Maritime 
Administration.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Admiral 
Robert J. Papp, Jr., Commandant of the United States Coast 
Guard, Master Chief Petty Officer of the United States Coast 
Guard Michael P. Leavitt, the Honorable Richard A. Lidinsky, 
Jr., Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), and the 
Honorable David T. Matsuda, Administrator at the Department of 
Transportation's Maritime Administration (MARAD).
    The President requested $9.96 billion in fiscal year 2013 
for Coast Guard activities, $602.4 million (or -5.7 percent) 
less than the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. This amount does 
not include $254.5 million for Overseas Contingency Operations 
(OCO), which the administration proposes to appropriate to the 
Department of Defense (DoD) in fiscal year 2013 and then make 
available to the Coast Guard. For the activities of the FMC, 
the President requested $26 million in fiscal year 2013, an 
increase of $1.9 million (or 7.9 percent) above the fiscal year 
2012 enacted level. Lastly, the President requested $344 
million in fiscal year 2013 for the activities of MARAD, a 
reduction of $5.4 million (or -1.6 percent) below the fiscal 
year 2012 enacted level.
    The Subcommittee had concerns with several provisions 
within the President's budget, especially the deep cuts 
proposed to the Coast Guard's acquisitions account. Members of 
the Subcommittee questioned Admiral Papp on a number of the 
decisions made in the budget, including delays, and in some 
cases altogether elimination, of funding for vital assets; 
cutting over 1,000 servicemember positions, including those 
critical to frontline operations; decommissioning three 110-
foot patrol boats and three recently upgraded HH-65 
helicopters; and spending $24.5 million over the budget 
baseline for the Coast Guard's move to the new Department of 
Homeland Security headquarters at St. Elizabeths.

    Title: Recent Regulation of the Maritime Industry: Ensuring 
U.S. Job Growth While Improving Environmental and Worker Safety
    Date: April 26, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of 
regulations by the United States Coast Guard and the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and how such regulations 
impact the maritime industry.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate 
panels. On the first panel was Vice Admiral Brian M. Salerno, 
United States Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Operations. 
Vice Admiral Salerno was accompanied by Mr. Jeffrey Lantz, 
United States Coast Guard Director of Commercial Regulations 
and Standards. Also on the first panel was Mr. James Hanlon, 
the Director of the Office of Wastewater Management at the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The second panel 
consisted of the Honorable Chris Koch, President and CEO of the 
World Shipping Council, Mr. James Gutowski of the Fisheries 
Survival Fund, Mr. Jimmy Lafont of Calais and Sons in Cut Off, 
Louisiana, Mr. Don Marcus, Secretary-Treasurer of the 
International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, and 
Mr. Paul Cozza, President and CEO of CSL International.
    The Federal Government creates or modifies rules and 
regulations through a rulemaking process guided by the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), codified in title 5 of the 
United States Code. The process involves notice in the Federal 
Register and the opportunity for public comment in a docket 
maintained by the regulating agency. This is a lengthy process 
and often requires several layers of bureaucratic review prior 
to the rule becoming final.
    Several rules under development by the Coast Guard and EPA 
in 2012 would have substantial implications for the maritime 
industry. The Subcommittee sought updates from both agencies on 
the status of new and existing regulations, including the Coast 
Guard's final rule regulating the discharge of ballast water 
from ships waters of the United States, and the EPA's related 
Vessel General Permit for Discharges Incidental to Normal 
Operation of Vessels, which is expected to be finalized in 
December of 2012. A number of other regulations were also 
addressed, including rules related to the North American 
Emission Control Areas, Transportation Worker Identification 
Credentials (TWIC), and fishing vessel safety.

    Title: Creating American Jobs and Assuring the Safety and 
Security of America's Waterways: A Review of the Coast Guard's 
5-year Capital Improvement Plan
    Date: May 16, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of the 
Coast Guard's current acquisition program and examine the 
program's sustainability. This was the third hearing the 
Subcommittee has held this Congress to review the Service's 
acquisition program. The last hearing was held on October 4, 
2011.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Vice Admiral 
John Currier, United States Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for 
Mission Support.
    The Coast Guard began a process of replacing its aging 
vessels and aircraft in the late 1990's. The program's focus 
was those assets that carry out missions farther than 50 miles 
from shore and the modernization of the information technology 
systems that the Service relies upon to coordinate its 
operations. The program was known as the Integrated Deepwater 
Program (Deepwater). Deepwater encountered significant quality 
and cost issues. The Coast Guard has terminated the Deepwater 
contract with Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS) and is now 
performing the acquisition functions in-house. The assets 
scheduled for recapitalization remain the same.
    In July of 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
released a study on the Coast Guard's acquisition program 
entitled ``Action Needed As Approved Deepwater Program Remains 
Unachievable''. The title refers to the GAO's finding that it 
will be impossible for the Coast Guard to complete its major 
acquisitions without breaching its 2007 baseline of 20 to 25 
years for construction and delivery of recapitalized assets at 
a total cost of $24.2 billion. The GAO estimated it could take 
an additional 10 years to complete and could cost at least an 
additional $5 billion. The Subcommittee is very concerned with 
the findings by GAO and was further troubled by the Coast 
Guard's 2013 budget request, which proposed to slash the 
acquisitions account by $271.6 million. Members of the 
Subcommittee questioned Admiral Currier on several of the 
proposals in the fiscal year 2013 budget related to the 
acquisitions account and sought an update on the status of 
assets listed in the program of record.

    Title: Review of Vessels Used to Carry Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve Drawdowns
    Date: June 27, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the process used to 
determine the availability of American flagged vessels during 
the summer 2011 drawdown of crude oil from the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and what steps are being taken to 
improve that process.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Honorable David Matsuda, Administrator at the United States 
Maritime Administration (MARAD), and Thomas Allegretti, 
President and CEO of American Waterways Operators, testifying 
on behalf of the American Maritime Partnership.
    On June 23, 2011, President Obama announced that the United 
States and its partners in the International Energy Agency 
would release a total of 60 million barrels of oil onto the 
world market over a 30-day period to offset the disruption in 
the oil supply caused by unrest in the Libya. As part of the 
effort, the United States pledged to release 30 million barrels 
of oil from the SPR. As part of the announcement on the SPR 
drawdown, Department of Energy (DOE) indicated that there would 
be a blanket waiver of the Jones Act for vessels seeking to 
move SPR oil between SPR terminal sites and refineries. A day 
later, on June 24, 2011, DOE dropped the language providing for 
a blanket waiver of the Jones Act. DOE then issued a ``Notice 
of Sale of SPR Oil'' which amended and added requirements for 
bidders on top of those mandated under 10 Code of Federal 
Regulations, Part 625. According to press reports and 
information provided to the Subcommittee, in the days following 
the issuance of the Notice of Sale officials at the DOE and 
MARAD made statements and took actions which may have been 
inconsistent with the laws and regulations governing Jones Act 
waivers.
    By September 2, 2011, DOE had completed the drawdown of 
30.6 million barrels of oil from the SPR. Ultimately, 44 
waivers of the Jones Act were issued to foreign owned, flagged, 
built, and/or crewed vessels to carry nearly 25.2 million 
barrels of SPR oil by water (the remaining 5.4 million barrels 
went by pipeline). Each waiver involved a foreign vessel 
carrying 500,000 barrels or more. Only one delivery of SPR oil 
was conducted by a qualified Jones Act vessel. That American 
vessel carried 150,000 barrels or less than 1 percent (0.59 
percent) of the total SPR oil moved by vessel.
    Members of the Subcommittee were concerned with the process 
undertaken by the Obama Administration to verify that there 
were not American flagged vessels capable of carrying oil from 
the drawdown. The Subcommittee sought an explanation from MARAD 
regarding the Agency's decision to issue the 44 Jones Act 
waivers and also sought verification from industry that there 
was sufficient capacity available on American-flagged vessels 
at the time of the drawdown. Furthermore, the Subcommittee 
requested input from both parties on how apparent 
miscommunication between American carriers and the 
Administration could be avoided during future drawdowns.

    Title: A Review of Federal Maritime Domain Awareness 
Programs
    Date: July 10, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the implementation 
of programs by the Coast Guard to collect, analyze, and 
disseminate information used to assess and respond to safety 
and security threats in the maritime domain.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Vice Admiral 
Peter Neffenger, United States Coast Guard Deputy Commandant 
for Operations.
    Maritime domain awareness (MDA) is the Federal government's 
effort to achieve an understanding of anything in the global 
maritime environment that can affect the security, safety, 
economy, or environment of the United States. The process of 
achieving MDA includes: (1) collection of information, (2) 
fusion of information from different sources, (3) analysis 
through the evaluation and interpretation of information, and 
(4) dissemination of information to decision makers, with the 
goal of identifying risks and threats in a timely manner.
    The Coast Guard is in the process of acquiring new 
technology and implementing new or revised programs to improve 
the collection of information to achieve MDA. Members of the 
Subcommittee sought an update on the Coast Guard's 
implementation of various MDA programs and expressed their 
concerns with the apparent lack of infrastructure needed to 
sufficiently tie the Service's disparate MDA systems into one 
``common operating picture.'' Chairman LoBiondo emphasized the 
importance of MDA systems to national security and articulated 
his desire to move forward with efforts to ensure the American 
taxpayer receives a good return on the significant investment 
made in the Coast Guard's MDA programs.

    Title: Tenth Anniversary of the Maritime Transportation 
Security Act: Are We Safer?
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to review the 
Coast Guard's implementation of the Maritime Transportation 
Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) since its passage ten years ago and 
identify what improvements still need to be made to enhance the 
security of our Nation's maritime transportation system.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from four 
witnesses: United States Coast Guard Rear Admiral Joseph 
Servidio, Assistant Commandant for Preparedness, Mr. Stephen 
Caldwell, Director of the Government Accountability Office's 
(GAO) Homeland Security and Justice Issues team, Ms. Bethann 
Rooney, Manager of Port Security for the Port Authority of New 
York and New Jersey testifying on behalf of the American 
Association of Port Authorities, and Mr. Chris Koch, President 
and CEO of the World Shipping Council.
    Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the 
Subcommittee developed legislation to improve the security of 
the Nation's ports and waterways. On November 25, 2002, S. 
1214, the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 
107-295) was signed into law. MTSA established a framework to 
improve the security of the Nation's ports, waterways, and 
vessels from potential terrorist attacks. Responsibility for 
carrying out the provisions of MTSA was vested in the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its component 
agencies, namely the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Patrol 
(CBP), and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). 
MTSA regulates American flagged vessels and domestic 
facilities. Several subsequent acts of Congress have made 
amendments to MTSA, most notably the Security and 
Accountability For Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-
347), and the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-
281).
    In addition to a general update on the implementation of 
MTSA provisions, Members of the Subcommittee questioned the 
witnesses on major provisions of MTSA that GAO reported to be 
incomplete or unsatisfactory. The areas of concern included the 
Transportation Worker Identity Credential (TWIC) Program, 
onboard electronic verification of foreign seafarers, and the 
Coast Guard's International Port Security Program (ISPS). 
Although Members expressed their frustration with the 
shortcomings in MTSA's implementation, they also praised the 
Coast Guard for its overall approach to the implementation 
process.

    Title: The Challenges That Maintaining Legacy Assets Poses 
to United States Coast Guard Mission Performance
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the 
challenges the Coast Guard faces maintaining its legacy assets 
and how those challenges impact the Service's mission 
performance.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from United 
States Coast Guard Rear Admiral Ronald J. Rabago, Assistant 
Commandant for Engineering and Logistics, and Mr. Stephen 
Caldwell, Director of Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
Homeland Security and Justice Issues team.
    The Coast Guard began a process of replacing its aging 
vessels and aircraft in the late 1990's. The program's focus 
was those assets that carry out missions farther than 50 miles 
from shore, as well as the modernization of the information 
technology systems that the Service relies upon to coordinate 
its operations. The program was known as the Integrated 
Deepwater System (Deepwater). Deepwater encountered significant 
quality and cost issues. Accordingly, the Coast Guard 
terminated the Deepwater contract with Integrated Coast Guard 
Systems (ICGS) and is now performing the acquisition functions 
in-house.
    The Service does not expect to complete its 
recapitalization of legacy assets until the mid-2030s, 
approximately ten years behind the 2004 Deepwater baseline 
schedule. In the meantime, the Service's legacy vessels and 
aircraft are either approaching, or have exceeded, their 
intended service lives. The age of the legacy assets, coupled 
with increased operations tempos, have led to increased rates 
of failure among the assets' parts and major systems. This, in 
turn, has increased scheduled and unscheduled maintenance costs 
and reduced patrol hours which have negatively impacted 
operational readiness and mission performance.
    Members of the Subcommittee sought explanations on a number 
of issues related to the Coast Guard's plan to replace its 
legacy assets. Chairman LoBiondo was particularly concerned 
with the Service's ability to meet future operational targets 
in light of President Obama's request to cut funding for 
replacement assets by $272 million or 19 percent below the 
current level. Chairman LoBiondo and other Members also 
questioned the Coast Guard and GAO on the ballooning costs of 
scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and the growing 
operational gaps in the legacy fleet.

                              LEGISLATION

    Title: Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2838 (Presented to the President on 
December 14, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2011, authorizes $8.4 billion in funding 
for the Coast Guard in fiscal year 2012, $8.6 billion in fiscal 
year 2013, and $8.7 billion in fiscal year 2014. The bill 
authorizes the end-of-year strength for military personnel at 
47,000 for each of the fiscal year 2012 through 2014. The bill 
also authorizes $22 million for the Federal Maritime Commission 
in each of the fiscal year 2012 through 2015. Finally, the bill 
makes changes to current law affecting marine safety, marine 
transportation system, and the authorities of the Coast Guard. 
The changes to current law include requiring the Coast Guard 
Academy to institute the same sexual harassment policy that 
exists at the other military service academies, repealing a law 
requiring that the Commandant of the Coast Guard establish an 
Ombudsman for each Coast Guard District, prohibiting the 
Commandant from going to production on a sixth national 
security cutter before acquiring a sufficient number of Long 
Range Interceptor II and Cutter Boat Over the Horizon IV small 
boats for each of the first three national security cutters, 
setting specific deadlines for decommissioning the Coast 
Guard's two inoperable polar icebreakers, providing a formal 
authorization to the existing interagency Committee on the 
Marine Transportation System, and changing the frequency of 
dockside examinations for commercial fishing vessels from two 
to five years.
    On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced 
for himself, and Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
Chairman John L. Mica, H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2011. On September 8, 2011, the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to 
consider H.R. 2838, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported 
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a 
quorum present. The bill was considered by the House beginning 
on November 4, 2011 and was passed by the chamber on November 
15, 2011 by voice vote. On December 5, 2012, the House agreed 
to Senate amendments to H.R. 2838 with an amendment pursuant to 
H. Res. 825. The measure passed by voice vote. On December 12, 
2012, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to the Senate 
amendment by voice vote. H.R. 2838 was signed by the President 
on December 20, 2012.

    Title: Piracy Suppression Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2839 (Reported to the House on November 
10, 2011)
    Summary: Piracy off the Horn of Africa, and in other high 
risk waters throughout the world, puts thousands of lives in 
danger, undermines freedom of navigation, and impacts the world 
economy. H.R. 2839, the Piracy Suppression Act of 2011, 
provides new authorities to suppress the threat of piracy on 
the high seas.
    H.R. 2839 instructs the Secretary of Transportation to 
update an existing training program to include instruction on 
acceptable use of force against pirates and techniques to use 
in the event of being taken hostage, requires the use of 
private armed security on vessels carrying government impelled 
cargo through high risk waters, and orders the Government 
Accountability Office to report to the Committee efforts to 
track ransom payments and the movement of money through Somali 
piracy networks.
    On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced 
for himself, and Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
Chairman John L. Mica, H.R. 2839, the Piracy Suppression Act of 
2011. On September 8, 2011, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure met in open session, and ordered the bill 
reported favorably to the House of Representatives by voice 
vote with a quorum present. Amended portions of H.R. 2839 were 
included as an amendment to H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation Act of 2011, and were considered by the 
House beginning on November 4, 2011. H.R. 2838 passed on 
November 15, 2011 by voice vote. On December 5, 2012, the House 
agreed to Senate amendments to H.R. 2838 with an amendment 
pursuant to H. Res. 825. The measure passed by voice vote. On 
December 12, 2012, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to 
the Senate amendment by voice vote. H.R. 2838 was signed by the 
President on December 20, 2012.

    Title: Commercial Vessel Discharges Reform Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2840 (Passed House on November 3, 2011)
    Summary: Discharges of ballast water are currently governed 
differently by the Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), as well as by numerous state laws and 
regulations. As a result, vessels engaged in international and 
interstate commerce are required to meet several different 
standards for the treatment of ballast water, some of which are 
not technologically achievable or verifiable. The Commercial 
Vessel Discharges Reform Act of 2011 establishes a single, 
uniform national standard for the treatment of ballast water 
discharged from vessels into navigable waters. The bill also 
provides for uniform Federal regulation of other discharges 
incidental to the normal operation of a vessel.
    H.R. 2840 amends Title II of the Clean Water Act by adding 
a new section specifying the circumstances under which a 
discharge of ballast water from a commercial vessel into 
navigable waters is permitted and identifies applicable 
vessels. The bill establishes an initial performance standard 
that is consistent with the International Maritime Organization 
(IMO) standard and requires vessel operators to conduct ballast 
water treatment using technologies certified to meet the 
performance standard. Furthermore, the legislation requires the 
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to 
review the performance standard no later than January 1, 2016, 
and every ten years thereafter to determine whether revising 
the performance standard is appropriate.
    On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced 
for himself, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
Chairman John L. Mica, and Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment Chairman Bob Gibbs, H.R. 2840, the Commercial 
Vessel Discharge Reform Act. On October 13, 2011, the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to 
consider H.R. 2840, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported 
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a 
quorum present. H.R. 2840 incorporated into H.R. 2838, The 
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011, in a House 
Rules Committee print for Floor consideration on October 28, 
2011. The House began consideration of H.R. 2838 on November 4, 
2011. H.R. 2838 was passed by the House on November 15, 2011 by 
voice vote. Amended portions of H.R. 2840 were included as an 
amendment pursuant to H. Res 825, which amended Senate 
amendments to H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2012. H.R. 2838 was signed by the 
President on December 20, 2012.

    Title: America's Cup Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 3321 (Enacted on November 29, 2011)--P.L. 
112-61
    Summary: H.R. 3321 provides a limited waiver of domestic 
cabotage laws for competing and support vessels participating 
in America's Cup related races. Excluded from the waiver are 
vessels transporting more than 25 individuals (in addition to 
the crew) and vessels transporting individual's point-to-point 
for hire. It also provides waivers of cabotage laws for several 
other specific vessels and clarifies that vessels carried on a 
movable dry dock in Alaska are not considered merchandise under 
Chapter 551 of title 46, United States Code.
    On November 2, 2011, Congressman Wally Herger (R-
California) introduced H.R. 3321, The America's Cup Act of 
2011. On November 4, 2011, the House agreed to the motion to 
suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3321 by a vote of 387-2, 1 
present. H.R. 3321 was signed into law on November 29, 2011 
(Public Law 112-61).

    Title: The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 
2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 5887 (Ordered Reported on June 7, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 5887, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2012, authorizes $8.6 billion for the 
Coast Guard for fiscal year 2013, $8.7 billion for fiscal year 
2014, and $8.76 billion for fiscal year 2015. The bill amends 
laws regarding Coast Guard authorities, shipping, and 
navigation. Specifically, H.R. 5887 provides for a 1.7 percent 
military pay raise in fiscal year 2013, consistent with the 
budget request; extends the date on which new fishing vessels 
must be classed to give the Coast Guard sufficient time to 
provide guidance to the fishing industry and shipyards; 
prevents the Coast Guard from reducing the number of Response 
Boat-Mediums it plans to acquire until the Service provides the 
Committee with adequate justification; prevents the Coast Guard 
from removing parts from the polar icebreaker, USCGC POLAR SEA, 
until the Service provides the Committee with a business case 
analysis on the reactivation and service life extension of the 
POLAR SEA; and includes provisions providing greater parity in 
authority between the Department of Defense and the Coast 
Guard.
    On June 1, 2012, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced H.R. 5887, 
The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012. The 
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation held an 
oversight hearing to review the Administration's budget 
proposal on March 7, 2012, an oversight hearing on how Coast 
Guard regulations impact the maritime sector on April 26, 2012, 
and an oversight hearing on the Service's acquisition program 
on May 16, 2012. On June 7, 2012, the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to 
consider H.R. 5887, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported 
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a 
quorum present.
    Amended portions of H.R. 5887 were included as an amendment 
pursuant to H. Res 825, which amended Senate amendments to H.R. 
2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012. 
The measure was passed under suspension of the rules on 
December 5, 2012. On December 12, 2012, the Senate agreed to 
the House amendment to the Senate amendment by voice vote. H.R. 
2838 was signed by the President on December 20, 2012.

    Title: The Marine Debris Act Reauthorization Amendments of 
2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 1171 (Ordered Reported on June 7, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 1171, the Marine Debris Reauthorization 
Amendments of 2011, reauthorizes the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Marine Debris Program. 
NOAA's Marine Debris Program addresses the adverse impact of 
marine debris on the economy, the marine environment, and 
navigation safety through voluntary programs that help 
identify, assess, prevent, reduce, and remove marine debris. 
H.R. 1171 would reauthorize NOAA's Marine Debris Program at 
currently appropriated levels through fiscal year 2015, clarify 
the purpose of the Marine Debris Program, and amend the Act to 
provide a definition of ``marine debris.''
    On March 17, 2011, Congressman Sam Farr (D-California) 
introduced H.R. 1171, the Marine Debris Act Reauthorization 
Amendments of 2011. The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation held an oversight hearing to review 
ways to improve Coast Guard operations and implement 
efficiencies on July 26, 2011. H.R. 1171 was among the major 
topics discussed at the hearing. On June 7, 2012, the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to 
consider H.R. 1171, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported 
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a 
quorum present. Amended portions of H.R. 1171 were included as 
an amendment pursuant to H. Res. 825, which amended Senate 
amendments to H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2012. The measure was passed under 
suspension of the rules on December 5, 2012. On December 12, 
2012, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to the Senate 
amendment by voice vote. H.R. 2838 was signed by the President 
on December 20, 2012.

    Title: The Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act of 2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 5797 (Passed House on August 1, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act 
of 2012, would exempt the owners and operators of vessels 
operating on the Lake from compliance with the licensing and 
vessel inspection requirements of subtitle II of title 46, 
United States Code. H.R. 5797 would not affect the authority of 
the Coast Guard to conduct search and rescue and other missions 
on the lake, or change the state's regulatory program.
    On May 17, 2012, Congressman Cravaack (R-Minnesota) 
introduced H.R. 5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act 
of 2012. The bill was referred to both the Subcommittee on 
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation and the Subcommittee on 
Water Resources and Environment. On July 27, 2012, the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open 
session to consider H.R. 5797, and ordered the bill, as 
amended, reported favorably to the House of Representatives by 
voice vote with a quorum present. Mr. Cravaack offered a 
substitute amendment to exempt owners and operators of vessels 
operating on Mille Lacs Lake from compliance with Federal laws 
and regulations requiring the licensing of individuals to 
operate vessels and the inspection of certain vessels to ensure 
they meet Federal safety standards. The Cravaack substitute 
amendment passed by voice vote. On August 1, 2012, the House 
agreed to the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 5797 by 
voice vote. Amended portions of H.R. 5797 were included as an 
amendment pursuant to H. Res. 825, which amended Senate 
amendments to H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2012. The measure was passed under 
suspension of the rules on December 5, 2012. On December 12, 
2012, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to the Senate 
amendment by voice vote. H.R. 2838 was signed by the President 
on December 20, 2012.

 Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency 
                               Management

    During the 112th Congress, the Subcommittee on Economic 
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, 
chaired by Congressman Jeff Denham (R-California), with 
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-District of Columbia) serving 
as Ranking Member, held 22 Subcommittee hearings (99 witnesses 
and approximately 39 hours). The Subcommittee also held three 
markup sessions and one roundtable discussion.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private 
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
    Date: February 10, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of 
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their 
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through 
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the 
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Services 
Commissioner, the director of the Physical Infrastructure Team 
of the GAO, and the Chairman of the 2005 Department of Defense 
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission.
    This field hearing was held at the Annex of the Old Post 
Office Building on Pennsylvania Avenue, NW in downtown 
Washington, District of Columbia. The Old Post Office Building 
is just one example of a poorly managed Federal property. The 
Annex, which was built with $1.8 million in government funding 
in addition to millions in private funds, has been unoccupied 
for ten years. According to reports, the maintenance of the 
vacant Annex costs taxpayers $6.5 million each year.
    GSA testified in agreement that the Old Post Office 
Building Annex was a commercial failure and that it would 
transform the asset for better use and to put up a Request for 
Proposals for private redevelopment. GSA told the Subcommittee 
that it was taking the necessary steps to aggressively renovate 
and reuse other underperforming Federal properties across the 
country. The Chairman of the 2005 BRAC Commission explained the 
process for the past realignment of military installations and 
how it could be applied to civilian property in order to 
maximize value from underperforming assets.

    Title: Managing Costs and Mitigating Delays in the Building 
of Social Security's New National Computer Center
    Date: February 11, 2011
    Purpose: A joint oversight hearing between the Subcommittee 
on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency 
Management and the Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on 
Social Security to receive testimony on the site selection and 
construction of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) new 
national computer processing and data storage facility to 
replace the National Computer Center (NCC), currently located 
in Woodlawn, Maryland. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and 
renovation of Federal property under the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
    Summary: The Subcommittees received testimony from the 
Inspector General of the Social Security Administration, the 
deputy commissioner of the GSA Public Buildings Service, and 
the deputy commissioner of Systems for the SSA.
    The Subcommittees previously held a joint hearing on the 
new NCC on December 15, 2009. The new facility is funded from 
the ARRA, which provided $500 million for the project. The 
replacement of the NCC is the single largest building project 
funded under the ARRA.
    The Subcommittees were concerned with delays in site 
selection and its effect on the project's budget. GSA testified 
that it had selected a site at Urbana in Frederick County, 
Maryland, in early February, 2011 and was beginning the process 
for design/build construction solicitation. GSA noted that the 
project remained on budget but pushed back the construction 
completion date from October, 2013 to September, 2014. SSA 
detailed aspects of the Information Technology (IT) workload 
for the new NCC, which will take responsibility for certifying 
payments of over $60 billion a month to 50 million American 
seniors.

    Title: Cutting Spending and Consolidating Federal Office 
Space: GSA's Capital Investment and Leasing Program
    Date: March 10, 2011
    Purpose: Receive testimony on GSA's Capital Investment and 
Leasing Program (CILP) including alteration, design, 
modernization, construction, leasing, and building purchase 
activities. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan for oversight of real property management and 
the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF).
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the 
commissioner of GSA's Public Building Service (PBS). The CILP 
provides the necessary resources to maintain current real 
property assets and acquire new or replacement assets, through 
ownership or leasing. The President's fiscal year 2012 budget 
requests a total of $9.5 billion in new obligational authority 
for the FBF to fund various projects. At the hearing, the PBS 
Commissioner testified about its requests for $840 million for 
new construction projects including five new land ports of 
entry, Federal Bureau of Investigations consolidation in San 
Juan, Puerto Rico, and the St. Elizabeth's Department of 
Homeland Security consolidation in Washington, District of 
Columbia. GSA also requested more than $395 million in funding 
for repairs and alterations.

    Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic 
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency 
Management Programs
    Date: March 30, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on how to better respond to 
disasters in the wake of the catastrophic earthquakes that 
devastated Japan in early March 2011. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining 
emergency management programs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from 
representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA), the United States Forest Service, the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC), the American Red Cross, and state 
and local emergency managers.
    This hearing was held in response to the catastrophic 
earthquakes that devastated Japan on March 13, 2011. It 
specifically focused on using better coordination between 
local, state, and Federal authorities. With saving lives being 
the top priority in disaster recoveries, minimizing costs and 
cutting the bureaucratic red tape are also of utmost 
importance.
    FEMA testified on improvements made to disaster 
preparedness through its ``Whole Community'' approach. This 
program recognizes that FEMA is not the Nation's sole emergency 
management team and to achieve maximum effectiveness in 
preparedness and recovery, FEMA must work with the entire 
emergency management community. FEMA also touched upon its 
national public service campaign, Ready. The program partners 
with the Advertising Council to educate and empower Americans 
to prepare for and respond to all emergencies, including 
natural disasters and potential terrorist attacks. The goal of 
the campaign is to get the public involved and to increase the 
level of basic preparedness across the Nation.

    Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal 
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
    Date: April 6, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on whether a civilian Base 
Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) process can 
effectively consolidate Federal office space, maximize value to 
the taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the 
Office of Management and Budget, the General Services 
Administration (GSA), the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), and the Chairman of the 2005 Department on Defense BRAC 
Commission.
    In fiscal year 2009, the Federal government spent $1.7 
billion in annual operating costs for underutilized buildings 
and $134 million annually for excess buildings. A civilian BRAC 
process, which would establish a fair process of evaluating 
Federal space needs, has the potential to save the taxpayers 
billions of dollars by addressing the currently underutilized 
Federal real property and over-reliance on costly leasing. GAO 
conducts biennial reviews on high-risk areas within the Federal 
government to bring focus to specific areas needing added 
attention and oversight. Areas are identified as ``high'' risk 
due to their greater vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, 
and mismanagement or areas that need broad-based transformation 
to address major economic, efficiency, or effectiveness 
challenges. Unfortunately, despite executive orders and 
memoranda issued during two Administrations and acts of 
Congress intended to improve the management of Federal real 
property, these problems persist. GAO acknowledged that while 
the government works to improve its real property planning the 
government still has not made significant reductions in excess 
property. GAO added that a process similar to DoD's BRAC 
Commission could help move this program forward.

    Title: Richard H. Poff Federal Building Renovation: Is it 
Costing the Taxpayer Too Much?
    Date: April 14, 2011
    Purpose: Receive testimony on the renovation and 
modernization of the Richard H. Poff Federal Building, located 
in Roanoke, Virginia. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and 
renovation of Federal property under the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from 
Congressman Bob Goodlatte, the Mid-Atlantic Regional 
Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA), the 
Inspector General of GSA (GSA IG), and the Clerk of the United 
States District Court of Western Virginia.
    The costs of the Poff Federal Building renovation are 
projected to exceed the project's estimated $51 million price 
tag by $10-15 million or more. According to the GSA, the 
purpose of the project is to update building systems and 
improve its emergency efficiency by incorporating ``greening'' 
elements. Included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act (ARRA) was $5.5 billion for the Federal Building Fund of 
the GSA. ARRA designated $4.5 billion of those funds for 
converting GSA buildings into High Performance Green Buildings, 
as defined by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) 
of 2007. The Poff Federal Building is included in GSA's Spend 
Plan as an ARRA project. The property is located in Roanoke, 
Virginia and was constructed in 1975. It has approximately 
316,000 gross square feet of space and is occupied by the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (49 percent), the United 
States Courts and United States Marshals (36 percent), and 
other agencies (15 percent). Congressman Goodlatte has 
expressed concerns and has followed up with GSA and the GSA IG 
on a number of these issues, such as to the cost-benefit 
analysis related to some of the greening elements, whether the 
renovation costs are reasonable, whether renovation was the 
most cost-effective solution for meeting the tenants' space 
needs, and the impact of the construction on the tenant 
agencies. In addition, Senators Webb and Warner, both of 
Virginia, have also expressed concerns, particularly regarding 
the impact of the renovation on current tenants.

    Title: How to Stop Sitting on Our Assets: A Review of the 
Civilian Property Realignment Act
    Date: May 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on specific legislative 
proposals to employ a Base Realignment and Closure Commission 
(BRAC) like process to civilian properties to produce 
significant savings to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of real property 
management and waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the 
Office of Management and Budget, the Department of State, the 
Chairman of the 2005 Department of Defense BRAC Commission and 
the private sector.
    H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act, was 
introduced by Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Denham on May 4, 2011. 
The legislation would establish a framework through which a 
board or commission would independently review Federal 
properties and make recommendations for consolidations, co-
locations, redevelopment, selling or other actions to minimize 
costs and produce savings for the taxpayer. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) estimates that the proposal could 
save taxpayers more than $15 billion.
    The Administration submitted a similar proposal for a 
civilian BRAC in early 2011. The OMB Controller testified that 
the differences between the Denham and Administration proposals 
are bridgeable and that he looked forward to continuing to work 
together to establish a civilian BRAC process. H.R. 1734 would 
create a nine member commission appointed by the President and 
confirmed by the Senate with input from House and Senate 
leadership. The Administration's proposal requires Federal 
agencies to send information and initial recommendations to the 
Board. H.R. 1734 would require initial recommendations 
submitted to the Commission be compiled through General 
Services Administration (GSA), in consultation with the 
chairperson of the Federal Real Property Council, and analyzed 
against standardized criteria that are consistent with the 
standards detailed in the legislation and published in the 
Federal Register. The Administration's proposal includes 
additional provisions for an annual review of the postal field 
offices and an annual assessment of the assets owned or managed 
by the State Department's Bureau of Overseas Building 
Operations. The Administration's proposal terminates the Board 
in 12 years. H.R. 1734 terminates the Commission in six years. 
H.R. 1734 also mandates an independent leasing authority and 
requires that agencies seeking to lease space for the purposes 
of a public building work through GSA to acquire such space. 
The witnesses stressed the importance of private sector 
participation and expertise to the success of the initiative. 
The managing partner of JBG Companies, which invests, develops, 
and manages commercial real estate in the Washington area, 
testified if the private sector sees progress with a civilian 
BRAC process and the opportunity to work with the Federal 
government, many would ``come out of the woodwork'' with 
proposals to better utilize Federal properties and save 
taxpayers money.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America
    Date: June 16, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Securities and Exchange 
Commission's (SEC) management of its independent authority to 
lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC Inspector General (SEC 
IG) report related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square 
feet of space under a ten year lease worth over $500 million. 
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for 
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and 
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the SEC, 
the SEC Inspector General, and the General Services 
Administration (GSA).
    On July 28, 2010, the SEC entered into a sole source lease 
for 900,000 square feet of space with an option to lease 
500,000 additional square feet at Constitution Center located 
at 7th and D Streets, SW, in Washington, District of Columbia. 
The SEC's rationale for the need for new space related to 
passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank), which expanded SEC's 
responsibilities. The $556 million lease was ``negotiated'' in 
three business days and signed on July 28, 2010, and not long 
after it was signed questions were raised regarding whether the 
SEC needed the space. The building is owned by David Nassif 
Associates (Landlord) and is the former location of the 
Department of Transportation headquarters. The building was 
completely renovated by the Landlord to be a modern, efficient 
class-A office building, reportedly exceeding Level IV security 
standards and is expected to be rated LEED Gold, a top green 
building certification. Following reports of the lease 
agreement, the SEC IG initiated an investigation into the 
lease. On May 16, 2011, the SEC IG concluded its investigation 
and, at the request of the Subcommittee, the SEC released the 
report to the Subcommittee.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
    Date: July 6, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive 
testimony on the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) 
mismanagement of its independent authority to lease space and 
the May 16, 2011, SEC Inspector General (SEC IG) report related 
to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square feet of space 
under a 10-year lease of Constitution Center in Washington, 
District of Columbia worth over $500 million. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
agencies with independent leasing authority and Clause 2(n) of 
House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from the Chairman of the SEC 
and SEC IG. The SEC Chairman testified that she took full 
responsibility for the misguided lease of Constitution Center. 
Because of the Subcommittee's investigation, the SEC Chairman 
agreed to give up the Agency's independent leasing authority 
and consult with General Services Administration (GSA) on 
future leasing opportunities.
    The SEC IG testified that he had referred the investigation 
to the Department of Justice. The SEC IG also noted that 
several SEC employees may face disciplinary action for 
backdating documents that justified the lease.

    Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in 
Recovery
    Date: July 14, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the 
issues of communities recovering from a disaster in the context 
of a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 
reauthorization. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from the Administrator of FEMA, 
and state and local emergency managers.
    The Administrator of FEMA testified that pre-disaster 
preparedness and mitigation are critical to recovery and 
resilience-building. Additionally, timely decisions can 
significantly reduce recovery time and cost. The FEMA 
Administrator believed that it is important that all members of 
the team understand their role in disaster response and 
recovery and to begin to prepare for disasters before they 
occur. The Administrator highlighted FEMA's recovery 
capabilities and programs that can be provided when states 
request Federal assistance for presidentially declared 
disasters of all sizes, including catastrophic events and 
terrorist attacks. The process begins with quickly processing 
state requests for disaster assistance. Then, after life-saving 
and life-sustaining operations have ceased, the recovery 
process requires the restoration of basic services within 60 
days.
    A representative of a federally recognized Indian tribe in 
Arizona testified about their support for H.R. 1953, 
legislation that would authorize Indian tribes to directly 
request the President for a major disaster or emergency 
declaration instead of being treated as a local entity.

    Title: The Economic Development Administration: How to 
Improve Effectiveness through Reforms and Consolidations
    Date: July 27, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on the Economic Development Administration (EDA) and 
how its programs can be improved.
    Summary: Received testimony from the EDA, the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO), local economic development 
officials, and the private sector.
    EDA testified about its work to promote economic 
development around the Nation in the current tough economic 
climate. The EDA reported that their best investments foster 
public and private partnerships as well as supporting ``bottom-
up'' business strategies from local and community leaders. The 
EDA also testified that the agency was working on coordinating 
its various efforts and trying to prevent the duplication of 
other Federal activities in certain areas.
    Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified about its 
report regarding 80 economic development programs whose purpose 
seems to overlap with directives of Federal agencies. EDA 
reported that the Department of Commerce, the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, the United States Small Business 
Administration, and the Department of Agriculture appear to 
have taken actions to implement some collaborative practices 
but have offered little evidence so far that they have taken 
steps to develop compatible policies or procedures with other 
Federal agencies or to search for opportunities to leverage 
physical and administrative resources with their Federal 
partners. GAO also found that the agencies appear to collect 
only limited information on program outcomes--information that 
is necessary to determine whether this potential for overlap 
and fragmentation is resulting in ineffective or inefficient 
programs.

    Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving 
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
    Date: October 13, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine how the 
emergency management system and programs can be streamlined to 
reduce costs and improve preparedness and response.
    Summary: Received testimony from the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the Department of Homeland Security 
Office of the Inspector General (DHS IG), state and local 
emergency managers and the private sector.
    FEMA testified that the more efficient its operations are, 
the more people it can support and that the agency is 
constantly looking for ways to cut costs and streamline its 
processes. Through careful management of the Disaster Relief 
Fund (DRF) funds; implementation of ``FEMAStat,'' a management 
tool used to identify potential process improvements; and 
increased oversight of contract administration, FEMA has 
identified and capitalized upon numerous opportunities to use 
its resources more efficiently. Over the past two years, FEMA 
has put additional mechanisms in place to reduce costs and 
identify funds that could be de-obligated and returned to the 
DRF. By increasing the level of oversight of the status of 
mission assignments, contracts, and grants, FEMA has been able 
to return over $4.7 billion (as of September 27, 2011) to the 
DRF since the beginning of fiscal year 2010. In addition to 
improvements to FEMA's operational efficiency, it also 
testified to having increased the effectiveness of the 
Individual Assistance (IA) program. FEMA's IA program provides 
assistance to individuals and families after a disaster, 
including emergency assistance, the Individuals and Households 
Program (IHP), Crisis Counseling Program, Disaster Legal 
Services, Disaster Unemployment Assistance, and the Disaster 
Case Management Program.
    The DHS IG testified to areas in which improvement was 
needed to speed recovery and reduce costs. The DHS IG 
highlighted that there were hundreds of field offices still 
open dating back to the Northridge Earthquake. The DHS IG 
asserted that speeding up recovery would result in more timely 
closure of these offices thus reducing administrative costs. 
The DHS IG agreed that steps like implementing cost estimating 
would help streamline the process.
    State emergency managers testified to the importance of 
ensuring that state emergency management programs remain 
resilient and that there is better coordination of resources 
between Federal, state, and local entities.

    Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million 
Los Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
    Date: November 4, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on 
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles, 
California, including the size, scope, compliance with 
courtroom sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the 
entire courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
    Summary: Received testimony from the United States courts, 
the General Services Administration (GSA), and the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO). The hearing was conducted pursuant 
to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs.
    The hearing was held in response to the GSA's insistence on 
moving forward with construction of a new $400 million Federal 
courthouse in Los Angeles, California, while ignoring profound 
criticism that the project is unnecessary due to the actual 
space needs for Federal judges and the lack of courtroom 
sharing in the current Spring Street and Roybal courthouses. In 
the view of the Subcommittee, the project would ultimately be a 
wasteful expenditure of taxpayer money.
    A Los Angeles Federal district court judge and GSA 
testified to the need of the new courthouse. The Federal judge 
reported that there were security concerns in the Spring Street 
courthouse and that it was no longer meeting GSA's building 
requirements for Federal courthouses. First proposed in its 
2001 Capital Investment and Leasing Program, GSA acknowledged 
that the decade old project should have progressed more 
efficiently.
    GAO testified to the results of its recent reports, which 
found that the addition of a third courthouse to the Los 
Angeles courthouse complex would exceed the needs of their 
judicial system. The GAO report has found this type of waste in 
courthouses across the country. GAO found that the proposed 
courthouse was designed to provide courtrooms to accommodate 
the judiciary's estimate of 61 district and magistrate judges 
in the Los Angeles Court by 2011--which, as of October 2011, 
exceeds the actual number of such judges by 14. This disparity 
calls into question the space assumptions on which the original 
proposals were based. In addition, the Los Angeles court was 
planning for less courtroom sharing than is possible. In 2011, 
the judiciary also approved sharing for bankruptcy judges. 
Additional courtroom sharing could reduce the number of 
additional courtrooms needed for the Los Angeles courthouse, 
thereby increasing the potential options for housing the Los 
Angeles court.

    Title: The Effectiveness of Our Nation's Public Alert 
System
    Date: December 13, 2011
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC), and representatives of the wireless, cable, and 
broadcasting industries to examine the development of FEMA's 
Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) and receive 
testimony regarding the recent test of the nation's Emergency 
Alert System (EAS). The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from Mr. Damon Penn, Assistant 
Administrator, National Continuity Programs Directorate, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mr. James Arden Barnett, 
Jr., Rear Admiral (Ret.), Chief, Public Safety and Homeland 
Security Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Ms. Suzanne 
D. Goucher, President and CEO, Maine Association of 
Broadcasters, Mr. Chris Guttman-McCabe, Vice President, 
Regulatory Affairs, CTIA--The Wireless Association, and Dr. 
William Check, Senior Vice President of Science and Technology, 
National Cable and Telecommunications Association.
    Currently, the United States issues emergency warnings 
through the EAS, which relays messages through broadcast and 
other media. EAS allows the President and authorized officials 
to transmit emergency messages to the public via television and 
radio. The current system is largely based on 1960s technology 
and is only able to transmit limited text and audio alerts.
    On November 9, 2011, the first nation-wide test of EAS was 
conducted. The test only involved the legacy TV and radio 
system. The visual message indicated that EAS had been 
activated; however, the message indicating it was a test was in 
audio. This raised concerns that many, including the hearing 
impaired, could mistake the test for an actual emergency. Other 
issues reported include three of the 63 Primary Entry Point 
stations failed to rebroadcast the message resulting in some 
members of the public not receiving a message and reports of 
poor or no audio or the playing of music in lieu of the 
message.
    On September 13, 2011, Chairman Denham and Ranking Member 
Norton introduced H.R. 2904, the Integrated Public Alert and 
Warning System Modernization Act of 2011, which would establish 
a clear framework and timetable for FEMA's modernization of its 
public alerts and warning system. The framework for 
modernization of the system created in H.R. 2904 would develop 
a system that would provide for the use of as many methods of 
communication as possible, including wireless technologies in 
sending alerts. IPAWS aims to improve public safety through the 
rapid dissemination of emergency messages to as many people as 
possible over as many communication devices as possible, 
including multiple languages, in American Sign Language, and in 
Braille.

    Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
    Date: February 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex 
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue NW 
in downtown Washington, District of Columbia, to receive 
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well 
as the status of other underperforming and vacant Federal 
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse 
or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from the Commissioner of the 
Public Buildings Service of the General Services Administration 
(GSA).
    The OPO Annex opened in the 1980s but was never fully 
occupied. To this day, the Annex remains vacant and 
deteriorating and GSA spends about $12 million to operate and 
maintain the facility, which results in an annual operating 
loss of $6.5 million. The Subcommittee held a field hearing at 
the OPO a year ago on February 8, 2011, where Members urged GSA 
to redevelop the property through private investment.
    During this hearing, GSA announced its plans to finally 
redevelop the OPO by selecting a bid from Trump Hotel 
Collection. GSA testified that there were several bids to 
renovate the property into a hotel or office space and that the 
GSA awarded preliminary approval to the Trump Organization. GSA 
reported that the agency would begin negotiations with the 
Trump Organization over the next year with a target 
construction date in 2013.
    The Subcommittee also questioned GSA on numerous 
underutilized Federal assets around the country including the 
Cotton Annex in Washington, District of Columbia, the Los 
Angeles Courthouse project, the Walter Hoffman United States 
Courthouse project in Norfolk, Virginia, and the Thurgood 
Marshall and Daniel Patrick Moynihan Federal Courthouses in New 
York, New York.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
    Date: March 22, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW in downtown Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to 
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant Federal properties, 
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can 
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming 
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of 
House rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from Senator Scott P. Brown (R-
Massachusetts) and Robert Peck, Commissioner of the Public 
Buildings Service of the General Services Administration (GSA).
    The Cotton Annex is an empty 89,000-square-foot building 
occupying a substantially larger parcel of highly desirable but 
underdeveloped land in Washington, District of Columbia. Much 
of the prized site is taken up by a large parking lot. The 
building was most recently occupied by the Department of 
Agriculture, but has been vacant for the last five years. The 
Congressional Budget Office conservatively estimated the sale 
value of the building and land at $150 million.
    Senator Scott Brown expressed his concern about GSA's 
mismanagement of Federal assets and testified about his efforts 
to get Federal property management reform legislation passed in 
the Senate. Senator Brown noted that he would introduce a 
companion bill to Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Denham's reform 
legislation, H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act, 
which passed the House of Representatives on February 7, 2012.
    Commissioner Peck testified that the Cotton Annex 
represents one of the few remaining developable parcels in 
Washington, District of Columbia, in GSA's inventory. The 
Commissioner said that the operational costs of the vacant 
building were $279,000 in fiscal year 2011 and that was fully 
funded by revenue gained from renting the facility's parking 
lot to the Federal Protective Service. The Commissioner alluded 
to various options that GSA was considering for the property, 
including potential redevelopment scenarios for the renovation/
replacement of GSA's Heating Operations and Transmission 
District (HOTD). Commissioner Peck also noted that given prior 
studies showing that Federal construction presents the highest 
and best use of the property, GSA's desire to locate agencies 
in government-owned space, the potential uses this property may 
have, and the fact that the property has generated a net 
positive return, GSA has continued to hold on to this property.

    Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of 
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
    Date: April 17, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on General Services Administration's (GSA) waste of 
taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010 Western Regional Conference 
(WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee rewards program, and other 
waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse 
or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from GSA Inspector General (GSA 
IG) Brian Miller, GSA Deputy Administrator Susan Brita, former 
GSA Administrator Martha Johnson, Acting GSA Administrator 
Daniel Tangherlini, GSA Chief Financial Officer Alison Doone, 
former Commissioner of the GSA Public Buildings Service (PBS) 
Robert Peck, Deputy PBS Commissioner David Foley, and PBS 
Events Planner Lisa Daniels. Region Nine PBS Commissioner Jeff 
Neely was invited to the hearing, but refused to testify.
    On April 2, 2012, the GSA IG issued a Management Deficiency 
Report on the GSA Public Buildings Service and its 2010 WRC. 
The GSA IG indicates that the GSA Deputy Administrator 
requested that the GSA IG investigate allegations of possible 
excessive expenditures and employee misconduct related to the 
2010 WRC. The 2010 conference had approximately 300 attendees 
and occurred at the M Resort Spa Casino just outside Las Vegas, 
Nevada. The IG found that the total cost of the conference was 
$822,751, including $136,504 spent on eight pre-conference 
scouting trips alone. The report also found that over $75,000 
was spent in a ``team building'' exercise, where several 
bicycles were assembled for charity. Conference planners also 
ignored protocols for bid contracts for hotels and audio/visual 
companies and even hired a mind-reader and a clown among other 
outlandish purchases. The GSA IG report found that this 
conference was overly excessive, wasteful, and in some cases 
impermissible.
    The hearing focused primarily on the 2010 WRC and other 
examples of gross misconduct by GSA employees that arose during 
the investigation. Officials were also questioned about the 
rapidly growing budget of the Public Buildings Service and 
requests were again made by Subcommittee leaders for a detailed 
and transparent list of the Agency's administrative costs.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
    Date: June 19, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street NW in Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to the 
taxpayer of underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that 
the process for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating 
Plant provides the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from Mr. Flavio Peres, Deputy 
Assistant Commissioner of Real Property Utilization and 
Disposal for the General Services Administration (GSA).
    The Georgetown Heating Plant, also known as the West Heat 
Plant, was constructed in 1948 to provide steam to Federal 
buildings on the west side of the city. The plant was 
decommissioned in 2000 and subsequently served as a fuel 
storage site and a parking facility for government vehicles. 
Since ceasing operation as a steam plant, the facility has cost 
the taxpayer more than $3.5 million in operating expenses, 
despite the fact that the facility sits in the densely 
developed area of Georgetown adjacent to high value real estate 
development. The facility was only declared surplus property in 
November, 2011, 11 years after it was closed as a steam plant. 
GSA is now commencing its marketing and appraisal efforts and 
intends to sell the property through a public sale targeted for 
the fall of 2012. GSA intends the property to be sold ``As-is, 
Where-is'' and there is no indication as to how the local city 
agencies will zone the site for private use. However, 
immediately surrounding the facility is dense commercial and 
residential development, including retail, hotels, and 
residences.
    The Deputy Assistant Commissioner testified that GSA 
formally declared the parcel excess to its needs on October 19, 
2011. As the first step in the disposal process, GSA screened 
the property for other Federal needs, and with no expressions 
of interest, declared the property surplus to the Government's 
needs in November, 2011. After conducting required homeless 
screening in accordance with the McKinney-Vento Homeless Act, 
GSA commenced marketing and appraisal efforts in support of a 
public sale of the property. The Deputy Commissioner stated 
that GSA was proceeding with required reviews under the 
National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic 
Preservation Act, and that these evaluations were slated for 
completion in the late summer 2012. GSA testified that the 
property would be sold by online auction at realestatesales.gov 
in fall 2012 and that it already had a great deal of interest 
from private sector developers. Upon questioning by Members of 
the Subcommittee as to the perceived value of the plant, the 
Deputy Assistant Commissioner refused to give an estimate, but 
said that it would be ``substantial.''

    Title: Reducing costs to Taxpayers and Saving Lives Through 
Hazard Mitigation and Building Codes
    Date: July 24, 2012
    Bill Number: H.R 2069 (The Safe Building Code Incentive 
Act)
    Purpose: To examine how building codes and mitigation 
efforts minimize costs associated with disasters and save 
lives. In particular, the Subcommittee examined the H.R. 2069, 
the Safe Building Code Incentive Act, introduced by Congressman 
Diaz-Balart (R-Florida). The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from The Honorable Mario Diaz-
Balart (R-Florida), David Miller, Associate Administrator of 
the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Jim 
Mullen, President of the National Emergency Management 
Association, Jimmy Gianato, Director of Homeland Security and 
Emergency Management of West Virginia, Chief Hank C. 
Clemmensen, First Vice President of the International 
Association of Fire Chiefs, Chad Berginnis, Executive Director 
of the Association of State Floodplain Managers, Julie Rochman, 
President and CEO of Insurance Institute for Business and Home 
Safety, and Rod Matthews CPCU, P&C Operations Vice President of 
State Farm Insurance Company.
    On June 1, 2011, Rep. Diaz-Balart introduced H.R. 2069, the 
Safe Building Code Incentive Act. The bill would provide 
incentives, through mitigation assistance, to states to adopt 
and implement statewide building codes to minimize damages from 
disasters, save lives, and save taxpayer dollars. The 
legislation provides for voluntary participation. States that 
do not meet the building code requirements would not be 
penalized. States that already have and enforce building codes 
would be rewarded.
    Ninety-nine major disasters and twenty nine emergency 
declarations accounted for $72.8 billion in overall disaster 
costs in 2011, the fifth most costly year in United States 
history for insured catastrophe losses. Through the first half 
of 2012, there was a total of $14.6 billion in economic losses 
accrued. ``It is evident that Mother Nature is sending us a 
wake-up call'', Rep. Diaz-Balart testified, ``Encouraging 
states to adopt model national building codes can help fortify 
our Nation's defenses against major storms.''
    On April 4, 2012, the National Association of Mutual 
Insurance Companies (NAMIC) commissioned a study to 
specifically examine the impact of the Building Codes Incentive 
Act and states adopting and enforcing state-wide codes. The 
study concluded that since 1988, net savings from hurricane and 
wind damages would have been $11 billion, had building codes 
been adopted. Specifically, the study highlighted that the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had spent $67 
billion in grants since 1988 on hurricane damages alone. Had 
the buildings exposed to these disasters been built to model 
building codes, the losses would have been reduced as much as 
$13 billion, or close to 20 percent. However, in some 
instances, like Hurricane Charley in 2004, the Insurance 
Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS) concluded that 
Florida's strict building codes reduced property damage by more 
than 40 percent.
    H.R. 2069 would provide a four percent post-disaster relief 
grant from FEMA to States that meet the national building codes 
qualification. The four percent in post-disaster relief grants 
would address long-term hazard mitigation, such as improving 
drainage structures, restraining cables on bridges, elevating 
structures to reduce flood damage, and installing window 
shutters for hospitals and other critical facilities. This four 
percent incentive for relief is in addition to the estimated 20 
percent in mitigation savings (concluded from IBHS report) from 
building devastation alone. Stronger buildings will undoubtedly 
increase the safety of disaster stricken regions, therefore 
saving lives. The fiscal and human savings are designed to 
incentivize States to increase disaster mitigation and save 
taxpayer dollars.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Vacant Federal Courthouse 
in Miami
    Date: August 6, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the United States 
courts, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the 
General Services Administration (GSA). The hearing focused on 
the costs to the taxpayer of the underperforming or vacant 
assets and the overbuilding of Federal courthouses.
    Summary: Received testimony from The Honorable Frank M. 
Hull, Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the 
Eleventh Circuit, Mr. David Wise, Director, Physical 
Infrastructure Team, GAO, and Mr. John Smith, Regional 
Commissioner, Public Buildings Service, GSA. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, 
fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    This was the fourth hearing held in a vacant Federal 
building part of an effort to highlight the extent of GSA 
wasteful property management. The Miami courthouse complex 
consists of five buildings, including the vacant David W. Dyer 
Federal Building Courthouse. The Dyer building has been vacant 
since 2007, when the new Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. United States 
Courthouse was completed. The Ferguson Courthouse was 
originally designed to supplement space in the Dyer building. 
More space was needed to accommodate the growing number of 
criminal trials in the district and to increase security in the 
court complex. However, the Ferguson building was built so 
large, the Dyer building was vacated. The Ferguson building was 
built to accommodate 33 judges, based on a year 2000 estimate. 
There are currently 27 active judges. According the GAO, the 
courthouse was overbuilt by 238,000 square feet, at an excess 
cost of $49 million. In addition, the excess space costs $3.8 
million annually in maintenance costs.
    The GAO testified that overbuilding and underutilizing 
courthouses is a nationwide problem. In the ten year period 
between 2000 and 2010, the GAO found that there was 3.56 
million square feet of extra, un-used space in the 33 
courthouses that were constructed. GAO cited three reasons for 
this problem: the Judiciary grossly over-estimated its 
projection of future judges assigned to courthouses, new 
courthouses did not incorporate courtroom sharing, and GSA 
constructed courthouses above the Congressionally-approved 
size. The GAO recommended two solutions to help GSA build more 
efficient courthouses and help them better manage underutilized 
assets. The first is for the GSA to implement a plan to improve 
its Federal Real Property Council (FRPC). GAO suggested the 
FRPC improve its sound data collection practices, so they are 
more complete, accurate, and consistent. The second is for the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to consult with the FRPC 
in order to develop and publish a national strategy for 
managing Federal excess and underutilized property.
    The GSA testified that they are aggressively moving to 
ensure better utilization of Federal real estate. The GSA 
stated that they not only met, but exceeded the $3 billion 
savings goal between the years of 2010 and 2012. GSA also 
stated that they looked into renovating the Dyer courthouse 
which was built in 1933, but the costs were estimated at $60 
million. The GSA intends to reposition the property in the near 
future but cited difficulties in separating the shared utility 
infrastructure, parking, courtyard, and tunnels between the 
Dyer Federal Building and Courthouse, and the C. Clyde Atkins 
United States Courthouse.

    Title: California's Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta: Planning 
and Preparing for Hazards and Disasters
    Date: August 16, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the California Emergency Management 
Agency (CalEMA), a county emergency manager, and public 
utilities in order to examine planning and preparedness for 
disasters in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight 
Plan for streamlining emergency management programs.
    Summary: Received testimony from Congressman John Garamendi 
(D-California), Mr. Robert J. Fenton, Jr., Assistant 
Administrator for Response, Office of Response and Recovery, 
FEMA, Mr. Brendan Murphy, Assistant Secretary, (CalEMA), Mr. 
Ronald E. Baldwin, Former Director of Emergency Operations, San 
Joaquin County, Mr. Timothy Alan Simon, Commissioner, 
California Public Utilities Commission, and Mr. Alexander 
Coate, General Manager, East Bay Municipal Utility District.
    The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a below sea level region 
in between Sacramento and Stockton, California, holds over 
1,000 miles of waterways and 1,100 miles of levees. The 
Sacramento River and San Joaquin River feed the waterways of 
the region which are responsible for delivering fresh water to 
25 million California residents in the San Francisco bay area 
and southern coastal communities of the state. Due to the 
expansive levee system which holds millions of gallons of fresh 
drinking water and protects over half a million acres of a $2 
billion agriculture industry, the region is particularly 
vulnerable to flooding. A major disaster, such as an 
earthquake, would jeopardize significant amounts of the State's 
water supply, infrastructure, and farmland communities.
    In 2008, the California state legislature passed the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Emergency Preparedness Act, which 
established the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Coordination Task 
Force. The Task Force is comprised of representatives from 
CalEMA, the Department of Water Resources, and the Delta 
Counties of Contra Costa, Solano, Yolo, San Joaquin, and 
Sacramento. In a 2012 report, the Task Force made specific 
recommendations for how to best prepare and respond to a flood 
emergency.
    From a Federal level, FEMA has been preparing detailed 
catastrophe response plans for the region in the event of an 
earthquake, hurricane, tsunamis, or nuclear device attack. 
Under the Presidential Policy Directive 8, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security is directed to develop a national 
preparedness system that defines the necessary procedures 
needed to prepare for worst-case scenario incidents in areas of 
greatest risk. The system includes a framework including 
prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery at 
every level of government. In the State of California, the San 
Francisco Bay Area Earthquake Response Plan and the Southern 
California Catastrophic Earthquake Response Plan are already in 
place to describe state and Federal response and coordination 
in the event of an earthquake.
    The goal of the hearing was to outline ways in which each 
level of government can support and facilitate disaster 
planning and preparedness in the region. Federal, state, and 
local officials each laid out their previous work, goals, and 
needs in hopes of streamlining a collaborative effort to better 
prepare and respond to a disaster in the region.

    Title: LA Courthouse: GSA's Plan to Spend $400 Million to 
Create Vacant Space
    Date: August 17, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the General Services 
Administration (GSA), the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), and the United States Courts about the justification and 
cost implications of building a third courthouse in Los 
Angeles, California.
    Summary: Received testimony from the Acting Regional 
Commissioner of the Public Building Service in the GSA, Mr. 
Kevin Richards, and the Director of Physical Infrastructure in 
the Government Accountability Office, Mr. Mark L. Goldstein. 
The Committee received written testimony from the Honorable 
Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, United States District 
Court for the Central District of California. The United States 
courts did not provide a witness at the hearing.
    In 2001, GSA submitted a prospectus for a third Los Angeles 
courthouse costing $400 million. The Los Angeles Courthouse 
Complex consists of two buildings--the Edward R. Roybal Federal 
Building and the Spring Street Courthouse. GSA cited three 
reasons for needing a third courthouse, a lack of capacity, 
security concerns, and smaller courtrooms than the United 
States Courts Design Guide standard.
    In 2001, there were 60 judges in the Los Angeles 
jurisdiction. The ten year projection for year 2011 was for 
there to be 73 judges. In year 2011, there were actually 59 
judges, 14 less than the 2001 projection for 2011. The latest 
projection for year 2012 was for 81 judges, there are currently 
59. The miscalculated projection of judges makes the need for 
more capacity irrelevant. There are currently 61 courtrooms in 
the existing two courthouse buildings, well above the number 
needed to sustain 59 judges due to the courtroom sharing 
policy. Under the courtroom sharing policy, magistrate judges, 
senior judges, and bankruptcy judges are required to share 
courtrooms. Only 21 of the 59 judges are active district 
judges. Therefore, under the sharing system, only 42 courtrooms 
are needed.
    There are two security concerns dealing with the 
circulation of judges, defendants, and prisoners in the Spring 
Street Courthouse. The first has to do with the circulation of 
all judges, defendants, and prisoners in and out of the 
courtroom through public walkways. While the Roybal Building 
has separate circulation for the public, Spring Street 
Courthouse does not. However, when the United States Marshals 
have a security concern about a particular trial, the trial is 
conducted in the Roybal Building which has separate 
circulation. Also, there have been no major security incidents 
recorded since 2008. The second security concern is with 
transporting prisoners from the Metropolitan Detention Center 
into the Courthouse. The Spring Street Courthouse is not 
connected to the detention center; therefore the prisoners are 
transported along surface streets. The Roybal Building has an 
underground tunnel which is connected to the Metropolitan 
Detention Center. However, the proposed courthouse does not 
have a connected tunnel to the detention center so prisoners 
would still have to be transported on the street.
    $60 million has already been spent on acquisition and 
planning for the third courthouse. GSA plans to spend an 
additional $340 million to construct the building. The new 
courthouse would provide unnecessary space that would be 
underutilized. The current two courthouse system already 
provides more courtrooms and space than needed for the 59 
judges in the Los Angeles jurisdiction.

    Title: Hurricane Sandy: Site Visit of Impacted Areas
    Date: November 27, 2012
    Purpose: To examine the damage from Hurricane Sandy to the 
impacted communities of Staten Island and Manhattan, and to 
talk with local leaders about the recovery process.
    Summary: Chairman Mica, Congressmen Hultgren (R-Illinois), 
Nadler (D-New York), Grimm (R-New York), Cohen (D-Tennessee), 
and Edwards (D-Maryland) met with the Mayor of New York City, 
Michael Bloomberg, the Deputy Mayor of New York City, Cas 
Holloway, the Commissioner of the New York City Department of 
Transportation, Ms. Janette Sadik-Khan, and the President of 
the New York City Transit division of the Metropolitan 
Transportation Authority, Mr. Thomas F. Prendergast.
    Chairman Mica and his colleagues received briefings from 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Metropolitan 
Transportation Authority, and Deputy Mayor Cas Holloway. The 
group toured Staten Island including Cedar Grove Beach, 
Jefferson and Hyland Boulevard, Midland Beach, and Great Kills. 
In Manhattan, the group toured Whitehall Ferry Terminal, South 
Ferry Station, and the Montague Subway.

                          ENACTED LEGISLATION

    Title: To designate the United States Courthouse under 
construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as the 
John M. Roll United States Courthouse
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-2 (February 17, 2011)
    Bill Number: S. 188
    Summary: The law designated the United States Courthouse 
under construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as 
the John M. Roll United States Courthouse.
    Judge John M. Roll was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 
1947. After moving to Arizona, he studied at the University of 
Arizona, where he received both his undergraduate and law 
degrees. His distinguished legal career spanned nearly forty 
years and included prosecutorial positions at the city, county, 
and Federal levels. Roll began his career by serving as an 
assistant city attorney in Tucson, Arizona and later as deputy 
county attorney in Pima County, Arizona. He was later appointed 
a state judge and served on the Arizona Court of Appeals, where 
he became vice-chief judge. In 1991, Roll was nominated to the 
Federal bench by President George H.W. Bush. In 2006, he was 
elevated to chief judge of the United States District Court of 
Arizona.
    On January 8, 2011, Judge Roll was assassinated in a 
shooting massacre at an Arizona supermarket that left six 
people dead and thirteen wounded, including Congresswoman 
Gabrielle Giffords of Tucson.

    Title: To designate the Federal building and United States 
Courthouse located at 217 West King Street, Martinsburg, West 
Virginia, as the ``W. Craig Broadwater Federal Building and 
United States Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-11 (April 25, 2011)
    Bill Number: S. 307
    Summary: The law designates the Federal Building and the 
United States Courthouse located at 217 West King Street, 
Martinsburg, West Virginia, as the ``W. Craig Broadwater 
Federal Building and United States Courthouse.''
    Judge Broadwater was born on August 8, 1950, in Elk City, 
Oklahoma. He attended West Virginia University, where he earned 
his undergraduate and law degrees. He spent several years in 
private practice until he was appointed as a state circuit 
judge. In 1996, President Clinton nominated him to the Federal 
bench in the Northern District of West Virginia and he was 
confirmed by the Senate.
    In addition to his time as a United States District Court 
judge, Broadwater was a decorated military officer. After being 
commissioned in the Army in 1972, he began his career with a 
tour in Korea as an Army Military Intelligence Officer. 
Broadwater continued his service with the West Virginia 
National Guard, where he eventually rose to the rank of 
Brigadier General. His awards included the Defense Superior 
Service Medal and the Bronze Star.
    Judge Broadwater died on December 18, 2006 after a long 
battle with cancer. He is survived by his wife and three 
children.

    Title: Authorizing the Use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
Greater Washington Soap Box Derby
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 16 (Passed the House on May 
11, 2011)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 16 authorizes the use of the Capitol 
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.
    Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
National Peace Officers' Memorial Service.
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 46 (Passed the House on May 
11, 2011)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 264 permits the Grand Lodge of the 
Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary to sponsor a free 
public event, the 30th annual National Peace Officers' Memorial 
Service, on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 2011, to honor the 
law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty during 
2010.

    Title: To designate the United States Courthouse located at 
80 Lafayette Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, as the 
``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-31 (September 23, 2011)
    Bill Number: S. 846
    Summary: The law designated the United States Courthouse 
located at 80 Lafayette Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, as 
the ``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse.''
    Senator Bond was born in St. Louis, Missouri, on March 6, 
1939. He pursued his undergraduate degree at Princeton 
University and his law degree at the University of Virginia. 
After law school, he clerked for the Chief Judge of the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Atlanta, 
Georgia.
    After some time in private practice in Washington, District 
of Columbia, he moved back to Missouri, where he was elected as 
Missouri State Auditor in 1970. In 1972, he was elected 
Governor of Missouri at the age of 33, making him the youngest 
Governor in State history and first Republican governor to 
serve in almost three decades. Although he lost his reelection 
bid in 1976, he reclaimed the governorship in 1980 and served a 
second term. In 1986, he was elected to the United States 
Senate, where he served for 24 years until his retirement in 
2011. During his long tenure, he served on several committees 
and was Chairman of the Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship from 1995 to 2001.

    Title: Authorizing the Use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 67 (Passed the House on 
September 7, 2011)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 264 authorized the use of the Capitol 
Grounds for the 26th Annual District of Columbia Special 
Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run that will be held on 
September 30, 2011.

    Title: Designating room HVC 215 of the Capitol Visitor 
Center as the Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room''
    Bill Number: H. Res. 364 (Passed the House on December 1, 
2011)
    Summary: H. Res. 364 was introduced by Rep. Wasserman-
Schultz on July 21, 2011.
    This resolution would designate room HVC 215 of the Capitol 
Visitor Center as the ``Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room''. 
Gabriel Zimmerman served as Director for Community Outreach for 
Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. At approximately 
10:10 a.m. on January 8, 2011, a gunman attempted to 
assassinate Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Arizona), 
opening fire at her ``Congress on your Corner'' event in front 
of a Safeway supermarket in Tucson, Arizona. Gabriel Zimmerman 
and six others were killed, 13 others were critically wounded--
Congresswoman Giffords among them.
    Gabriel Zimmerman was a 1998 graduate of University High 
School in Tucson, Arizona, a 2002 graduate of the University of 
California at Santa Cruz, and a 2006 graduate of Arizona State 
University, where he received a Master's degree in social work. 
Prior to joining Congresswoman Gifford's staff, Zimmerman 
worked as a social worker assisting troubled youth. Gabriel 
Zimmerman began his Congressional career in January 2007 as 
Constituent Services Supervisor for then newly elected 
Congresswoman Giffords, a role in which he supervised a robust 
constituent services operation and worked directly with the 
people of Arizona's Eighth Congressional District. He was later 
promoted to Director of Community Outreach, where he organized 
hundreds of events to allow constituents to meet with the 
Congresswoman.
    Gabriel Zimmerman was the first Congressional staffer in 
history to be murdered in the performance of his official 
duties.

    Title: To designate the United States Courthouse at 222 
West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, as the ``James M. 
Fitzgerald United States Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-101 (March 14, 2012)
    Bill Number: S. 1710 (Companion bill, H.R. 3182 introduced 
on October 13, 2011)
    Summary: This legislation designates the United States 
Courthouse at 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, as the 
``James M. Fitzgerald United States Courthouse''. Judge James 
M. Fitzgerald had 47 years of experience as a judge both in the 
State of Alaska and on the Federal bench. He was one of the 
first judges appointed to the Superior Court in Alaska when 
Alaska became a state in 1959, and was later appointed to the 
Alaska Supreme Court in 1972. In 1974, President Ford appointed 
Judge Fitzgerald to the United States District Court for the 
District of Alaska where he remained until his retirement in 
2006. Prior to his service as a judge, he was an assistant 
United States attorney and upon moving to Alaska worked as the 
city attorney in Anchorage and as legal counsel to the Governor 
of Alaska. He also served as the first State Commissioner of 
Public Safety and helped organize the Alaska State Troopers.

    Title: Authorizing the Use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
Greater Washington Soap Box Derby
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 106 (Passed the House on 
May 7, 2012)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 106 authorized the use of the Capitol 
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby held on June 
16, 2012.

    Title: Authorizing the Use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
National Peace Officers' Memorial Service
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 117 (Passed the House on 
May 7, 2012)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 117 permitted the Grand Lodge of the 
Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary to sponsor a free 
public event, the 31st annual National Peace Officers' Memorial 
Service, on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 2012, to honor the 
law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty during 
2011.

    Title: Authorizing the Use of the Capitol Grounds for the 
District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run
    Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 118 (Passed the House on 
May 7, 2012)
    Summary: H. Con. Res. 118 authorized the use of the Capitol 
Grounds for the 27th Annual District of Columbia Special 
Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run held on June 1, 2012.

    Title: Brian A. Terry Memorial Act
    Public Law Number: 112-113 (May 15, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 2668
    Summary: H.R. 2668 was introduced by Congressman Darrell 
Issa (R-California) on July 27, 2011.
    This legislation would honor the sacrifice of Border Patrol 
Agent Brian A. Terry by designating the station of the United 
States Border Patrol located at 2136 South Naco Highway in 
Bisbee, Arizona, as the ``Brian A. Terry Border Patrol 
Station''.
    Prior to joining the Border Patrol, Agent Brian A. Terry 
proudly served his country with the United States Marine Corps 
and continued his service as a police officer with the cities 
of Ecorse and Lincoln Park, Michigan. Agent Terry was a member 
of the 699th Session of the Border Patrol Academy assigned to 
the Naco Border Patrol Station within the Tucson Sector.
    On December 14, 2010, Agent Brian A. Terry was conducting a 
Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC) operation in the area of 
``Peck Wells.'' At 11:15 p.m., near Rio Rico, Arizona, and 
about 15 miles north of Nogales, Arizona, Agent Terry and his 
team spotted a group of individuals approaching their position. 
Officials later found the suspects to be preying on illegal 
immigrants with the intent to rob them. Shortly thereafter, an 
encounter ensued and gunfire was exchanged that left Agent 
Terry mortally wounded by a bullet fired from an AK-47. Agent 
Terry succumbed to his injuries on December 15, 2010.

    Title: John F. Kennedy Center Reauthorization Act of 2012
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-131 (June 8, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 4097 (Passed the House on May 7, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 4097 was introduced by Chairman John Mica on 
February 28, 2012. This bill reauthorizes the John F. Kennedy 
Center Act. It also authorizes an expansion project for the 
south end of the facility with stipulations that it will be 
less than 100,000 square feet and will improve the existing 
accessibility and educational functions of the building. The 
project will use non-appropriated funds. The legislation 
authorizes $22.3 million for Maintenance, Repair, and Security 
as well as $13.6 million for capital projects for fiscal years 
2013 and 2014.

    Title: To designate the United States courthouse under 
construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort Pierce, 
Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States 
Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-180 (October 5, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 1791
    Summary: This bill designates the United States courthouse 
under construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort 
Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States 
Courthouse''
    Chief Justice Adams was born in 1899, and was raised on a 
farm in Walton County, Florida. After graduating from the 
University of Florida College of Law in 1921, he practiced law 
in Fort Pierce, Florida, from 1924 to 1938. He was then 
appointed as Circuit Court Judge for St. Lucie County. After 
Floridians adopted an amendment to add a seventh justice on the 
State Supreme Court in 1940, Governor Fred Cone appointed Chief 
Justice Adams to the newly created seat. Chief Justice Adams 
served on the Court from 1940 until 1951 and was Chief Justice 
from 1949 until 1951. He sat on the bench again from 1967 until 
1968.
    Outside of his judicial career, Chief Justice Adams was 
active in his community. In 1937, he served as President of the 
Florida State Elks Association. From 1937 and 1938, he served 
as the Vice Chairman of the State Welfare Board. Chief Justice 
Adams also devoted time to local business interests in St. 
Lucie County, including citrus groves and Bass Motors. He began 
a cattle ranch in 1937, which is still run by the Adams family. 
The ranch now encompasses over 65,000 acres in three counties.

    Title: To designate the new United States Courthouse in 
Buffalo, New York as the ``Robert H. Jackson United States 
Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-184 (October 5, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 3556
    Summary: Justice Jackson was born on February 13, 1892, in 
Pennsylvania, and was raised in Frewsburg, New York. He 
attended the Albany School of Law and was admitted to the New 
York Bar in 1913, and joined a law practice in Jamestown, New 
York. He later moved to practice in Buffalo where he also 
served as city corporation counsel.
    In 1936, Jackson became Assistant Attorney General under 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, heading the Antitrust 
Division. From 1938 to 1940, Jackson was nominated as the 
United States Solicitor General. In 1940, President Roosevelt 
nominated him to become United States Attorney General. In 
1941, President Roosevelt nominated him as an Associate Justice 
on the United States Supreme Court where he served until his 
death in 1954.

    Title: To designate the United States Courthouse located at 
709 West 9th Street in Juneau, Alaska, as the ``Robert 
Boochever United States Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-187 (October 5, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 4347
    Summary: Judge Boochever was born on October 2, 1917, in 
New York City, New York. He attended Cornell University where 
he received his B.A. and LL.D. During World War II, he served 
as a Captain in the United States Army Infantry. After the war, 
he was an assistant United States Attorney in Juneau, Alaska, 
from 1946-1947, and then in private practice until 1972. He 
served as a Justice of the Alaska Supreme Court from 1972 to 
1980, where he was Chief Justice from 1975-1978.
    In 1980, Judge Boochever was nominated by President Jimmy 
Carter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 
Circuit. He assumed senior status on 1986 and served until his 
death in 2011.

    Title: To designate the United States courthouse located at 
2601 2nd Avenue North, Billings, Montana, as the ``James F. 
Battin United States Courthouse''
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-
    Bill Number: S. 3311 (Passed the House on December 19, 
2012)
    Summary: James Franklin Battin (February 13, 1925-September 
27, 1996) was a Republican Congressman from the S of Montana, 
and later a United States Federal judge. Born in Wichita, 
Kansas, Battin moved with his parents to Montana in November 
1929. He served three years in the United States Navy before 
graduating in 1948 from Eastern Montana College in Billings.
    He received a law degree from George Washington University 
Law School in 1951, and was in private practice of law in the 
District of Columbia from 1951 to 1952, then in Billings from 
1953 to 1960. He was a deputy county attorney of Yellowstone 
County, Montana, from 1953 to 1955, then general counsel and 
secretary of the City-County Planning Board of Billings in 
1955. Also in 1955 he became an assistant city attorney of 
Billings, and was the city attorney from 1957 to 1958. He 
served as member of the Montana House of Representatives in 
1958 and 1959.
    Battin was elected as a Republican to the Eighty-seventh 
and to the four succeeding Congresses, and served from January 
3, 1961, until his resignation February 27, 1969, to become 
United States district judge. He was nominated by President 
Richard M. Nixon on February 20, 1969, to a seat on the United 
States District Court for the District of Montana vacated by 
William James Jameson. He was confirmed by the United States 
Senate on February 25, 1969, and received his commission on 
February 27, 1969.
    He became chief judge of the District on November 16, 1978, 
and served as chief judge until 1990. He assumed senior status 
on February 13, 1990, and served in that capacity until his 
death, in Billings on September 26, 1996.

                           OTHER LEGISLATION

    Title: To re-designate the Federal building and United 
States Courthouse located at 200 East Wall Street in Midland, 
Texas, as the ``George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush United 
States Courthouse and George Mahon Federal Building''
    Bill Number: H.R. 362 (Passed the House on May 2, 2011)
    Summary: H.R. 362 re-designates the Federal building and 
United States Courthouse located at 200 East Wall Street in 
Midland, Texas, as the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush 
United States Courthouse and George Mahon Federal Building.
    The former presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush 
have honorably served this Nation for many decades. President 
George H.W. Bush dedicated his life to public service. His 
public service began when he was just 18 and enlisted in 
military. He became the youngest pilot in the Navy when he 
earned his wings and flew 58 combat missions, receiving the 
Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery in action after getting 
shot down by anti-aircraft fire.
    Later, he was elected to Congress as a representative from 
the State of Texas and served in this chamber for two terms. 
Subsequently, he served in various other public service 
positions critical to the Nation, including as Ambassador to 
the United Nations, as Chief of the United States Liaison 
Office in China, and as Director of the Central Intelligence 
Agency. He was later elected Vice President in 1982 and stood 
by President Ronald Reagan's side for eight years, contributing 
to the policies that brought the Cold War to an end. In 1988, 
he was elected the 41st President of the United States. During 
his term in office, he skillfully navigated the diplomacy with 
new Nations created following the breakup of the Soviet Union 
and helped to overthrow and bring to justice the corrupt Manuel 
Noriega regime in Panama. In February, 2011, President George 
H.W. Bush was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by 
President Barack Obama. This award is the highest civilian 
honor given for ``an especially meritorious contribution to the 
security or national interests of the United States, world 
peace, cultural, or other significant public or private 
endeavors.''
    In 2000, his son, George W. Bush, followed in his footsteps 
when he was elected the 43rd President of the United States, 
after serving six years as the Governor of Texas. President 
George W. Bush led our Nation in response to the worst 
terrorist attack on our soil. He helped to unite the Nation 
after the September 11th terrorist attacks and, under his 
leadership, led the reforms of our intelligence and security 
capabilities to better counter this unconventional threat. 
During his two terms, he effectuated the overthrow of a 
dictator in Iraq and removed the Taliban from power in 
Afghanistan, upsetting a key staging ground for Al-Qaida and 
bringing democracy to an oppressed country.
    See S. 3687 for further action.

    Title: To direct the Administrator of General Services to 
transfer administrative jurisdiction, custody, and control of 
the building located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, in the 
District of Columbia, to the National Gallery of Art, and for 
other purposes
    Bill Number: H.R. 690 (Ordered reported on February 16, 
2011)
    Summary: H.R. 690, the Federal Trade Commission and 
National Gallery of Art Facility Consolidation, Savings, and 
Efficiency Act of 2011, requires the Administrator of General 
Services Administration (GSA), not later than December 31, 
2014, to transfer administrative jurisdiction, custody, and 
control of the building located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 
in Washington, District of Columbia, to the National Gallery of 
Art (NGA), and to name such building as the ``North Building of 
the National Gallery of Art''. The legislation requires the 
National Gallery of Art to pay the costs of remodeling, 
renovating, or reconstructing such building. The Administrator 
of GSA also must relocate the offices of the Federal Trade 
Commission (FTC) to other modernized buildings in Washington, 
District of Columbia, that are owned by the Federal government.
    H.R. 690 saves the taxpayers an estimated $300 million in 
avoided renovation and lease costs of the FTC and NGA. 
Additional benefits include $200 million in non-taxpayer 
renovations of the Apex Building by the NGA. The Apex building 
will be utilized more efficiently by the NGA, as currently only 
a little more than half of the facility's 306,000 square feet 
is usable for FTC operations.

    Title: Committee Resolution--To reduce facility costs by 
consolidating National Gallery of Art and Federal Trade 
Commission operations in the District of Columbia
    Date: February 16, 2011 (Approved by Full Committee)
    Summary: Expressed the Committee's view that the GSA shall 
transfer administrative jurisdiction and custody and control of 
the building located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 
Washington, District of Columbia, to the National Gallery of 
Art and relocate the Federal Trade Commission, currently 
located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, District of 
Columbia.

    Title: The National Women's History Museum and Federal 
Facilities Consolidation and Efficiency Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2844 (Ordered reported to the House on 
September 8, 2011)
    Summary: H.R. 2844 was introduced by Committee Chairman 
John Mica on September 7, 2011.
    The legislation directs the Administrator of General 
Services (GSA) to convey, by quitclaim deed, to the National 
Women's History Museum, Inc. (the Museum) specified property 
(commonly known as the ``Cotton Annex'' site) in the District 
of Columbia, on terms which the Administrator deems 
appropriate. It requires the purchase price for the property to 
be: (1) its market value based on its highest and best use, as 
determined by an independent appraisal performed under the 
assumption that the property does not contain any hazardous 
substances, waste, or pollutants requiring a response under 
applicable environmental laws; and (2) paid into the Federal 
Buildings Fund. It requires the property to be dedicated for 
use as a site for a National Women's History Museum for a 99-
year period and prohibits using Federal funds to purchase the 
property or design and construct any facility on such property.
    The bill also directs the Administrator, not later than 
December 31, 2012, to transfer administrative jurisdiction, 
custody, and control of the building located at 600 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, in the District of Columbia, to the 
National Gallery of Art and to name such building as the 
``North Building of the National Gallery of Art''. It requires 
the National Gallery of Art to pay the costs of remodeling, 
renovating, or reconstructing such building and prohibits the 
use of appropriated funds for the initial costs of such 
activities. It directs the Administrator to relocate the 
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) employees and operations housed 
in such building to specified space in the leased building 
known as the Constitution Center located at 400 7th Street, SE, 
in Washington, District of Columbia.

    Title: Civilian Property Realignment Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 1734 (Passed the House on February 7, 
2012)
    Summary: H.R. 1734 was introduced by Congressman Jeff 
Denham (R-California) on May 4, 2011. The legislation would 
establish a framework through which a board or commission would 
independently review Federal properties and make 
recommendations for consolidations, co-locations, 
redevelopment, selling or other actions to minimize costs and 
produce savings for the taxpayer. OMB estimates that the 
proposal could save taxpayers more than $15 billion.

    Title: FEMA Reauthorization Act of 2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 2903 (Passed the House on September 19, 
2012)
    Summary: H.R. 2903 reauthorizes the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the Urban Search and Rescue System 
(US&RS), and the Emergency Management Assistance Compact Grants 
(EMAC) at current year levels.
    H.R. 2903 incorporates key reforms to the disaster 
assistance process that would speed up recovery following a 
disaster and lower costs, including making permanent FEMA's 
debris removal pilot program and establishing a new Public 
Assistance pilot program. Additionally, H.R. 2903 provides a 
framework for FEMA's upgrade of its old Emergency Alert System 
(EAS) to the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System 
(IPAWS). The language was developed in response to problems 
identified by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as 
well as key stakeholders who are an integral part of ensuring 
the development of IPAWS is successful, including State and 
local emergency managers, broadcasters, and the wireless 
industry.

    Title: To designate the United States Courthouse at 100 
North Church Street in Las Cruces, New Mexico as the ``Edwin L. 
Mechem United States Courthouse''
    Bill Number: H.R. 3742 (Passed the House on July 23, 2012)
    Summary: Judge Edwin Mechem was born on July 2, 1912, in 
Alamogordo, New Mexico. After attending schools in New Mexico, 
he transferred to the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville 
where he received a law degree. Mechem returned to New Mexico 
to practice in Las Cruces and Albuquerque. From 1942-1945, he 
served as an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigations, 
and from 1947 to 1948 he served as a member of the New Mexico 
House of Representatives. Mechem was elected Governor of New 
Mexico in 1950 and 1952, and 1956 and 1960. He also served as a 
United States Senator from 1962 to 1964. In 1970, he was 
appointed by President Richard Nixon as a Federal judge for the 
United States District Court for the District of New Mexico. He 
served from 1970-1982 and took senior status from 1982 until 
his death in 2002.

    Title: To designate the Federal building currently known as 
Federal Office Building 8, as ``Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Federal 
Building''
    Bill Number: H.R. 6604 (Passed the House on November 28, 
2012)
    Summary: Thomas P. (``Tip'') O'Neill was appointed to the 
Congressional seat vacated by Senator-elect John F. Kennedy in 
1952. During his second term in the House, O'Neill was selected 
to the House Rules Committee. O'Neill served in the House of 
Representatives for 34 years representing two C in 
Massachusetts. In 1971 he was appointed Majority Whip, and in 
1973 he was elected Majority Leader. Four years later, in 1977, 
he became Speaker of the House of Representatives. He served as 
Speaker of the House from 1977 until his retirement in 1987, 
making him the second longest-serving Speaker in history after 
Sam Rayburn. After retiring from Congress in 1987, O'Neill 
published his autobiography, Man of the House. On November 18, 
1991, O'Neill was presented with the Presidential Medal of 
Freedom by President George H. W. Bush.
    See S. 3687 for further action.

                      LEASE PROSPECTUSES APPROVED

    On March 8, 2012, the Committee approved 11 General 
Services Administration (GSA) lease resolutions. They included 
the Department of Interior--National Park Service, the Federal 
Communications Commission, the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
the Department of Health and Human Services- Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of 
Health, the Department of State- United States Agency for 
International Development, the National Science Foundation, the 
Office of Director of National Intelligence, the Department of 
Labor, the Food and Drug Administration, and the United States 
Coast Guard.
    The Committee approved resolutions represent a $19,493,319 
reduction in annual lease payments and $316,770,420 total 
reduction over the lease terms from the prospectuses submitted 
by the Administration or current leases.
    Department of Interior--National Park Service--Washington, 
DC--PDC-02-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 158,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $7,742,000
    Federal Communications Commission--Washington, DC--PDC-03-
WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 64,745
          Lease Term: 10 years
          Annual Rent: $3,172,505
    Department of Veterans Affairs--Washington, DC--PDC-01-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 181,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $8,507,000
    Department of Health and Human Services--CDC--Suburban 
Maryland--PMD-01-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 104,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $3,536,000
    National Institutes of Health--Suburban Maryland--PMD-02-
WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 352,717
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $11,992,378
    Department of State-International Development--Washington, 
DC--PDC-12-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 392,302
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $19,222,798
    National Science Foundation--Northern Virginia--PVA-01-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 667,759
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $24,200,000
    Office of Director of National Intelligence--Northern 
Virginia--PVA-09-WA12
          Rentable Square Feet: 183,000
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $7,137,000
    Department of Labor--Northern Virginia--PVA-02-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 100,000
          Lease Term: 3 years
          Annual Rent: $3,800,000
    Food and Drug Administration--Suburban Maryland--PMD-07-
WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 101,000
          Lease Term: 3 years
          Annual Rent: $3,434,000
    U.S. Coast Guard--Corpus Christi, TX--PTX-07-CC12
          Rentable Square Feet: 180,000
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $3,530,200
    On July 26, 2012, the Committee approved 13 General 
Services Administration (GSA) lease resolutions. They included 
the Department of Energy--National Nuclear Security 
Administration, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of 
Investigations, Department of Defense-Defense Security 
Cooperation Agency, General Services Administration, Bureau of 
Public Debt, Department of Homeland Security, Internal Revenue 
Service, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of 
Treasury, and Department of Defense-United States Joint Forces 
Command. The Committee also approved the acquisition of a 
building currently under lease to the Federal government at 
4700 River Road in Riverdale, Maryland.
    The Committee approved resolutions represent an $11,999,537 
reduction in annual lease payments and $186,468,875 total 
reduction over the lease terms from the prospectuses submitted 
by the Administration or current leases. The Committee approved 
acquisition was purchased at $14,000,000 below fair market 
value and will provide $11,458,000 in annual lease savings.
    Department of Energy--National Nuclear Security 
Administration--Washington, D.C.--PDC-04-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 89,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $4,361,000
    Department of Justice--Washington, D.C.--PDC-06-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 292,173
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $14,316,477
    Federal Bureau of Investigations--Atlanta, GA--PGA-01-AT11
          Rentable Square Feet: 191,156
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $5,925,836
    Department of Defense--Defense Security Cooperation 
Agency--Arlington, VA--PVA-06-WA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 87,000
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $3,306,000
    General Services Administration--Philadelphia, PA--PPA-01-
PH11
          Rentable Square Feet: 172,000
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $5,848,000
    Bureau of Public Debt--Parkersburg, West Virginia--PWV-01-
PA11
          Rentable Square Feet: 284,209
          Lease Term: 20 years
          Annual Rent: $5,527,865
    Department of Homeland Security--Phoenix, AZ--PAZ-01-PH12
          Rentable Square Feet: 131,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $5,305,500
    Department of Homeland Security--Dallas, TX--PTX-02-DA12
          Rentable Square Feet: 195,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $4,972,500
    Department of Homeland Security--Houston, TX--PTX-02-HO12
          Rentable Square Feet: 144,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $4,104,000
    Internal Revenue Service--Covington, KY--PKY-01-C012
          Rentable Square Feet: 414,000
          Lease Term: 10 years
          Annual Rent: $9,108,000
    Consumer Product Safety Commission--Bethesda, MD--PMD-04-
WA12
          Rentable Square Feet: 124,000
          Lease Term: 15 years
          Annual Rent: $4,340,000
    Department of Treasury--Hyattsville, MD--PMD-05-WA12
          Rentable Square Feet: 327,000
          Lease Term: 5 years
          Annual Rent: $8,502,000
    Department of Defense--United States Joint Forces Command--
Suffolk, VA--PVA-01-SU12
          Rentable Square Feet: 320,825
          Lease Term: 5 years
          Annual Rent: $5,011,287
    Riverdale, MD--PUR-0001-VA13
          Fair Market Value of Building: $45,000,000
          Below Market Purchase Option: $31,000,000

                  Subcommittee on Highways and Transit

    To date, the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, chaired 
by Congressman John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-Tennessee), with 
Congressman Peter A. DeFazio (D-Oregon) serving as Ranking 
Member, held six Subcommittee hearings and six Full Committee 
hearing (64 witnesses and approximately 14 hours), covering 
numerous issues within the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Accelerating the Project Delivery Process: 
Eliminating Bureaucratic Red Tape and Making Every Dollar Count
    Date: February 15, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the 
existing laws and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to accelerate the delivery process for surface 
transportation projects. The hearing was part of the 
Subcommittee's efforts to reauthorize Federal surface 
transportation programs under Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 
(SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011.
    Summary: Limited financial resources for transportation 
infrastructure can be more effectively utilized by speeding up 
the process for project approval. According to the ``Highway 
Planning and Project Development Process'' timeline put 
together by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal 
project delivery process can take up to 15 years from planning 
through construction. An analysis conducted by the National 
Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Committee found that 
a $500 million project that took 14 years to complete would see 
its cost double due to the impact of delays and inflation.
    The Subcommittee heard testimony from Victor Mendez, 
Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 
Debra L. Miller, Secretary of the Kansas Department of 
Transportation (DOT) on behalf of the American Association of 
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Will 
Kempton, Chief Executive Officer of the Orange County 
Transportation Authority, Tom Margro, Chief Executive Officer 
of the Transportation Corridor Agencies, and Michael Replogle, 
Global Policy Director and Founder of the Institute for 
Transportation and Development Policy.
    The Subcommittee heard testimony specifically relating to 
streamlining and cutting red tape that so often hinders the 
cost-effectiveness of surface transportation projects. The 
Subcommittee discussed with the witnesses the improvements that 
could be made to existing rules and regulations governing 
project delivery in order to expedite the delivery process for 
all projects and reduce the cost of transportation projects. As 
the reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation 
programs moves forward, the Subcommittee will look at potential 
reforms to the project delivery process.

    Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs
    Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
    Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs. 
These hearings were part of the Subcommittee's effort to 
reauthorize Federal surface transportation programs under Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 
2009, but was extended through September 30, 2011.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony regarding 
views and proposals on reauthorization of the Federal surface 
transportation programs from the surface transportation 
community, including highways, transit, highway safety and 
motor carrier safety interests. The witnesses offered ideas and 
suggestions for improving and reforming the Nation's surface 
transportation programs.
    The Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) had a 
balance of $22.55 billion at the end of fiscal year 2000. The 
balance dropped to $13 billion by the expiration of TEA 21 the 
previous six-year surface transportation authorization at the 
end of fiscal year 2003. In September 2008, the balance in the 
Highway Account decreased to a level requiring Congress to 
transfer $8 billion into the HTF from the General Fund. 
Subsequent General Fund transfers to the HTF in 2009 and 2010 
totaled $26.5 billion. Current projections show the cash 
balance in the Highway Account of the HTF will be depleted 
sometime in 2013 and the Mass Transit Account will be depleted 
sometime in 2014.
    With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses 
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private 
investment in financing surface transportation projects, 
methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal 
government and states find ways to do more with less and better 
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also 
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery 
process and explored what improvements could be made to 
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and 
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
    DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative 
purposes or are no longer needed. The Subcommittee discussed 
with the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or 
eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Subcommittee 
will study performance management approaches that increase the 
accountability and transparency of Federal surface 
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their 
effectiveness.

    Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform 
the Nation's Surface transportation Programs
    Date: April 5, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on 
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal 
surface transportation programs. This hearing was part of the 
Subcommittee's effort to reauthorize Federal surface 
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on 
September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30, 
2011.
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from Members 
of Congress representing Ohio, California, Kentucky, New York, 
Texas, Oregon, North Carolina, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and 
Pennsylvania who presented ideas and policy proposals for 
improving and reforming the Nation's surface transportation 
programs.
    Compounding the state, local, and private sector funding 
and financing shortfalls severely hinders the ability to 
adequately finance surface transportation programs. Members 
addressed the critical issue of Federal surface transportation 
funding and financing shortfalls the Nation faces. With the 
Highway Trust Fund (HTF) expected to be depleted in 2013, 
Members provided the Subcommittee with innovative financing 
tool proposals and ideas for private investment in financing 
surface transportation projects; methods the Subcommittee will 
explore to help the Federal government and states find ways to 
do more with less and better leverage existing revenue sources. 
The Subcommittee also looked at potential reforms to the 
project delivery process by exploring what improvements could 
be made to existing rules and regulations governing project 
delivery in order to expedite the delivery process for all 
projects and reduce the cost of transportation projects.
    Members provided the Subcommittee with specific policy 
proposals that would streamline the project delivery process, 
develop a programmatic reform agenda, propose innovative 
financing solutions, and create a system of performance 
standards that increase transparency and accountability of 
Federal surface transportation funds. With the HTF expected to 
be depleted in 2013, Members provided the Subcommittee with 
innovative financing tools and private investment in financing 
surface transportation projects they supported and methods the 
Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal government and 
states find ways to do more with less and better leverage 
existing revenue sources.

    Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and 
More Red Tape
    Date: October 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's 
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the 
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). The hearing was part of 
the Subcommittee's effort to reauthorize Federal surface 
transportation programs under Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 
(SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 2009, but is 
extended through March 31, 2012.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard from the Secretary of the 
Oklahoma Department of Transportation, a Senior Research Fellow 
from the Heritage Foundation, a Civil Engineer and 
Transportation Economist from the Independent Institute, a 
former member of the National Surface Transportation 
Infrastructure Financing Commission, and the Director of Public 
Policy from the Progressive Policy Institute. The witnesses 
offered ideas and suggestions on improvements, as well as 
alternatives, to the national infrastructure bank proposal 
offered by the Obama Administration, including suggestions to 
better utilize both the Transportation Infrastructure Finance 
and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program and state infrastructure 
banks (SIBs).
    On September 8, 2011, President Obama transmitted to 
Congress the American Jobs Act of 2011. President Obama's 
proposal would create the American Infrastructure Financing 
Authority (AIFA), capitalized with $10 billion, to leverage 
private and public capital and to invest in a broad range of 
infrastructure projects of national and regional significance. 
The AIFA would be run by a board of directors consisting of 
seven voting members selected by the President and confirmed by 
the Senate. The Majority Leader of the Senate, the Minority 
Leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the Minority Leader of the House of 
Representatives would each recommend one person to the 
President to be nominated to the board. The President would 
select the other three board nominees on his own. Only four of 
the board members could be from the same political party.
    The AIFA would provide loans or loan guarantees to 
transportation infrastructure projects on highways, bridges, 
transit, airports, ports, inland waterways, and rail systems 
(including high-speed rail); water infrastructure projects at 
wastewater treatment facilities, storm water management 
systems, solid waste disposal facilities, drinking water 
treatment facilities, dams and levees; and energy 
infrastructure projects for pollution reduced energy 
generation, transmission and distribution, storage, and energy 
efficiency enhancements for buildings (public and commercial). 
In the selection of projects, the board of director of AIFA 
would give consideration to the economic, financial, technical, 
environmental, public benefits and cost of each infrastructure 
project under consideration and would prioritize those projects 
based on their contribution to regional or national economic 
growth, value to taxpayers, demonstration of a clear and 
significant public benefit, job creation, and environmental 
concerns.
    The President's proposal is similar to the existing TIFIA 
program, which supplements traditional surface transportation 
funding and financing methods by providing Federal credit 
assistance to surface transportation projects of regional and 
national significance. The President's proposal is also similar 
to state infrastructure banks. SIBs are revolving fund 
mechanisms that allow states to finance highway, transit, and 
rail projects through loans and credit enhancements by 
utilizing their Federal surface transportation funds.
    According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 
TIFIA has provided $8.4 billion in credit assistance to 24 
projects totaling over $31 billion in total investment. In 
fiscal year 2011, 34 projects submitted letters of interest, 
seeking $14 billion in TIFIA loans and in fiscal year 2010, 39 
projects submitted letters of interest seeking $12 billion in 
TIFIA loans. In both years the program had the capacity to 
issue approximately $1 billion in loans.
    According to FHWA, since the creation of the program in 
1995, a total of $661 million in Federal funds have been used 
to capitalize SIBs. SIBs have made $6.25 billion in loan 
agreements over the 16 years since they were authorized--a 1 to 
9.45 ratio. Each dollar of Federal funds used to capitalize 
SIBs, combined with state funds and bonds issued against these 
funds, has resulted in 9.45 times the credit assistance 
compared to the original Federal capitalization.

    Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of DOT's Truck and Bus 
Safety Program
    Date: September 13, 2012
    Purpose: Receive testimony from the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration (FMCSA), the trucking and bus industry, 
enforcement officials, and a safety advocate on the 
Administration's Compliance, Safety, Accountability program 
(CSA).
    Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony on FMCSA's new 
motor carrier safety enforcement and compliance program and 
issues related to its implementation.
    In December 2010, FMCSA implemented the CSA program. The 
main component of CSA is the Safety Measurement System (SMS) 
that analyzes safety violations from inspections and crash data 
to identify high-risk truck and bus companies (motor carriers) 
for compliance reviews. The SMS uses seven safety improvement 
categories called Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement 
Categories (BASICs) to examine a carrier's on-road performance 
and potential crash risk. The BASICs are Unsafe Driving, 
Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service), Driver Fitness, Controlled 
Substances/Alcohol, Vehicle Maintenance, Cargo-Related and 
Crash Indicator.
    Data from inspections and crash reports are classified into 
a BASIC where the SMS assigns a severity weight (including time 
weight) which is based on the perceived severity of the 
violation. Severity weights are scaled from one to ten, where 
one is the lowest crash risk and ten is the highest crash risk. 
These severity weights are then normalized to account for a 
carrier's power units, vehicle miles traveled, and inspections. 
Based on a comparison of a motor carrier's BASIC score to other 
carriers with a similar number of safety events, a rank and 
percentile are assigned. SMS is available on the Internet to 
the general public.
    The trucking industry has raised concerns over the 
inclusion of crash data that may not be attributable to a 
commercial motor vehicle driver. Currently, crash data is 
included in the BASIC score regardless of who is at fault for 
the crash. If a motor carrier is involved in a crash where a 
passenger vehicle is found to have caused the accident, the 
crash will still be counted ``against'' the motor carrier in 
their BASIC score. FMCSA states that there is a concern 
regarding the consistency of police crash reports and how fault 
is assessed. However, no progress has been made by FMCSA to 
address this issue. Members of the Subcommittee used the 
hearing to address their concerns regarding the effectiveness 
of the program and request the Administrator consider changes 
that could promote greater effectiveness.

                              LEGISLATION

    Title: The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-5 (March 4, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 662
    Summary: The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011 
(STEA) extends, through September 30, 2011, the authority for 
Federal surface transportation programs originally authorized 
under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, 
Transportation Equity Act--a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that 
otherwise would have expired on or ceased to apply after March 
4, 2011.
    STEA also authorized funding for the Federal highway, 
transit, and highway safety programs for fiscal year 2011. 
Rather than authorizing additional funding for highway projects 
earmarked in SAFETEA-LU, STEA provides that funding to the 
states and allows them to fund projects that they choose. STEA 
authorizes the Federal Transit Administration to distribute 
funding provided for transit earmarks in SAFETEA-LU through a 
competitive process.
    STEA also extends the authority to expend funds from the 
Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating 
Trust Fund to October 1, 2011.

    Title: Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension 
Act of 2011
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-30 (September 16, 2011)
    Bill Number: H.R. 2887
    Summary: The Surface and Air Transportation Programs 
Extension Act of 2011 extends, through March 31, 2012, the 
authority for Federal surface transportation programs 
originally authorized under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient, Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users 
(SAFETEA-LU) that otherwise would have expired on or ceased to 
apply after September 30, 2011. The bill also authorized 
funding for the Federal highway, transit, and highway safety 
programs for the first half of fiscal year 2012.
    The Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act 
of 2011 also extends the authority to expend funds from the 
Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating 
Trust Fund to April 1, 2012.

    Title: Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-102 (March 30, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 4281
    Summary: The Surface Transportation Act of 2012 extends, 
through June 30, 2012, the authority for Federal surface 
transportation programs originally authorized under the Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act--A 
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that otherwise would have expired 
on or ceased to apply after March 31, 2012. The bill also 
authorized funding for the Federal highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs for the third quarter of fiscal year 
2012.
    The Surface Transportation Act of 2012 also extends the 
authority to expend funds from the Highway Trust Fund and the 
Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund to July 1, 2012.

    Title: American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 7 (Reported to the House on February 13, 
2012)
    Summary: This five year, $260 billion bill authorizes 
funding at current levels for Federal-aid highway, public 
transportation, and highway and motor carrier safety programs 
through fiscal year 2016. In addition to authorizing funds, 
this bill makes significant programmatic reforms by reducing 
bureaucratic delay, enhancing the project delivery process, 
reforming surface transportation programs, increasing safety, 
and better leveraging existing resources in order to enhance 
productivity and create more jobs for the American people. The 
new Federal Highway Program created by this bill focuses 
primarily on the National Highway System, dedicating more than 
half of the funding provided for the program to funding 
projects on the National Highway System.
    Currently, there are over 100 Federal surface 
transportation programs, dozens of which were created over the 
last 50 years to address issues beyond the Federal government's 
original programmatic goals. Many of these programs are 
duplicative or do not serve a national interest, but add to the 
massive Federal bureaucracy. This bill reforms surface 
transportation programs by consolidating or eliminating 
approximately 70 programs that are duplicative or do not serve 
a Federal purpose. Rather than applying spending cuts evenly 
across all existing programs, this bill identifies programs 
that serve similar purposes and consolidates or eliminates 
them. Furthermore, this bill lifts the mandate that states 
spend highway funding on non-highway activities. States will be 
permitted to fund such activities if they choose, but they will 
be provided the flexibility to identify and address their most 
critical infrastructure needs.
    Additionally, H.R. 7 increases the value of infrastructure 
resources by better leveraging existing Federal funds and 
adopting policies that attract private sector investment. This 
bill builds upon and improves the successful Transportation 
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program 
by dedicating $1 billion a year towards the program to provide 
low interest loans to fund transportation projects. Providing 
additional funding for TIFIA will help meet demand for credit 
assistance for transportation projects and enable increased 
leveraging of Highway Trust Fund dollars with state, local, and 
private-sector funding. Under this initiative, existing lanes 
on the Interstate Highway System remain toll-free; however, 
states will have the ability to toll new capacity on the 
Interstate System. States will also have greater flexibility to 
toll non-Interstate highways. Moreover, H.R. 7 rewards states 
that create and capitalize State Infrastructure Banks to 
provide loans for transportation projects at the state and 
local level. This bill increases the percentage of Federal 
highway funding that a state can dedicate to a State 
Infrastructure Bank from 10 percent to 15 percent and provides 
states a specific amount of funding that can only be used to 
fund State Infrastructure Banks.
    Government bureaucracy and red tape in the approval and 
permitting process needlessly delay infrastructure projects. 
According to the Federal Highway Administration, highway 
projects can take up to 15 years to complete. While state and 
local governments deal with the seemingly endless review 
process, transportation capacity and safety improvements stall, 
construction costs escalate, and job creation remains on hold. 
H.R. 7 streamlines and condenses the project review process by 
cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing Federal agencies to 
review transportation projects concurrently, setting hard 
deadlines for Federal agencies to approve projects, and 
delegating more decision making authority to states.
    H.R. 7 directs a strong focus towards giving states more 
flexibility and holding them accountable through strict 
performance measures and transparency requirements. States will 
maintain the opportunity to fund the broad range of eligible 
projects under the current Surface Transportation and 
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality programs, but they will 
not be required to spend a specific amount of funding on 
specific types of projects, such as transportation museums or 
landscaping. More than 90 percent of Federal Highway Program 
funding will be distributed through formula programs to state 
departments of transportation, allowing state and local 
transportation officials to prioritize projects.

    Title: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act 
(MAP-21)
    Public Law Number: 112-141 (July 6, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 4348
    Summary: The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century 
Act (MAP-21) reauthorizes Federal highway, transit and highway 
safety programs at current funding levels through the end of 
fiscal year 2014. The legislation includes significant reforms 
to cut Federal red tape and bureaucracy, consolidate and 
eliminate duplicative programs or programs which are not in the 
Federal interest, and ensure that states have more flexibility 
to focus funding on their most critical needs. The Act contains 
no earmarks and does not increase spending. Highlights of the 
measure include:
    Streamlining the Project Delivery Process: Completing a 
major highway project can take 15 years, but only a fraction of 
that time involves actual construction. While projects navigate 
the approval process, construction costs escalate. MAP-21 
streamlines the project approval process, adding much needed 
common sense and efficiency. Changes in MAP-21 will allow for a 
faster and simplified approval process (Categorical Exclusions) 
for projects that do not significantly impact the environment. 
Beginning in 2013, DOT will be required to approve the 
following types of projects under this simplified process: 
projects with less than $5 million in Federal highway funding, 
projects within the existing highway right-of-way, and projects 
being rebuilt after a disaster.
    Program Reform & Consolidation: Since the creation of the 
Highway Trust Fund and the core highway and bridge programs, 
numerous additional Federal programs have been created, 
diluting the focus of the Trust Fund. Currently there are well 
over 100 programs. In the last four years, $35 billion in 
General Fund transfers have been necessary to maintain Highway 
Trust Fund solvency. MAP-21 consolidates and eliminates 
programs, and better focuses limited gas tax revenues on 
critical needs.
    Improves Safety: MAP-21 includes provisions to strengthen 
highway and motor carrier safety programs. The legislation 
consolidates the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
incentive grant programs, and increases funding flexibility for 
states that qualify for safety incentive grants. The measure 
also improves motor carrier safety in a balanced fashion that 
does not over-regulate the industry, as the initial Senate 
proposal would have done.
    TIFIA Reforms: MAP-21 increases funding for the 
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act 
(TIFIA) loan program from $122 million a year to $1 billion a 
year. This significant increase in funding and a change in law 
to allow a TIFIA loan to account for 49 percent of the project 
costs (previously only 33 percent) will allow DOT to issue 
about $17 billion in loans over the next two years. State 
governments, local governments, toll authorities, and public 
private partnerships are eligible to apply for TIFIA loans. 
Loans are issued based on the creditworthiness of the project 
and can be used to fund highway, bridge, transit, and other 
surface transportation projects.
    Tolling: MAP-21 ensures that existing toll-free lanes on 
Interstate highways remain toll-free. If a lane on the 
Interstate is toll-free today it will remain toll-free. States 
will only be allowed to toll new lanes on Interstate highways. 
The revenue from those tolls must first go to construction, 
operation and maintenance of the highway, and debt service 
associated with the project before the revenue can be used for 
other highway and bridge projects.
    Hazmat Safety: MAP-21 reauthorizes the DOT's hazardous 
materials safety programs, secures reforms to the hazmat 
special permits and approvals program, and removes burdensome 
statutory changes. The legislation also bans proposed wetlines 
regulation until the Government Accountability Office can 
analyze costs and benefits.

    Title: Temporary Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
2012
    Public Law Number: P.L. 112-140 (June 29, 2012)
    Bill Number: H.R. 6064
    Summary: The Temporary Surface Transportation Extension Act 
of 2012 extends, through July 6, 2012, the authority for 
Federal surface transportation programs originally authorized 
under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, 
Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that 
otherwise would have expired on or ceased to apply after June 
30, 2012. The bill also authorized funding for the Federal 
highway, transit, and highway safety programs through July 6, 
2012, to allow time for enrollment of H.R. 4348, which 
reauthorizes these programs through fiscal year 2014. In 
addition, the bill extends the authority to expend funds from 
the Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and 
Boating Trust Fund to July 6, 2012.

     Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

    To date, the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and 
Hazardous Materials, chaired by Congressman Bill Shuster (R-
Pennsylvania), with Congresswoman Corrine Brown (D-Florida) 
serving as Ranking Member, has held five hearings on issues 
related to rail and hazardous materials, one roundtable 
discussion on pipeline safety issues, and one pipeline-related 
hearing. Additionally, the Full Committee held 11 rail-related 
hearings and one roundtable discussion during this period. The 
Subcommittee heard from 97 witnesses, including the 53 
witnesses from the 11 full Committee hearings under its 
jurisdiction.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Sitting on our Assets: Rehabilitating and Improving 
our Nation's Rail Infrastructure
    Date: February 17, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Railroad Rehabilitation 
and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, highlighting its 
importance in helping railroads, states and other public 
authorities to finance the development of railroad 
infrastructure, which in turn creates new jobs and drives 
economic benefits.
    Summary: Testimony highlighted RRIF loan applicants' 
experiences with the RRIF program, and recommended ways to 
improve the Department of Transportation's (DOT) management of 
the program. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the Deputy 
Secretary of DOT, short line and commuter railroad 
representatives, and two rail industry financial advisors. 
Discussions centered on how to make the RRIF program more 
effective and widely utilized, and to speed up the loan process 
at DOT.
    Railroad infrastructure is crucial to our Nation's economic 
growth and international competitiveness. The RRIF program 
provides low-interest Federal loans and loan guarantees to 
finance further development of railroad infrastructure. RRIF 
loans are available to railroads, rail freight shippers, state 
and local governments, and government-sponsored authorities, 
and are used to make critical infrastructure improvements, 
refinance debt, or develop new facilities.
    Despite these clear advantages of the RIFF loan program, 
loan evaluations are often a long process that impedes 
infrastructure improvements to our Nation's railways. The 
bureaucratic red tape coupled with the environmental protection 
issues, changes in scope, limited personnel on the part of 
short line railroads, and the intrinsic complexity of some 
proposals make the RIFF application process slow and 
burdensome. The Subcommittee proposed the feasibility of 
removing some of these impediments, particularly within the 
DOT, to make the RRIF loan program more effective and popular.
    On March 28, 2011, the Subcommittee held a bipartisan, 
staff-level workshop with staff from DOT, rail industry 
representatives, national advocacy organizations, and rail 
industry financial advisors to more fully discuss proposed 
changes and improvements to the RRIF program, for possible 
inclusion in the upcoming surface transportation 
reauthorization bill.

    Title: Roundtable--Pipeline Safety
    Date: March 7, 2011
    Purpose: Discussed pipeline safety issues with elected 
officials, Federal and state pipeline safety regulators, 
industry stakeholders, and safety advocates discussion in King 
of Prussia, Pennsylvania, in response to two pipeline incidents 
in Pennsylvania in early 2011, and to gather information as 
part of the Subcommittee's efforts to reauthorize the Federal 
pipeline safety programs which expired on September 30, 2010.
    Summary: Participating in the discussion were Members of 
the Pennsylvania Congressional delegation, Alan Mayberry, 
Deputy Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety for the 
Department of Transportation (DOT), Ed Pawlowski, Mayor of 
Allentown, Pennsylvania, Craig White, CEO of Philadelphia Gas 
Works, John Walsh, CEO of UGI Utilities, Inc., Robert Powelson, 
Chairman of the Pennsylvania Utility Commission, Rick Kessler, 
Vice President of the Pipeline Safety Trust, and a 
representative of the Mayor of Philadelphia. Participants 
discussed the natural gas pipeline explosion that occurred in 
Philadelphia on January 18, 2011, and the natural gas pipeline 
explosion that occurred in Allentown on February 9, 2011. 
Participants also discussed the division of responsibilities 
between Federal and state regulators and pipeline owners and 
operators. In addition, the participants discussed changes that 
should be made in Federal and state laws to improve pipeline 
safety.

    Title: Finding Ways to Encourage and Increase Private 
Sector Participation in Passenger Rail Service
    Date: March 11, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on intercity passenger rail in 
the United States and how to make it more effective and less 
expensive, specifically through private competition and to 
examine the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and Amtrak's 
implementation of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement 
Act of 2008 (PRIIA).
    Summary: Witnesses suggested reforms to Federal intercity 
passenger rail programs for possible inclusion in the upcoming 
surface transportation reauthorization bill. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from the Administrator of the FRA, a vice 
president of Amtrak, a State department of transportation, an 
expert in international models of competitive rail operations, 
a representative of independent rail operators, and the AFL-
CIO.
    Created in 1970 under the Rail Passenger Service Act, 
Amtrak has been the sole provider of regularly scheduled 
intercity passenger rail since 1981. Amtrak operates at a loss, 
averaging a per-ticket taxpayer subsidy of $54.48 per ticket. 
By comparison, commuter railroads are able to contract out 
service elements to private companies that specialize in 
providing those services. Amtrak competes with the private rail 
companies to provide commuter rail services. Currently, 11 of 
the 23 commuter rail systems in the United States are operated 
by private sector operators, eight are operated in-house by the 
local transit authority, and four are operated under contract 
by Amtrak.
    PRIIA, the most recent passenger rail authorization, allows 
for greater state control of intercity passenger rail 
initiatives and participation by private sector service 
providers. This same law also included provisions to improve 
Amtrak service, cost-effectiveness, and accountability. If 
implemented correctly, PRIIA would improve Amtrak's performance 
and service along with its bottom line.

    Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad 
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
    Date: March 17, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on implementation of the Rail 
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), focusing on the Federal 
Railroad Administration's (FRA) rule implementing requirements 
for freight and passenger railroads to install positive train 
control systems by December 31, 2015.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Congressman 
Elton Gallegly (R-California), the daughter of a victim of the 
2008 Metrolink crash, the FRA Associate Administrator for 
Safety, one representative each from the Class I freight 
railroads, the shortline railroads, and commuter railroads, and 
a rail labor union representative. Discussions centered on the 
Department of Transportation's (DOT) final rule implementing of 
positive train control mandate included in the Rail Safety 
Improvement Act, and on how that rule goes beyond Congressional 
intent and violates President Obama's Executive Order on 
January 2011, which directs that regulations shall be cost-
effective and based on the best possible science, and shall not 
be overly burdensome on affected industries and the United 
States economy.
    The Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) comprises Division A 
of the broad rail authorization bill signed in 2008. Division B 
is comprised of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement 
Act, or PRIIA, which was the topic of the March 11, 2011, 
oversight hearing. RSIA includes major provisions meant to 
improve safety of freight and passenger rail operations for the 
benefit of rail passengers, employees, and communities. The 
RSIA includes a mandate for the installation of positive train 
control (PTC) technology on freight main lines carrying toxic-
by-inhalation cargo and on all passenger rail lines. PTC 
technology is designed to automatically stop or slow a train 
before accidents caused by human error. The inclusion of the 
PTC mandate in RSIA was in part spurred by a major commuter 
rail accident in September, 2008 in Chatsworth, California, in 
which 25 people were killed and 135 injured.
    In January, 2010, FRA published its final rule to implement 
the PTC mandate, causing great concern in the rail industry 
that the FRA rule exceeded the scope of the agency's regulatory 
powers. The 20-year costs to Class I and commuter railroads of 
implementing PTC are estimated by FRA to be $13.21 billion, 
with a cost-to-benefit ratio of 22:1. Short line railroads 
would also be adversely affected although they are not 
explicitly required to install PTC. Instead, since they operate 
on tracks that would have been made PTC-compatible, short lines 
would also have to upgrade their own equipment.

    Title: Railroad and Hazardous Materials Transportation 
Programs: Reforms and Improvements to Reduce Regulatory Burdens
    Date: April 7, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders in the rail 
and hazardous materials safety areas regarding legislative 
priorities for changes or reforms to current law authorizations 
and administrative regulatory policies at the Federal Railroad 
Administration (FRA) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration (PHMSA) and to focus on the areas of 
intercity passenger rail, high-speed rail, rail safety, and 
rail financing along with hazardous materials transportation 
safety.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from nineteen 
witnesses, including representatives from the National 
Transportation Safety Board, Amtrak, private rail providers, 
rail associations, manufacturing associations, and several 
unions. Because of the variety of stakeholders, there were a 
number of messages heard by the Subcommittee regarding the 
impact of FRA and PHMSA programs and regulations on the 
stakeholders' businesses. The Subcommittee will analyze all 
testimony received in this hearing as they prepare a Rail Title 
and Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Title for the 
Surface Transportation reauthorization bill.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe 
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
    Date: April 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the 
hazardous materials safety programs of the Pipeline and 
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), which 
expired in 2008, focusing on how to reduce the regulatory 
burdens, and how to transport hazardous materials safely and 
efficiently.
    Summary: The invited witnesses included the Administrator 
of PHMSA, representatives of parties interested in 
transportation of hazardous materials, and the Teamsters Union. 
Discussions centered on hazardous materials regulations and 
their impact on a variety of hazardous materials manufacturers, 
offerors, shippers, and the employees of these businesses.
    PHMSA promulgates and enforces hazardous materials 
regulations for all modes of transportation. There are 1.4 
million daily movements of hazardous materials. These materials 
are essential to the economy of the United States and the 
general public.
    The Subcommittee discussed streamlining the regulation 
process to prevent duplication, increase uniformity, and 
transparency. Background checks, equitable enforcement, 
international representation, state hazardous materials 
permits, cargo tank wetlines, special permits and approvals, 
package opening and inspection, and preemption issues were 
among the topics discussed.

    Title: Silvertip Pipeline Oil Spill in Yellowstone County, 
Montana
    Date: July 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the July 1, 2011 
release of crude oil from the Silvertip Pipeline in Yellowstone 
County, Montana.
    Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the 
Administrator of the Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration (PHMSA), the President of the ExxonMobil 
Pipeline Company, and a scientist from the National Wildlife 
Federation. Senator Jon Tester (R-Montana) also gave a 
statement at the beginning of the hearing, at the request of 
Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Montana).
    After the Silvertip pipeline incident in Yellowstone 
County, Montana, in July of 2011, the Subcommittee found the 
witness testimony to be useful in generating discussions on 
PHMSA regulations and ExxonMobil corporate policy. Given that 
the United States has the largest network of energy pipelines 
in the world, the safety and enhanced reliability of pipeline 
transportation must be a priority. By examining ways to improve 
safety and coordination between regulators on the Federal, 
state, and local level, pipeline spills and accidents can be 
avoided if not altogether eliminated.

                              LEGISLATION

    Title: Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job 
Creation Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2845 (Reported on December 1, 2011; House 
Report 112-297, Part I)
    Summary: H.R. 2845 amends title 49, United States Code, to 
reauthorize the Federal pipeline safety programs administered 
by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
(PHMSA) of the Department of Transportation (DOT) for fiscal 
year 2012 through 2015. H.R. 2845 provides for enhanced safety 
in pipeline transportation and provides for enhanced 
reliability in the transportation of the Nation's energy 
products by pipeline. The bill also ensures regulatory 
certainty which will help create a positive environment for job 
development.
    The bill increases the maximum amount of civil penalties 
the United States can seek from pipeline owner or operators who 
violate pipeline safety rules and regulations. H.R. 2845 
requires states eliminate most exemptions to their ``Call 
Before You Dig'' programs in order to receive Federal grant 
funding. The bill allows the Secretary to issue a rulemaking 
requiring the installation of automatic and remote-controlled 
shutoff valves on newly constructed transmission pipelines but 
does not require operators to retrofit existing pipelines.
    The bill requires the Secretary to study expanding pipeline 
integrity management requirements and leak detection systems 
but gives Congress the final say in whether or not the 
requirements should be expanded or the leak detection systems 
should be required. H.R. 2845 requires DOT and pipeline 
operators to provide information to first responders on the 
location of pipelines in their jurisdiction. The bill requires 
DOT to review regulations regarding accident reporting 
requirement for pipeline operators.
    The bill authorizes funding to be appropriated for several 
pipeline safety programs. Specifically, the bill authorizes 
$107 million a year to be appropriated for safety inspections. 
The bill also authorizes grants to states funded from pipeline 
safety fees collected from pipeline operators. Further, it 
authorizes approximately $13 million a year to be appropriated 
out of the General Fund for emergency response grants and 
damage prevention programs.

    Title: To provide for the resolution of the outstanding 
issues in the current railway labor-management dispute.
    Bill Number: H.J. Res. 91
    Summary: This resolution would require the parties 
represented by the National Carriers' Conference Committee and 
the National Railway Labor Conference to settle specified 
disputes between railway carriers and their railroad employees 
(represented by specified labor unions) to prevent a freight 
labor strike at 12:01 a.m. on December 6, 2011, by implementing 
the report and recommendations of the Presidential Emergency 
Board No. 243 issued on November 5, 2011.

    Title: American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 7
    Summary: The Subcommittee had two titles in H.R. 7, as 
reported by the Committee on February 3, 2012: Title VIII, 
Railroads, and Title IX, Hazardous Material Transportation. 
Both titles of the bill eliminated unnecessary or duplicative 
Federal programs, decreased regulatory burdens on private 
industry, and strived to set realistic goals by leveraging 
Federal investments, streamlined project delivery, reduced 
regulatory burdens, reformed Amtrak, and promoted 
accountability and transparency. No earmarks were included, and 
existing law earmarks were eliminated. This bill is the basis 
of the House conferee negotiations with the Senate on surface 
transportation reauthorization.

    Title: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act 
(MAP-21)
    Bill Number: H.R. 4348 (P.L. 112-141)
    Summary: The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century 
Act (MAP-21) reauthorizes Federal highway, transit and highway 
safety programs at current funding levels through the end of 
fiscal year 2014. Regarding areas within the Subcommittee's 
jurisdiction, MAP-21 reauthorizes the Department of 
Transportation's hazardous materials safety programs, and, 
among other things, secures reforms to the hazmat special 
permits and approvals program, establishes a program review for 
motor carrier permitting, and converts two earmarks into 
competitive grant programs. The legislation also bans proposed 
wetlines regulation until the Government Accountability Office 
can analyze costs and benefits.

            Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment

    To date, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment, Chaired by Congressman Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), with 
Congressman Timothy Bishop (D-New York) serving as the Ranking 
Member, held three joint hearings, one roundtable and 18 
subcommittee hearings (with 110 witnesses spanning 41 hours), 
covering the breadth of issues within the purview of the 
subcommittee.
    The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee includes the civil 
works programs of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the 
clean water and Superfund programs of the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA). Other agencies under the 
Subcommittee's jurisdiction include the Tennessee Valley 
Authority (TVA), the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation, the International Boundary Water Commission, and 
certain programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration and the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
    The Subcommittee shares the goals of the Full 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: creating jobs, 
saving the tax payer money, and reducing the size of the 
Federal government with the added goal of maintaining our 
Nation's safe, clean and usable water resources. The hearings 
and legislation of the Subcommittee demonstrate a commitment to 
oversight over the EPA's Clean Water Act programs and the Corps 
of Engineers Civil Works mission. In addition to many oversight 
opportunities, unique challenges facing the Subcommittee 
include aging water resources infrastructure, under funded 
programs and expansive, overreaching Federal policies.

                                HEARINGS

    Title: Improving Oil Spill Prevention and Response, 
Restoring Jobs, and Ensuring our Energy Security: 
Recommendations from the National Commission on the BP 
DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
    Date: February 11, 2011
    Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittees on Water 
Resources and Environment and Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation to hear testimony regarding the BP DEEPWATER 
HORIZON oil spill and the status of offshore drilling 
operations and safety.
    Summary: In the wake of the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill, 
the National Commission on the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill 
and Offshore Drilling was created to find the root cause of the 
accident and provide recommendations on how to prevent such 
disasters and improve response in the future. The Commission 
issued their report on January 11, 2011, and it contained 14 
specific recommendations that fell under the jurisdiction of 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    The witnesses' testimonies elaborated on these 14 
recommendations made in the Report, ranging from creating an 
independent agency within the Department of Interior to enforce 
regulations on offshore drilling, to raising the liability cap 
on oil production facilities, to increasing communication 
between Federal agencies and local governments during a Spill 
of National Significance. The Subcommittee will continue to 
provide oversight of waters, energy independence, and jobs.

    Title: To Consider Reducing the Regulatory Burden Posed by 
the Case National Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Cir. 2009) and to 
Consider Related Draft Legislation
    Date: February 16, 2011
    Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment and the Agriculture Committee's 
Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture. The purpose was 
twofold: to hear testimony regarding the 6th Circuit Court's 
ruling on the National Cotton Council v. EPA, and to consider 
draft legislation that would address the judicial decision.
    Summary: Stakeholders from across the country and a 
representative of the EPA gave testimony that spoke to the 
burden that redundant regulation placed on their localities. 
The hearing resulted in the introduction of H.R. 872, the 
Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, which was reported 
favorably by both the Committees on Transportation and 
Infrastructure and Agriculture. H.R. 872 passed by the House on 
March 31, 2011.

    Title: Review of the FY 2012 Budget and Priorities of the 
Environmental Protection Agency: Impacts on Jobs, Liberty, and 
the Economy
    Date: March 2, 2011
    Purpose: Following the release of the President's budget 
request for fiscal year 2012, the Subcommittee met to review 
the budget and priorities of the Environmental Protect Agency 
(EPA). Nancy Stoner, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Water, EPA, and Mathy Sanislaus, Assistant Administrator, 
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, were witnesses.
    Summary: Members questioned the EPA on Agency 
``guidances,'' the use of numerical nutrient standards 
throughout the country, and other expansions of the EPA's 
regulations.

    Title: Review of the FY 2012 Budget and Priorities of the 
Army Corps of Engineers, Tennessee Valley Authority, and the 
Natural Resources Conservation Service: Finding Ways To Do More 
With Less
    Date: March 8, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Honorable Jo Ellen 
Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army--Civil Works, Lt. Gen. 
Robert Van Antwerp, Chief Engineer of the Army Corps, John 
Thomas, Chief Financial Officer of the Tennessee Valley 
Authority (TVA), and Thomas Christiansen, a regional 
conservationist with the Department of Agriculture's Natural 
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), regarding how the 
President's budget impacts their agencies.
    Summary: The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) provides water 
resources development projects, usually through cost-sharing 
partnerships with nonfederal sponsors. Navigation, flood damage 
reduction, shoreline protection, hydropower, dam safety, water 
supply, recreation, environmental restoration and protection, 
are all activities in the Corps' Civil Mission. The fiscal year 
2012 budget reduces most major accounts that fund Corps 
projects and activities. TVA supplies power to nearly eight 
million people over an 80,000 square mile service area. Their 
responsibilities include the multi-purpose management of land 
and water resources throughout the Tennessee Valley and 
fostering economic development. The NRCS facilitates Small 
Watershed Programs, Surveys and Planning, Flood Prevention 
Operations and Watershed Rehabilitation Programs.
    The hearing highlighted the role of the Corps and NRCS in 
the development of water infrastructure. Both entities face 
shrinking budgets but by no means diminished demands on water 
infrastructure. Questions from Members focused on the need for 
the Corps to maximize benefit to cost, streamline their 
processes, and work more closely with other agencies. The long 
term fiscal health of the TVA was also addressed.

    Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs--
Parts I and II
    Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from state regulators, the 
mining industry, impacted organizations, economists, and Nancy 
Stoner, Assistant Administrator at the Office of Water, EPA, 
regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) policies 
and actions toward Appalachian Mining. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of the 
Clean Water Act.
    Summary: Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), the EPA and 
States share in the protection of water quality. Congress gave 
EPA limited authority to promulgate water quality standards 
only when a State's proposed new or revised standard does not 
measure up to requirements set by the CWA and the State refuses 
to accept EPA proposed revisions.
    In 2007 the Corps issued a Sec. 404 permit in connection 
with the Arch Coal, Mingo Logan, Inc., Spruce No. 1 Surface 
Mine. Arch Coal conducted a ten year environmental review prior 
to the issuance of the permit and the EPA agreed to all the 
terms and conditions included. In April, 2010, EPA published a 
Proposed Determination to prohibit, restrict or deny the 
authorized discharges to certain of the waters associated with 
the project site, without alleging any violation of the permit. 
In September, 2010, EPA withdrew the discharge authorization.
    Testimony and questions focused on the Spruce Mine permit 
revocation, the policy and procedure behind the action, its 
national impact on mining and the larger economy. H.R. 2018, 
the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, was 
introduced as a result of this hearing.

    Title: Running Roughshod Over States and Stakeholders: 
EPA's Nutrients Policies
    Date: June 24, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders including 
State administrators, water quality regulators, and a municipal 
wastewater reclamation official. The focus of the hearing was 
to provide oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency's 
(EPA) nutrients policies and quest for States to adopt 
numerical nutrient water quality standards under the Clean 
Water Act (CWA).
    Summary: Testimony will focus on the science and burden of 
the EPA nutrient policy. EPA is pressing States to adopt 
numerical standards based on historical ambient nutrient water 
quality data collected from other water bodies that may not 
have sufficiently comparable characteristic. Nutrients are 
essential for natural plant and animal growth. However, 
nutrients can adversely affect aquatic life or human health if 
present in excessive concentrations. Water quality standards 
define the goals for a water body by designating uses, setting 
criteria to protect those uses, and provisions to protect water 
quality. When a state adopts a new or revised water quality 
standard, the EPA must approve, disapprove, or conditionally 
approve the standard depending on requirements of the CWA. Each 
state has standards that prevent water from containing 
excessive nutrients. Setting numeric water quality standards 
presents unique challenges that are difficult to solve. Numeric 
standards are not universally appropriate for substances like 
nutrients that are both widely variable, naturally occurring, 
ubiquitous, and a natural and necessary component of healthy 
ecosystems.

    Title: Legislative Hearing on H.R. 104: The Realizing 
America's Maritime Promise Act
    Date: July 8, 2011
    Purpose: To consider and hear testimony regarding H.R. 104 
the Realizing American's Maritime Promise Act. The Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) provides funds for the Army Corps 
of Engineers to carry out the dredging of navigation channels 
to their authorized depths and widths. It was established by 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 to fund the harbor 
operation and maintenance activities of the Corps. The HMTF is 
based upon a user fee collected from shippers (not including 
exporters) that utilize the Nation's coastal ports. In fiscal 
year 2010 the HMTF grew by $1.3 billion, but only $828.6 
million was spent in total operations, burgeoning the HMTF 
balance to nearly $5.6 billion by the end of fiscal year 2010. 
At the end of fiscal year 2011 the HMTF is estimated to have a 
balance of $6.1 billion. Since the HMTF is not ``off-budget'' 
or separate from the general fund, all surplus funds have, in 
effect, already been spent by the Federal government. Despite 
the theoretical HMTF balance, the Nation's federally maintained 
navigation channels are dangerously under maintained. Only one 
third of the Nation's navigation channels are at their 
authorized depths and widths, portions of the important 
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway have been closed to commercial 
navigation due to lack of maintenance dredging, and eight out 
of the Nation's ten largest ports are not at their authorized 
depths and widths.
    Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the author 
of the legislation, Hon. Charles Boustany (R-Louisiana), and 
representatives from industries and communities that would be 
impacted by H.R. 104. The legislation would require the total 
budget resources for expenditures from the HMTF for harbor 
maintenance programs to equal the level of receipts plus 
interest credited to such Fund for that fiscal year. The 
primary result would be greater funds for the operation and 
maintenance of Federally maintained channels what would support 
robust coastwise trade.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of 
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Commonsense Approach to 
Ballast Water Regulation
    Date: July 13, 2011
    Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast 
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment to hear testimony from important 
industry groups and government agencies on current rules 
governing the discharge of ballast water. The Subcommittees 
sought input from witnesses on how to best move forward with 
efforts to reform current ballast water discharge rules.
    Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from two 
separate panels. The first panel of witnesses included Vice 
Admiral Brian Salerno, United States Coast Guard Deputy 
Commandant for Operations, Mr. James Hanlon, Director of the 
Office of Wastewater Management at the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, Chair of the EPA's 
Science Advisory Board, and Dr. James Carlton, Chair of the 
Committee on Numeric Limits for Living Organisms in Ballast 
Water at the National Research Council. The second panel 
consisted of Mr. Thomas Allegretti, President of the American 
Waterways Operators, and Mr. Michael Jewell, President of the 
Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association.
    In order to maintain stability during transit, most ocean 
going vessels fill internal tanks with ballast water during the 
loading of cargo and then release it during unloading. Ballast 
water has long been recognized as one of several pathways by 
which invasive species are transported globally and introduced 
into coastal waters where they did not live before. Many 
aquatic nuisance species have been introduced into waters of 
the United States via ballast water discharges. Ballast water 
is currently governed differently by the Coast Guard and the 
Environmental Protection Agency, as well as by numerous state 
laws and regulations. As a result, vessels engaged in 
international and interstate commerce are required to meet 
several different standards for the treatment of ballast water, 
some of which are not technologically achievable or verifiable. 
Witnesses from private industry emphasized the importance of 
developing clear and consistent ballast water standards in 
order for the United States to continue being a leader in the 
international maritime trade. Additionally, the EPA and the 
Coast Guard pledged to continue working with Congress to 
develop a more cost effective and sensible approach to 
regulating ballast water discharge. From the testimony 
presented at this hearing, legislative language regarding 
ballast water discharges was crafted and passed as an element 
of the fiscal year 2011 Coast Guard Authorization bill in 
November of 2011 setting a national standard for standard for 
ballast water. This legislation ensures the free movement of 
waterborne trade throughout the country.

    Title: Roundtable--Missouri River Flood
    Date: August 19, 2011
    Purpose: To meet with community leaders, Corps officials 
and impacted individuals of the major 2011 Missouri River flood 
event in Pierre, South Dakota.
    Summary: Participating in the discussion were Committee 
Members, Mr. Witt Anderson--Director of Programs for the 
Northwestern Division of the Corps (SES), Ms. Jody Farhat--
Chief of Missouri River Basin Water Management, Colonel Robert 
Ruch--Commander of the Omaha District of the Corps, Mr. Eric 
Stasch--Operations Manager for the Lake Oahe Project at Pierre, 
South Dakota Mayor Laurie Gill--Pierre, South Dakota, Jeff 
Dooley--Community Manager, Dakota Dunes, South Dakota, Kevin 
Vaughn--South Dakota resident and flood victim from Wynstone, 
Union County, South Dakota, Steven Rounds--Owner Oahe Marina 
and Resort, Pierre, South Dakota. The group discussed the 
impacts of the flood and future preventative measures.

    Title: The Economic Importance and Financial Challenges of 
Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways Transportation 
System
    Date: September 21, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Army Corps of 
Engineers (the Corps), a representative from the barge 
industry, a representative from the Inland Waterways Users 
Board, a representative from the agriculture sector, a 
representative from the inland navigation economics profession, 
and another nongovernmental organization to hear testimony.
    Summary: Today the Inland Waterways Transportation System 
provides an alternative to truck and rail and is the most cost-
effective and energy efficient means for transporting 
commercial goods, especially major bulk commodities like grain, 
coal, and petroleum products. The Inland Waterways 
Transportation System is also a key component of state and 
local economies and job creation efforts and is essential in 
maintain economic competitiveness and national security. The 
Corps operates and maintains approximately $235 billion worth 
of water resources infrastructure assets, including a network 
of 11,000 miles of the ``fuel-taxed'' Inland Waterways 
Transportation System. The Corps operates and maintains 221 
lock chambers at 185 sites on 27 inland rivers and intracoastal 
waterways segments. The fuel-taxed Inland Waterways 
Transportation System carries over 546 million tons of freight 
annually. Despite the importance of the system, it is in 
serious disrepair: 57 percent of our inland system is more than 
50 years old, and 37 percent of the system is more than 70 
years old. The hearing provided Congressional oversight of the 
system and the role of the Inland Waterways Users Board.

    Title: The Economic Importance of Seaports: Is the United 
States Prepared for 21st-Century Trade Realities?
    Date: October 26, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Army Corps of 
Engineers (the Corps), port authorities from across the 
country, and industry representatives regarding the status of 
port infrastructure, challenges plaguing the industry, and the 
fiscal and policy opportunities that could promote robust 
coastwise trade.
    Summary: The waterborne trade that is facilitated at the 
Nation's ports is vital to the American economy. Millions of 
jobs throughout the country are dependent upon the commercial 
shipping industry. Waterborne trade accounts for the largest 
percentage of imports across all modes, and is the preferred 
method of transport of vital goods such as oil. It remains the 
cheapest, safest and most environmentally-friendly form of bulk 
cargo transport. Any impediment to safe, reliable shipping has 
ripple effects felt by workers, taxpayers, and consumers. This 
hearing examined Congressional policies that could support 
robust coastwise trade.

    Title: Hydraulic Fracturing of Shale Beds: Ensuring 
Regulatory Approaches that Will Help Protect Jobs and Domestic 
Energy Production
    Date: November 16, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), Federal and state regulators, and industry 
representatives on regulatory approaches to the hydraulic 
fracturing of shale beds. This hearing provided oversight to 
forthcoming EPA issued national effluent limitation guidelines 
specifically created for the hydraulic fracturing of shale gas.
    Summary: The development and production of oil and gas in 
the United States, including shale gas, are regulated under a 
complex set of Federal, state, and local laws that address 
every aspect of exploration and operation. The EPA administers 
most of the Federal laws, including the Clean Water Act, which 
is under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee. Most Federal 
laws have provisions for granting ``primacy'' to the states 
(i.e., state agencies implement the programs with Federal 
oversight). State and local agencies not only implement and 
enforce Federal laws, but also have their own sets of laws to 
administer. The States have broad powers to regulate, permit, 
and enforce all shale gas development activities--the drilling 
and fracture of the well, production operations, management and 
disposal of wastes, and abandonment and plugging of the well. 
State regulation of the environmental practices related to 
shale gas development addresses the regional and state-specific 
character of the activities. State laws often add additional 
levels of environmental protection and requirements to the 
already strict Federal requirements. In 2011, EPA announced 
plans to develop additional guidelines specifically for the 
production of oil and gas from shale formations. This hearing 
provided Congressional oversight of the Federal regulation of 
this growing industry.

    Title: The Missouri River Flood: An Assessment of River 
Management in 2011 and Operational Plans for the Future
    Date: November 30, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Members of 
Congress representing Congressional Districts within the 
Missouri River Valley, local officials and residents impacted 
by the catastrophic Missouri River flood of 2011.
    Summary: The Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) manages a 
comprehensive system for the purposes of flood control, 
navigation improvement, irrigation, municipal and industrial 
water supply, hydroelectric generation facilities, and other 
important purposes for the ten states in the Missouri River 
Basin. 2011 was an extraordinary year for flooding in the 
basin, as it is estimated that by the end of the year the basin 
will have received approximately 61 million acre feet of water, 
easily exceeding the previous record of 49 million acre feet, 
set in 1997. The Army Corps of Engineers is in the process of 
writing their 2012 operating plan for the basin, and the flood 
of 2011 will serve as a source of many lessons learned as they 
work to determine a plan to operate the system in the coming 
year. The Subcommittee reviewed the response to the 2011 flood, 
as well as the management of the system throughout the year, in 
order to better understand how best to operate the system in 
the future.

    Title: Integrated Planning and Permitting: An Opportunity 
for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to Make Smart 
Investments in Water Quality
    Date: December 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, the 
commissioner of a city's department of environmental 
protection, a municipal wastewater utility director, a state 
water quality program director, an environmental activist 
advocate, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the 
Agency's proposed integrated planning and permitting regulatory 
prioritization effort under the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act (commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act).
    Summary: It is widely accepted that clean drinking water 
and public wastewater services are necessary priorities to 
sustain public health, support our economy, and protect the 
environment. Significant amounts of public resources have been 
devoted to water infrastructure in American communities over 
the last 40 years to meet these priorities. An impressive 
inventory of physical assets has been developed over this 
period. Since 1972, with the enactment of the Clean Water Act, 
Federal, state, and local investment in our national wastewater 
infrastructure has been over $250 billion. This investment has 
provided significant environmental, public health, and economic 
benefits to the Nation.
    However, our Nation's ability to provide clean water is 
being challenged, as our existing national wastewater 
infrastructure is aging, deteriorating, and in need of repair, 
replacement, and upgrading. Old and deteriorated infrastructure 
often leak, have blockages, and fail to adequately treat 
pollutants in wastewater, thereby creating water pollution 
problems. EPA has initiated a national rulemaking to establish 
a potentially far-reaching program to regulate stormwater 
discharges from newly developed and redeveloped sites and add 
to or make other regulatory requirements more stringent under 
its stormwater program. As a result of many communities 
becoming financially constrained, representatives of local 
government are increasingly voicing concerns over EPA's 
policies and unfunded mandates, including the cumulative 
impacts of multiple regulatory requirements being imposed on 
them, and over how EPA is dealing with communities to address 
the regulatory mandates that EPA is imposing on them. 
Importantly, municipalities are seeking a more collaborative 
approach where EPA and state water regulators work more like 
``partners'' than ``prosecutors'' with communities to yield 
better solutions that achieve the goal of eliminating sewer 
overflows and addressing other water quality issues through the 
use of best engineering and innovative approaches at the lowest 
cost, resulting in the greatest environmental benefits.

    Title: Review of Innovative Financing Approaches for 
Community Water Infrastructure Projects--Parts I and II
    Date: February 28, 2012 and March 21, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from city mayors, municipal 
and private water utility directors, experts in municipal and 
private capital project finance, associations of water quality 
professionals and contractors, and a state infrastructure 
financing authority on potential innovative financing tools, 
including public or private funding and investment mechanisms, 
to better enable local communities to finance wastewater and 
drinking water facilities mandated by state and Federal 
environmental laws and regulations.
    Summary: The Subcommittee focused on potential innovative 
financing tools, including public or private funding and 
investment mechanisms, to better enable local communities to 
finance wastewater and drinking water facilities mandated by 
state and Federal environmental laws and regulations. Local 
governments continue to be concerned about the impacts unfunded 
Federal mandates have on their ability to meet compliance 
obligations, especially given municipalities' dwindling 
revenues due to the economic downturn.

    Title: A Review of the President's FY 2013 Budget Request 
for the Army Corps of Engineers
    Date: March 27, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Army Corps of 
Engineers regarding the President's fiscal year 2013 
appropriation request. The Corps of Engineers provides water 
resources development projects for the Nation, usually through 
cost-sharing partnerships with nonfederal sponsors.
    Summary: The appropriation request in the Administration's 
fiscal year 2013 budget submittal for the Corps of Engineers is 
$4.731 billion. This allocation is far below the amount needed 
to provide for the many missions of the Corps. Members 
addressed their concerns regarding the funding levels.

    Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget 
Request for the Environmental Protection Agency
    Date: March 28, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the President's fiscal year 
2013 appropriation request. The President's request for the EPA 
was $8.3445 billion.
    Summary: The EPA has the primary responsibility for 
carrying out the Clean Water Act, which provides for a major 
Federal/state program to protect, restore, and maintain the 
quality of the Nation's waters. However, significant parts of 
the program are administered by the states with EPA's approval. 
EPA also administers the Superfund program, which is aimed at 
investigating and cleaning up uncontrolled and abandoned sites 
contaminated with hazardous substances.

    Title: How Reliability of the Inland Waterway System 
Impacts Economic Competitiveness
    Date: April 18, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Army Corps of 
Engineers, shippers, and industry officials on the importance 
of preserving the reliability of the Inland Waterways System.
    Summary: The Inland Waterways System provides a cost-
effective and energy efficient alternative to truck and rail 
transportation and is also important to State and local 
economies and job creation efforts. One 15-barge tow on a river 
can carry as much cargo as 216 rail cars or 1,050 large trucks. 
However, the unreliability of the aging locks and dams on the 
System is making waterways a less attractive means of 
transportation, and moving cargo from waterways to rail or 
truck would produce significant national economic and 
environmental impacts. A catastrophic failure of the system 
would impact the economy including the valuable agriculture and 
energy sectors. The witnesses testified to how the success of 
the inland waterways system is vital to the Nation's economic 
competitiveness.

    Title: Integrated Planning and Permitting, Part 2: An 
Opportunity for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to 
Make Smart Investments in Water Quality
    Date: July 25, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from city mayors, the 
commissioner of a city's department of environmental 
protection, a county commissioner, a former executive director 
of a river valley water sanitation commission, a state water 
quality program director, and the Environmental Protection 
Agency's (EPA) on the Agency's recently finalized integrated 
planning and permitting regulatory prioritization effort under 
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to 
as the Clean Water Act). This hearing followed up on a Water 
Resources and Environment Subcommittee hearing held on December 
14, 2011, on a proposed integrated planning and permitting 
regulatory prioritization effort that EPA proposed on December 
14, 2011.
    Summary: On June 5, 2012, EPA released the issuance of 
their final policy framework, entitled Integrated Municipal 
Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework. The 
seven-page document outlines principles for letting communities 
structure plans for addressing multiple Clean Water Act 
obligations one at a time in an effort to reduce costs. EPA's 
framework is intended to provide EPA regional offices and 
states with a guide on how to help cities prioritize costly 
wastewater and stormwater infrastructure improvements that are 
needed to address water quality issues, including preventing 
pollution releases during heavy precipitation events.
    The witnesses provided their latest views on EPA's final 
framework, which was received with mixed reviews. Some 
stakeholders are concerned that EPA is not willing to limit its 
enforcement efforts against municipalities, which have been 
driving costly infrastructure upgrades to reduce stormwater and 
sewer overflows during heavy storm events. Some are concerned 
that a continued emphasis on an enforcement approach will 
undermine the flexibility EPA is ostensibly seeking to provide 
under the policy. The Water Resources and Environment 
Subcommittee will need to continue its oversight of EPA's 
implementation of the integrated planning and permitting 
regulatory prioritization initiative.

    Title: Forty Years After the Clean Water Act: Is it Time 
for the States to Implement Section 404 Permitting?
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from representatives of the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Army Corps of Engineers 
(the Corps), and state water quality agencies on the potential 
opportunities for enhancing Cooperative Federalism with the 
States through State assumption of the Clean Water Act section 
404 permit program.
    Summary: While the EPA has the basic responsibility for 
administering and enforcing most of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 
the Corps has lead responsibility for administering the section 
404 wetlands permit program. The CWA does not contemplate a 
single, Federally-led water quality program. Rather, Congress 
intended the states and EPA to implement the CWA as a Federal-
state partnership where the states and EPA act as co-
regulators. However, state assumption of the section 404 
program has been limited in comparison to States assuming other 
parts of the Clean Water Act. While 46 States are authorized to 
implement the NPDES permit program under CWA section 402, only 
two States, Michigan and New Jersey, have assumed the 404 
program to date. Nevertheless, numerous States recently have 
expressed increased interest in assuming the administration of 
the 404 program. The Subcommittee received testimony on the 
perceived benefits of and barriers to states assuming the 404 
permitting program.

                              LEGISLATION

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 872 (Passed the House on March 31, 2011)
    Summary: The Subcommittee considered legislation to amend 
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as 
the Clean Water Act) to clarify the Congressional intent 
regarding the regulation of pesticides in or near navigable 
waters and for other purposes. On March 2, 2011, Congressman 
Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio) introduced the Reducing Regulatory Burdens 
Act of 2011, designated H.R. 872. The bill was narrowly crafted 
to eliminate the duplicative regulations over the lawful and 
proper application of pesticides. It was referred to the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment and to the 
Committee on Agriculture's Subcommittee on Nutrition and 
Horticulture.
    The bill had 137 cosponsors and was ordered reported by the 
Full Committee on March 16, 2011, with a manager's amendment 
making technical corrections. On March 31, 2011, the House 
agreed to suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended by a 
vote of 292-130. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee 
on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

    Title: Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2018 (Passed the House on July 13, 2011)
    Summary: The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011 
amends the Clean Water Act (CWA) to preserve the authority of 
each state to make determinations relating to the state's water 
quality standards, and to restrict Environmental Protection 
Agency's (EPA) ability to second-guess or delay a State's 
permitting and water quality certification decisions under the 
CWA in several important respects including state water quality 
standards, dredge and fill permits, and requiring a deadline 
for Agency comment.
    The bill was introduced on May 26, 2011, receiving 
widespread and bipartisan support. It was reported on July 8, 
2011. On July 13, 2011, the bill passed the House in a 
bipartisan vote of 239 to 184.

    Title: To preserve existing rights and responsibilities 
with respect to waters of the United States, and for other 
purposes.
    Bill Number: H.R. 4965 (Ordered reported on June 7, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 4965 prohibits the Secretary of the Army and 
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
from: finalizing, adopting, implementing, administering, or 
enforcing the proposed guidance described in the notice of 
availability and request for comments entitled ``EPA and Army 
Corps of Engineers Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters 
Protected by the Clean Water Act''; or using such guidance, or 
any substantially similar guidance, as the basis for any 
decision regarding the scope of the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) or any 
rulemaking. Additionally, it provides that the use of such 
guidance as the basis for any rule shall be grounds for 
vacating such rule.
    The bill was introduced on April 27, 2012 receiving 
widespread and bipartisan support. The bill was reported on 
September 20, 2012.

    Title: Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 3158 (Passed the House on August 1, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 3158, Farmers Undertake Environmental Land 
Stewardship Act (FUELS Act)--Requires the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in implementing the 
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure rule with respect 
to any farm, to require certification of compliance with such 
rule by a professional engineer for a farm with an individual 
tank with a storage capacity greater than 10,000 gallons, an 
aggregate storage capacity of at least 42,000 gallons, or a 
history that includes a spill; or the owner or operator of the 
farm (via self-certification) for a farm with an aggregate 
storage capacity greater than 10,000 gallons but less than 
42,000 gallons and no history of spills. The bill exempts from 
all requirements of such rule any farm with an aggregate 
storage capacity of at least 10,000 gallons and no history of 
spills.
    The bill was introduced on October 12, 2011, receiving 
widespread and bipartisan support. The bill was reported on 
August 1, 2012. On August 1, 2012, the House agreed to the 
motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3158 by voice vote.

    Title: Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 5797 (Passed House on August 1, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act 
of 2012, would exempt the owners and operators of vessels 
operating on the Lake from compliance with the licensing and 
vessel inspection requirements of subtitle II of title 46, 
United States Code. H.R. 5797 would not affect the authority of 
the Coast Guard to conduct search and rescue and other missions 
on the lake, or change the state's regulatory program.
    On May 17, 2012, Congressman Cravaack (R-Minnesota) 
introduced H.R. 5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act 
of 2012. The bill was referred to both the Water Resources and 
Environment and Coast Guard and Maritime Subcommittees. On July 
27, 2012, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
met in open session to consider H.R. 5797, and ordered the 
bill, as amended, reported favorably to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote with a quorum present. Mr. 
Cravaack offered a substitute amendment to exempt owners and 
operators of vessels operating on Mille Lacs Lake from 
compliance with Federal laws and regulations requiring the 
licensing of individuals to operate vessels and the inspection 
of certain vessels to ensure they meet Federal safety 
standards. The Cravaack substitute amendment passed by voice 
vote. The bill was reported on July 31, 2012. On August 1, 
2012, the House agreed to the motion to suspend the rules and 
pass H.R. 5797 by voice vote.

    Title: Silviculture Regulatory Consistency Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 2541 (Reported on September 20, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 2541, the Silviculture Regulatory Consistency 
Act--Amends the Clean Water Act to prohibit the Administrator 
of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from requiring a 
permit under national pollutant discharge elimination system 
permitting requirements for a discharge resulting from the 
conduct of any silvicultural activity, such as nursery 
operations, site preparation, reforestation, thinning, 
prescribed burning, pest and fire control, harvesting 
operations, surface drainage, or road use, construction, and 
maintenance, from which there is runoff.
    On July 14, 2011, Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-
Washington) introduced H.R. 2541, the Silviculture Regulatory 
Consistency Act, a bill to exempt the conduct of silvicultural 
activities from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
permitting requirements under the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act. On August 1, 2012, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 2541, 
and ordered the bill reported favorably to the House by voice 
vote with a quorum present. H.R. 2541 was reported on September 
20, 2012.

    Title: Preserving Rural Resources Act of 2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 4278 (Reported on September 20, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 4278, the Preserving Rural Resources Act of 
2012--Amends section 404 of the Clean Water Act to make it 
clear that changing an activity from one exempted use to 
another does not require a Clean Water Act permit. Exempted 
activities under current law include normal farming, 
silviculture, and ranching activities, maintenance of flood 
control structures, construction or maintenance of farm or 
stock ponds or irrigation ditches, and temporary roads for 
farming and mining activities. The bill would allow land use to 
change among exempted activities without the need for a permit.
    On March 28, 2012, Congressman Robert Hurt (R-Virginia) 
introduced H.R. 4278, the Preserving Rural Resources Act of 
2012, a bill to clarify Congressional intent regarding 
exemptions from permit requirements for dredged or fill 
material. On August 1, 2012, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 4278, 
and ordered the bill reported favorably to the House by voice 
vote with a quorum present. H.R. 4278 was reported on September 
20, 2012.

    Title: Farmer's Privacy Act of 2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 5961 (Reported on September 20, 2012)
    Summary: H.R. 5961, the Farmer's Privacy Act of 2012 
prohibits the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), in exercising any authority under the Clean Water 
Act, from conducting aerial surveillance of agricultural land 
unless the Administrator has obtained the voluntary written 
consent of the owner or operator of the land to be surveilled, 
or obtained from the United States District Court for the 
District of Columbia a certification of reasonable suspicion 
that a violation of the Act exists in the area to be 
surveilled.
    On June 19, 2012, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito (R-
West Virginia) introduced H.R. 5961, the Farmer's Privacy Act 
of 2012, a bill to provide reasonable limits, control, and 
oversight over EPA's use of aerial surveillance of agricultural 
land. On August 1, 2012, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 5961, and 
ordered the bill reported favorably to the House by voice vote 
with a quorum present. H.R. 5961 was reported on September 20, 
2012.

                             OVERSIGHT PLAN

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure approved 
the oversight guiding document, the 112th Oversight Plan, in 
open session on January 26, 2011. In the report, the Committee 
determined it will focus its oversight responsibility on 
improving the overall performance and operation of the agencies 
and entities within the Committee's jurisdiction by eliminating 
fraud, wasteful spending, abuse and mismanagement where 
possible. Specifically, the Committee will focus its oversight 
authority on determining: (1) how the departments and agencies 
under its jurisdiction can spend fewer taxpayer dollars while 
continuing to carry out their statutory mandates; (2) how to 
decrease the size of departments and agencies that implement 
the Committee's authorized programs; and (3) how best to 
utilize government resources to create jobs and economic 
opportunities for all Americans.
    The Full Committee focused on oversight of the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and effectiveness of the 
Department of Transportation's (DOT) discretionary grant 
programs. The Subcommittee on Aviation will focus on funding of 
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), safety programs, 
security programs, NextGen, the National Transportation Safety 
Board (NTSB), and the financial condition of the airlines and 
passenger services. The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation will focus on the Coast Guard 
acquisitions, mission balance, maritime domain awareness, oil 
spill prevention and response, short sea shipping, piracy, 
ballast water and incidental discharges, vessel capacity, and 
the budgets of the agencies within its jurisdiction. 
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and 
Emergency Management will focus on Federal courthouses, the 
General Services Administration (GSA) broker contracts, real 
property management, the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF), leasing 
authorities, Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP), 
Federal Protective Service, the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) headquarters, and other issues within its jurisdiction. 
The Subcommittee on Highways and Transit will focus its 
oversight responsibility on streamlining project delivery, 
program consolidation and elimination, redefining the Federal 
role in surface transportation, performance and accountability, 
innovative financing, transportation funding, transit 
oversight, and safety program accountability. The Subcommittee 
on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials will focus its 
oversight on the implementation of previous rail legislation, 
Amtrak, rail safety programs, pipeline safety, hazardous 
materials safety, and the Surface Transportation Board (STB). 
Finally, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment 
will focus its oversight on the Clean Water Act and water 
infrastructure programs, the Army Corps of Engineers (the 
Corps) civil works program, the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) and its program management of the Superfund and 
Brownfield program, and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
    The full Oversight Plan can be viewed on the Committee's 
website here: http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/112th/
112th_Oversight_Plan.pdf

 Summary of Actions Taken and Recommendations Made Regarding Oversight 
                                  Plan


                             Full Committee

    Report Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
    Date: May 4, 2011
    Purpose: To continue oversight of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act (ARRA), pursuant to Committee-approved 
Oversight Plan, by examining the audit work performed by the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of 
Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG), and the 
Environmental Protection Agency Inspector General (EPA IG) on 
implementation the ARRA. GAO and the two IGs performed 
extensive audit work on the implementation of funded programs 
from the DOT, including the Federal Highways Administration 
(FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), the Federal Railroads 
Administration (FRA), and the EPA. The audits uncovered 
significant lapses in oversight by the implementing agencies, 
mismanagement of grants and funds, and lack of transparency.

    Report Title: TSA Ignores More Cost-Effective Screening 
Model
    Date: June 3, 2011
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the 
basis and rationale for the January 28, 2011 decision by John 
Pistole, Administrator, Transportation Security Administration 
(TSA), to halt the expansion of the Screening Partnership 
Program (SPP), the comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP 
screening, and the various screening models used in the 
international community.
    Summary: Since the creation of the SPP, a total of sixteen 
airports have chosen to opt-out of the Federal screening model 
and use private contractors for passenger and baggage 
screening. On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole 
announced that he would not expand the SPP and denied pending 
SPP applications from five airports. The report investigates 
the basis and rationale for Administrator Pistole's decision, 
the comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP screening, and 
the various screening models used in the international 
community.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Report Title: A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform
    Date: November 16, 2011
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the 
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) operations ten 
years after its creation and provided recommendations to 
improve TSA operational efficiency.
    Summary: TSA has a vital and important mission and is 
critical to the security of the traveling public. This report 
is an examination and critical analysis of the development, 
evolution, and current status and performance of TSA ten years 
after its creation.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Report Title: Airport Insecurity: TSA's Failure to Cost-
Effectively Procure, Deploy and Warehouse its Screening 
Technologies
    Date: May 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated 
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) management of 
its procurement, deployment, and storage of screening 
technologies.
    Result: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, led to 
dramatic reforms in how the Federal government protects the 
traveling public and the Nation's transportation sector. 
Securing commercial aviation became a top priority for Congress 
and resulted in the development and passage of the Aviation and 
Transportation Security Act of 2001 (ATSA). ATSA created the 
TSA and directed the agency to secure travelers through 
improved passenger and baggage screening operations. To 
successfully carry out its mission, TSA utilizes many layers of 
security, including screening technology.
    This report is a critical examination and analysis of TSA's 
procurement, deployment, and storage of screening technologies. 
During the past ten years, TSA has struggled to cost-
effectively utilize taxpayer funding to procure and deploy 
security equipment at the Nation's 463 airports where TSA 
provides screening operations. The report makes recommendations 
emphasizing TSA's need to more effectively develop its 
deployment strategy prior to the procurement of screening 
technologies. In addition, TSA must look for ways to reduce 
significant shipping costs for the thousands of pieces of 
equipment it deploys annually.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Report Title: Amtrak commuter Rail Service: The High Cost 
of Amtrak's Operations
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the high 
cost of Amtrak's Commuter Rail Service.
    Result: Amtrak is responsible for providing intercity 
passenger rail transportation and was designed to service long-
distance passenger travel needs. However, it has expanded its 
operations to include state-supported routes--where states 
cover the cost of Amtrak operations--and commuter rail 
operations, under contract to a public transit agency. This 
report examines the process and benefits of competitive 
contracting for commuter rail operations as well as Amtrak's 
role and effectiveness in this industry.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Report Title: TSA Labor Agreement: Distraction from Core 
Mission
    Date: November 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee Majority Staff investigated the 
specific provisions of the labor contract between the American 
Federation of Government Employees, which represent baggage 
screeners, and the Transportation Security Administration.
    Result: The Administration's decision to grant collective 
bargaining rights to one of the largest blocks of Federal 
employees is expected to add millions annually to the cost of 
TSA operations, and continue to distract the Agency away from 
its important security mission. A labor agreement focused on 
cosmetics does not ensure screener job satisfaction or increase 
the efficiency and effectiveness of airport screening 
operations; rather it only serves as another diversion from 
ensuring the security of the traveling public.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Hurricane Sandy: Site Visit of Impacted Areas
    Date: November 27, 2012
    Purpose: To examine the damage from Hurricane Sandy to the 
impacted communities of Staten Island and Manhattan, and to 
talk with local leaders about the recovery process.
    Summary: Chairman Mica, Congressmen Hultgren (R-Illinois), 
Nadler (D-New York), Grimm (R-New York), Cohen (D-Tennessee), 
and Edwards (D-Maryland) met with the Mayor of New York City, 
Michael Bloomberg, the Deputy Mayor of New York City, Cas 
Holloway, the Commissioner of the New York City Department of 
Transportation, Ms. Janette Sadik-Khan, and the President of 
the New York City Transit division of the Metropolitan 
Transportation Authority, Mr. Thomas F. Prendergast.
    Following the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy, the 
Committee organized a site visit of the hard hit New York metro 
area. Members toured impacted transportation infrastructure in 
Manhattan on Tuesday, November 27, 2012. The tour included a 
tour of South Ferry Station, the flooded Montague subway tube 
to Brooklyn which is still closed, and a tour of Whitehall 
Ferry Terminal.
    Chairman Mica and his colleagues received briefings from 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Metropolitan 
Transportation Authority, and Deputy Mayor Cas Holloway. The 
group toured Staten Island including Cedar Grove Beach, 
Jefferson and Hyland Boulevard, Midland Beach, and Great Kills. 
In Manhattan, the group toured Whitehall Ferry Terminal, South 
Ferry Station, and the Montague Subway.

                                Aviation

    The Government Accountability Office (GAO) conducted 
several reviews related to aviation safety. The GAO issued the 
following reports to Chairman Petri, Chairman Mica, and other 
Members of the Subcommittee:
    
 A report on the unauthorized international travel 
of children in June 2011.
    
 A report on airline passenger protections in 
September 2011.
    
 An aviation safety report on enhanced oversight 
and improved availability of risk-based data in October 2011.
    
 A report on collaboration of air traffic control 
modernization efforts in the United States and the European 
Union in November 2011.
    
 A report on pilot training and Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) oversight in November 2011.
    
 A follow up report to a January 2010 report on the 
National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) implementation of 
GAO recommendations issued between 2006-2008 in January, 2012.
    
 A report on systemic challenges with FAA's 
management of key programs' costs and timelines associated with 
NextGen in February 2012.
    
 A report on aviation safety and additional FAA 
efforts which could enhance Safety Risk Management in September 
2012.
    
 A report on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) 
looking at progress made by the FAA in facilitating integration 
into the National Airspace System and potential privacy 
concerns associated with UAS's in October 2012.
    
 A report on general aviation safety, looking at 
additional FAA efforts to help identify and mitigate safety 
risks in October 2012.
    The GAO also conducted a number of reviews related to 
aviation security. The GAO issued the following reports to 
Chairman Mica and other Members:
    
 A report on Transportation Security 
Administration's (TSA) enhanced explosive detection 
requirements for checked baggage in July 2011.
    
 A report on the TSA's foreign airport assessment 
program in both classified and public versions in October 2011.
    
 A report on transportation security information 
sharing in November, 2011.
    
 A classified report on TSA's Advanced Imaging 
Technology in January, 2012.
    
 A classified report on Terrorists Watchlists in 
January, 2012.
    
 A report on the TSA's screening partnership 
program has been initiated and a follow-up report on the TSA's 
behavior detection program or SPOT is in the queue.
    The Department of Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG) 
conducted a review of the new collective bargaining agreement 
(CBA) that the FAA entered into with the National Air Traffic 
Controllers Association (NATCA). The review was published on 
June 16, 2011, and addresses the impact the new CBA will have 
on the FAA and industry at the request of the Subcommittee. The 
DOT IG conducted an audit of Air Traffic Control (ATC) systems 
and networks located at two FAA facilities within the 
continental United States at the request of Chairman Mica. The 
report summarizes the results of our information technology 
vulnerability assessment of the FAA operational ATC systems, 
and was issued April 15, 2011.
    The DOT IG issued a report in July 2012 on FAA efforts to 
realign and consolidate outdated and unneeded air traffic 
facilities. The FAA operates 561 manned air traffic facilities 
nationwide, many of which are deteriorating and outdated, 
especially given the ongoing modernization efforts (NextGen). 
The IG found that the FAA recently approved an initial plan to 
consolidate air traffic facilities into large, integrated 
facilities over the next two decades. However, the FAA has not 
yet decided where to build the first facility, nor developed 
metrics to measure the effectiveness of its plans.
    The DOT IG also issued a report on the management policies 
and processes of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 
(MWAA) in November, 2012. DOT IG's review uncovered serious 
problems at the MWAA. The Authority was limiting competition 
using categorical exceptions and sole source contracts and 
employees were accepting gifts from contractors, including 
tickets to the Super Bowl, baseball games, golf tournaments, 
and many other sporting events. Senior MWAA officials were 
improperly filling vacancies, awarding excessive salaries, 
providing unjustified hiring bonuses and questionable cash 
awards as well as giving preferential treatment to friends and 
relatives of Board members. In response to both an interim IG 
letter and the final IG report, the Authority has taken a 
number of reform actions. DOT IG indicated that he remains 
concerned because these actions have not been independently 
reviewed or fully implemented and DOT IG believes further 
actions are needed to fully address weaknesses. Accordingly, in 
the final report, the DOT IG made 12 recommendations for the 
MWAA to promote integrity and accountability in its management 
and governance.
    The DOT IG is also conducting the following reviews and 
audits:
    
 FAA's Air Traffic Safety Action Program (ATSAP);
    
 Aviation safety inspector and operations research 
analyst staffing;
    
 FAA's aviation safety information analysis and 
sharing system;
    
 The underlying causes of problems with 
implementing NextGen; and
    
 FAA's implementation of PBN and NavLean.
    The Department of Homeland Security Inspector General (DHS 
IG) has undertaken an audit of the management of oversight of 
transportation security at Honolulu International Airport. The 
report is expected to be complete in 2012. The DHS IG will also 
be conducting a follow-up audit of the TSA's National 
Deployment Force (NDF).

                Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation

    Fourteen of the 22 hearings held by the Subcommittee during 
the 112th Congress were directly derived from sections of the 
approved Oversight Plan for the Subcommittee. Section one and 
section ten of the Subcommittee's Oversight Plan detail the 
overseeing of the Coast Guard, Federal Maritime Commission, and 
Maritime Administration's budget. In March of 2011 and March of 
2012, the Subcommittee held hearings to examine the 
Administration's fiscal year 2012 and 2013 budget requests for 
these agencies and explored ways to implement cost savings by 
leveraging efficiencies and cutting waste, fraud, and abuse.
    Section two of the Oversight Plan is concerned with the 
Subcommittee's overseeing of the Coast Guard's acquisition 
program. The Subcommittee held a hearing in April regarding the 
current status of the Coast Guard's acquisition programs, as 
well as a review of the policies and procedures the Service 
uses to determine mission needs requirements. In October, the 
Subcommittee held a follow-up hearing on the acquisition 
program and reviewed issues raised in the Government 
Accountability Office's report entitled ``Action Needed as 
Approved Deepwater Program Remains Unachievable.'' The 
Subcommittee called another meeting to examine the status of 
the Service's acquisitions program on May 16, 2012, where 
topics discussed at both of the previous hearings were reviewed 
in addition to several new developments. On September 20, 2012, 
the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the challenges the 
Coast Guard faces maintaining its legacy assets and how those 
challenges impact the Service's mission performance. Topics 
from previously held acquisition hearings were also revisited.
    Section four of the Oversight plan outlines the 
Subcommittee's commitment to monitoring the development and 
implementation of the Coast Guard's Maritime Domain Awareness 
(MDA) programs to ensure the best system is fielded in a timely 
manner and at the best price for the American taxpayers. On 
July 10, 2012, the Subcommittee held a hearing to review the 
implementation of programs by the Coast Guard to collect, 
analyze, and disseminate information used to assess and respond 
to safety and security threats in the maritime domain. Maritime 
domain awareness (MDA) is the Federal government's effort to 
achieve an understanding of anything in the global maritime 
environment that can affect the security, safety, economy, or 
environment of the United States. Members of the Subcommittee 
sought an update on the Coast Guard's implementation of various 
MDA programs and voiced their concerns on areas in need of 
improvement.
    Section five of the Oversight Plan highlights the 
Subcommittee's concern with oil spill prevention and response, 
with specific attention devoted toward the response efforts 
during the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill in the summer of 2010. 
The Subcommittee, in conjunction with the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment, held a joint hearing in February, 
2011 regarding improvements that can be made to oil spill 
prevention and response, while ensuring access to domestic 
energy resources and protecting vital energy sector jobs. The 
Subcommittee held a second hearing on this topic in November, 
where Members reviewed the findings and recommendations within 
a number of recently published reports on the DEEPWATER HORIZON 
oil spill. On January 30, 2012, the Subcommittee held a field 
hearing in Sunny Isles Beach, FL to examine Cuban and Bahamian 
plans to drill in proximity to the United States Exclusive 
Economic Zone (EEZ) and review the Coast Guard's level of 
preparedness to handle oil spills occurring at these sites.
    Section six of the Oversight Plan outlines the 
Subcommittee's intentions to examine the feasibility of short 
sea shipping along the coasts of the United States. The 
revitalization of our marine highways represents a cost 
effective and efficient mode of transportation that has the 
potential to create new maritime industry jobs for Americans. 
In June of 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled 
``Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S. Exports by Enhancing the 
Marine Transportation System.'' Witnesses at the hearing 
suggested various ways to enhance and expand the American 
marine transportation system and create American maritime jobs 
without burdening the American taxpayer. The Jones Act was 
specifically targeted by both Members and witnesses alike as 
being a key component in preserving American maritime jobs and 
the shipbuilding industry of the United States.
    Section seven of the Oversight Plan details the 
Subcommittee's oversight plans regarding piracy and the United 
States' efforts to ensure the safety of Americans on the high 
seas. In March, the Subcommittee held a hearing regarding ways 
to improve the Federal government's efforts to safeguard 
American lives and property on the high seas against acts of 
piracy. Specific attention was given to acts of piracy that 
occur off the Horn of Africa.
    Section eight of the Oversight Plan lays out the 
Subcommittee's plans to work with the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment to conduct oversight on the 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) current efforts to 
regulate the discharge of ballast water and other ``discharges 
incidental to the normal operation of vessels'' such as bilge 
water, deck wash and air conditioning condensate. In July, 2011 
the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Reducing Regulatory 
Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A 
Commonsense Approach to Ballast Water Regulation.'' The 
Subcommittee pledged to continue working with various industry 
actors and relevant agencies to develop a single nationwide 
standard that ensures efficient movement of maritime commerce, 
defends seafaring and port jobs, and protects the environment. 
Ballast water regulation was also a major topic at the 
Subcommittee's April 26, 2012, regulatory hearing. The 
Subcommittee reviewed the Coast Guard's published final rule 
governing the discharge of ballast water and also discussed the 
EPA's related rule expected to be published in December of this 
year.

    Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management

    The activities of the Subcommittee demonstrated its 
commitment to the Oversight Plan approved by the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure. In regards to the 
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee, the plan included a focus on 
implementing better management of Federal real estate, 
streamlining emergency management programs, and supervising the 
construction and renovation of Federal property under the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).
    The Subcommittee is deeply invested in the oversight of 
Federal real property. In fact, during the 111th Congress, the 
Republican staff released a report, ``Sitting on Our Assets: 
The Federal Government's Misuse of Taxpayer-Owned Assets,'' 
which detailed billions of dollars of wasteful spending on 
underutilized Federal properties. The Subcommittee is committed 
to identifying these underutilized Federal buildings and assets 
in order to shed waste and save taxpayer money. The 
Subcommittee has developed major pieces of legislation in 
support of this mission. H.R. 690, the Federal Trade Commission 
and National Gallery of Art Consolidation, Savings, and 
Efficiency Act, saves the taxpayers an estimated $300 million 
in avoided renovation and lease costs of the Federal Trade 
Commission, and the National Gallery of Art (NGA). The House of 
Representatives also passed H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property 
Realignment Act, which was introduced by Congressman Jeff 
Denham (R-California). The legislation sets up a Base 
Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) like commission for 
the realignment of civilian Federal property that has the 
potential to save taxpayers an estimated $15 billion.
    The Subcommittee has also held the following hearings to 
carry out the Committee-approved Oversight Plan:

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private 
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
    Date: February 10, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of 
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their 
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through 
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: Managing Costs and Mitigating Delays in the Building 
of Social Security's New National Computer Center
    Date: February 11, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a joint oversight hearing 
with the Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Social 
Security to receive testimony on the site selection and 
construction of the SSA's new national computer processing and 
data storage facility to replace the National Computer Center 
(NCC), currently located in Woodlawn, Maryland. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan of supervision for 
the construction and renovation of Federal property under ARRA.

    Title: Cutting Spending and Consolidating Federal Office 
Space: GSA's Capital Investment and Leasing Program
    Date: March 10, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on General Services Administration's (GSA) Capital 
Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) including alteration, 
design, modernization, construction, leasing, and building 
purchase activities. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan for oversight of real property management and 
the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF).

    Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic 
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency 
Management Programs
    Date: March 30, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on how to better respond to disasters in the wake of 
the catastrophic earthquakes that devastated Japan in early 
March 2011. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs.

    Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal 
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
    Date: April 6, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on whether a civilian BRAC process can effectively 
consolidate Federal office space, maximize value to the 
taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: Richard H. Poff Federal Building Renovation: Is it 
Costing the Taxpayer Too Much?
    Date: April 14, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on the renovation and modernization of the Richard H. 
Poff Federal Building, located in Roanoke, Virginia. The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan of 
supervision for the construction and renovation of Federal 
property under ARRA.

    Title: How to Stop Sitting on Our Assets: A Review of the 
Civilian Property Realignment Act
    Date: May 12, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on specific legislative proposals to employ a BRAC-
like process to civilian properties to produce significant 
savings to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Committee's plan for oversight of real property management 
and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs.
    Summary: Congressman Denham (R-California) introduced H.R. 
1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act, on May 4, 2011, as 
a result of the Subcommittee's oversight activities.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America
    Date: June 16, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Securities and Exchange 
Commission's (SEC) management of its independent authority to 
lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC Inspector General (SEC 
IG) report related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square 
feet of space under a 10-year lease worth over $500 million. 
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for 
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and 
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
    Date: July 6, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive 
testimony on the SEC's mismanagement of its independent 
authority to lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC IG report 
related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square feet of 
space under a ten year lease of Constitution Center in 
Washington, District of Columbia, worth over $500 million. The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for 
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and 
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in 
Recovery
    Date: July 14, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the 
issues of communities recovering from a disaster in the context 
of a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 
reauthorization. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs.

    Title: The Economic Development Administration: How to 
Improve Effectiveness through Reforms and Consolidations
    Date: July 27, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on the Economic Development Administration (EDA) and 
how its programs can be improved. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan.

    Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving 
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
    Date: October 13, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine how the 
emergency management system and programs can be streamlined to 
reduce costs and improve preparedness and response. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for 
streamlining emergency management programs.

    Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million 
Los, Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
    Date: November 4, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on 
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles, 
California, including the size, scope, compliance with 
courtroom sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the 
entire courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
    Summary: Received testimony from the United States courts, 
the GSA, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI 
on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
    Date: February 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex 
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue NW 
in downtown Washington, District of Columbia, to receive 
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well 
as the status of other underperforming and vacant Federal 
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse 
or mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
    Date: March 22, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW in downtown Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to 
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant Federal properties, 
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can 
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming 
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of 
House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs.

    Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of 
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
    Date: April 17, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on GSA's waste of taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010 
Western Regional Conference (WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee 
rewards program, and other waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. 
The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule 
XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government 
programs.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
    Date: June 19, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street NW in Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to 
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that 
the process for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating 
Plant provides the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.

    Title: Reducing costs to Taxpayers and Saving Lives Through 
Hazard Mitigation and Building Codes.
    Date: July 24, 2012
    Bill Number: H.R. 2069 (Safe Building Code Incentive Act)
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine how 
building codes and mitigation efforts minimize costs associated 
with disasters and save lives. In particular, the Subcommittee 
examined the H.R. 2069, the Safe Building Code Incentive Act, 
introduced by Congressman Diaz-Balart (R-Florida). The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for 
streamlining emergency management programs.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Vacant Federal Courthouse 
in Miami
    Date: August 6, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony from the United States courts, the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) and the General Services 
Administration (GSA). The hearing focused on the costs to the 
taxpayer of the underperforming or vacant assets and the 
overbuilding of Federal courthouses. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan and Clause 2(n) of 
House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs.

    Title: California's Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta: Planning 
and Preparing for Hazards and Disasters
    Date: August 16, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the California Emergency Management 
Agency (CalEMA), a county emergency manager, and public 
utilities in order to examine planning and preparedness for 
disasters in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight 
Plan for streamlining emergency management programs.

    Title: LA Courthouse: GSA's Plan to Spend $400 Million to 
Create Vacant Space
    Date: August 17, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony from the General Services Administration (GSA), the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the United States 
Courts about the justification and cost implications of 
building a third courthouse in Los Angeles, California.

                          Highways and Transit

    The Subcommittee on Highways and Transit played an active 
role in asserting oversight of their jurisdiction, including 
partnering with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and 
the Department of Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG) to 
request studies and holding nine oversight hearings.
    In November of 2011, the Subcommittee requested that GAO 
perform a study to investigate the life cycle costs and 
benefits of incorporating innovative materials in pavements. 
Keeping America's roads and bridges in good condition requires 
substantial resources: public entities spent more than $180 
billion in 2008 on highways, with about $40 billion coming from 
the Federal government. Despite these outlays, the Federal 
Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that these funding 
levels are insufficient to maintain or improve the condition of 
the Nation's highways through 2028. As a result, state highway 
agencies, the entities that are ultimately responsible for 
keeping most major highways in good repair, will need to 
develop strategies for doing so at reduced costs. GAO found 
that one potential strategy is using more cost-effective 
materials and practices. This study laid out resources that 
will help state departments of transportation better understand 
the viability of these innovative materials and utilize their 
Federal funding in a more cost-effective manner.
    In conjunction with an oversight hearing, the Subcommittee 
requested that the DOT IG carry out an audit of the Federal 
Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) Compliance, 
Safety, Accountability program (CAS) in October of 2012. The 
audit will explore the reliability, accuracy, and significance 
of carriers' CSA scores. The results of the audit are expected 
by March 31, 2013.
    The Subcommittee held hearings to help craft important 
transportation authorization legislation, which served an 
additional purpose of providing oversight opportunities, 
according to the Committee's Oversight Plan, including 
oversight on streamlining project delivery, program 
consolidation and elimination, redefining the Federal role in 
surface transportation, performance and accountability, 
innovative financing, and highway safety.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia, Field Hearing
    Date: February 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local 
area surrounding Beckley. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Committee's plan for oversight of surface transportation 
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on 
elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: Accelerating the Project Delivery Process: 
Eliminating Bureaucratic Red Tape and Making Every Dollar 
Count.
    Date: February 15, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the 
existing laws and regulations governing project delivery in 
order to accelerate the delivery process for surface 
transportation projects. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface transportation 
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on 
elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio, Field Hearing.
    Date: February 19, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing Ohio, and the local area surrounding 
Columbus. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's 
plan for oversight of surface transportation program management 
and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of 
duplicative programs.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
    Date: February 23, 2011
    Committee: Transportation and Infrastructure; Joint Hearing 
with the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
    Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing in Los 
Angeles, California, on the local transportation challenges 
facing Southern California. The hearing was conducted pursuant 
to the Committee's plan for oversight of surface transportation 
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on 
elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Field Hearing
    Date: February 24, 2011
    Purpose: Receive testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing Oklahoma, and the local area surrounding 
Oklahoma City. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan for oversight of surface transportation 
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on 
elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Central Florida Field Hearing
    Date: March 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing Florida, and the greater Orlando area. The 
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for 
oversight of surface transportation program management and 
Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of duplicative 
programs.

    Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs.
    Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
    Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs. 
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan 
for oversight of surface transportation program management and 
Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of duplicative 
programs.

    Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform 
the Nation's Surface Transportation Programs.
    Date: April 5, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on 
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal 
surface transportation programs. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface 
transportation program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House 
Rule X on elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: How Best to Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's 
Highways
    Date: June 13, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the 
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing 
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal 
surface transportation programs under Safe, Accountable, 
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 
Users (SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 2009, but 
was extended through September 30, 2011.

    Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and 
More Red Tape
    Date: October 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's 
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the 
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface 
transportation program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House 
Rule X on elimination of duplicative programs.

    Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of DOT's Truck and Bus 
Safety Program
    Date: September 13, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration, the trucking and bus industry, 
enforcement officials, and a safety advocate on the 
Administration's Compliance, Safety, Accountability program 
(CSA).

              Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials

    Pursuant to the Committee-approved Oversight Plan for the 
112th Congress, the Subcommittee held hearings addressing 
important issues such as railroad infrastructure, Amtrak, and 
rail and hazardous materials safety.
    With respect to railroad infrastructure, the Subcommittee 
held an oversight hearing on improving the Railroad 
Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) direct and 
guaranteed loan program and an oversight hearing on passenger 
rail capital programs authorized under the Passenger Rail 
Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA). The Subcommittee also 
held or had jurisdiction over four hearings on Amtrak, 
specifically on improving passenger rail service on the 
Northeast Corridor (NEC) and authorizing it for private 
competition, and on improving intercity passenger rail 
throughout the country by fully implementing PRIIA requirements 
and allowing private competition for passenger rail service. 
There was also one hearing on railroad safety, providing 
oversight on the implementation of the Rail Safety Improvement 
Act of 2008. The Subcommittee also held an oversight hearing on 
the implementation of the Federal Railroad Administration's 
(FRA) high-speed and intercity passenger rail program. Lastly, 
the Subcommittee held two hearings discussing the safe 
transportation of hazardous materials and possible ways to 
reduce regulatory burdens on the hazardous materials and 
railroad transportation industries.
    Chairman John Mica, along with the Majority Whip Kevin 
McCarthy, Chairman Darrell Issa (Oversight and Government 
Reform Committee), and Subcommittee Chairman Bill Shuster, also 
submitted a request to the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) on December 19, 2011, to conduct a study on the viability 
of the California High Speed Rail project. As the cost of high 
speed rail in California skyrockets, serious concerns regarding 
about the viability of the project have been raised, including 
questions on project construction and operating cost estimates, 
as well as potential ridership and anticipated economic impacts 
of the project. The California High Speed Rail project is the 
largest single rail grant ever made by the Department of 
Transportation, and the Committee takes very seriously its 
oversight responsibility over these Federal funds.
    Later in 2012, the Committee held a three-part series in 
oversight hearings concerning Amtrak. The hearings addressed: 
Amtrak's food and beverage service, competitiveness on commuter 
lines, and an overview of Amtrak's 41-year history of receiving 
a taxpayer subsidy. The hearings focused specifically on 
examining why Amtrak was losing money and its competitive edge 
in the railroad industry.
    Specifically, in accordance with the Committee's Oversight 
Plan, the Subcommittee held or had jurisdiction over the 
following hearings:

    Title: Developing True High-Speed Rail in the Northeast 
Corridor--Stop Sitting on our Federal Assets
    Date: January 27, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony regarding the potential and 
development of high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor, 
highlighting the importance of economic development, 
opportunities and incentives for private sector investment, and 
the need for competition and public-private partnerships.

    Title: Sitting on our Assets: Rehabilitating and Improving 
our Nation's Rail Infrastructure
    Date: February 17, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Railroad Rehabilitation 
and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, highlighting its 
importance in helping railroads, States and other public 
authorities to finance the development of railroad 
infrastructure, which in turn creates new jobs and drives 
economic benefits.

    Title: Finding Ways to Encourage and Increase Private 
Sector Participation in Passenger Rail Service
    Date: March 11, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on intercity passenger rail in 
the United States and how to make it more effective and less 
expensive, specifically through private competition and to 
examine the FRA and Amtrak's implementation of the Passenger 
Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).

    Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad 
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
    Date: March 17, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on implementation of the Rail 
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), focusing on the FRA's 
rule implementing requirements for freight and passenger 
railroads to install positive train control systems by December 
31, 2015.

    Title: Railroad and Hazardous Materials Transportation 
Programs: Reforms and Improvements to Reduce Regulatory Burdens
    Date: April 7, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders in the rail 
and hazardous materials safety areas regarding legislative 
priorities for changes or reforms to current law authorizations 
and administrative regulatory policies at the FRA and the 
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) 
and to focus on the areas of intercity passenger rail, high-
speed rail, rail safety, and rail financing along with 
hazardous materials transportation safety.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe 
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
    Date: April 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the 
hazardous materials safety programs of the PHMSA, which expired 
in 2008, focusing on how to reduce the regulatory burdens, and 
how to transport hazardous materials safely and efficiently.

    Title: Opening the Northeast Corridor to Private 
Competition for Development of High-Speed Rail
    Date: May 26, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony regarding the development of 
high-speed rail in the NEC through private competition using a 
public-private partnership.

    Title: Legislative Hearing on the Committee Print, 
``Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America''
    Date: June 22, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on managing Amtrak's Northeast 
Corridor business unit as a public-private partnership, as 
envisioned in the draft legislation, Competition for Intercity 
Passenger Rail in America at the request of Ranking Member Nick 
J. Rahall (D-West Virginia) and Subcommittee Ranking Member 
Corrine Brown (D-Florida).

    Title: Silvertip Pipeline Oil Spill in Yellowstone County, 
Montana
    Date: July 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the July 1, 2011 
release of crude oil from the Silvertip Pipeline in Yellowstone 
County, Montana.

    Title: The Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and 
Intercity Passenger Program: Mistakes and Lessons Learned
    Date: December 6, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Federal Railroad 
Administration's High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail 
(HSIPR) Program which was launched in 2009, but not funded by 
Congress in fiscal year 2011 and 2012.

    Title: California's High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing 
Costs and Project Concerns
    Date: December 15, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the constant 
increasing cost of building a high-speed rail system in 
California. While the project was originally estimated to be 
$43 billion in 2008, the total cost estimate has more than 
doubled to $98.5 billion and the project completion date has 
been extended 13 years.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part I: Mismanagement 
of Food and Beverage Services
    Date: August 8, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
food and beverage operation, specifically investigating its 
monetary losses.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part II: The High 
Cost of Amtrak's Monopoly Mentality in Commuter Rail 
Competitions
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
involvement in commuter rail operations, specifically regarding 
procurements.

    Title: A Review of Amtrak Operations, Part III: Examining 
41 Years of Taxpayer Subsidies
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on Amtrak's 
monetary losses associated with its operations; the hearing 
will also explore and compare Amtrak's level of Federal subsidy 
with the subsidies provided to other modes of passenger 
transportation and examine management deficiencies identified 
by the Amtrak Office of Inspector General.

    Title: Getting Back on Track: A Review of Amtrak's 
Structural Reorganization
    Date: November 28, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee met to receive testimony on the 
ongoing reorganization of the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation (Amtrak), the Committee heard testimony on what 
prompted the reorganization, the purpose of the reorganization, 
and what goals are to be achieved.

    Title: An Update on the High Speed and Intercity Passenger 
Rail Program: Mistakes Made and Lessons Learned
    Date: December 6, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee received testimony regarding the 
Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and Intercity 
Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. In December, 2011, the 
Committee held a series of hearings on the HSIPR Program and 
this hearing will follow up on those meetings, providing an 
opportunity to receive an update on the HSIPR program, examine 
what projects are being developed and built with the Federal 
funding invested thus far, and discuss means of improving the 
program now that a majority of the funds have been obligated.

    Title: Northeast Corridor Future: Options for High-Speed 
Rail Development and Opportunities for Private Sector 
Participation
    Date: December 13, 2012
    Purpose: The Committee received testimony regarding plans 
to develop improved and expanded intercity passenger rail on 
the Northeast Corridor (District of Columbia to Boston, 
Massachusetts), including options to 220-mph service to the 
corridor. This final full committee hearing in the 112th 
Congress follows up on the first hearing held by the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in this Congress, 
on January 27, 2011, ``Developing True High-Speed Rail in the 
Northeast Corridor: Stop Sitting on Our Federal Assets.''

                    Water Resources and Environment

    The activities of the Subcommittee Water Resources and 
Environment demonstrated its commitment to the Oversight Plan 
approved by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 
In regards to the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee, the plan 
included a focus on implementing better oversight of the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Water Act program, 
including the development of regulations for ballast water 
discharges, effluent limitations guidelines and issues with 
local compliance. Pursuant to the Oversight Plan, the 
Subcommittee considered ways of streamlining the civil works 
activities of the Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), 
specifically the permitting, scheduling, and allocation of 
projects, as well as operation and maintenance of both inland 
and coastal navigation channels. Additionally, the Subcommittee 
held an oversight hearing regarding Corps actions during the 
Missouri River Flood of 2011. The Subcommittee remains 
committed to reining in job killing regulatory overreach.
    The Subcommittee has also held the following hearings to 
carry out the Committee-approved Oversight Plan:

    Title: Hearing to Consider Reducing the Regulatory Burden 
Posed by the Case National Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Circuit 
2009) and to Review Related Draft Legislation
    Date: February 16, 2011
    Purpose: Joint meeting of the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment and the Committee on Agriculture, 
Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture to review court 
decisions and regulatory actions taken by the EPA regarding the 
use of pesticides in or near navigable waters. Hearing led to 
introduction and House-passage of H.R. 872, the Reducing 
Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011.

    Title: Review of the FY 2012 Budget and Priorities of the 
Environmental Protection Agency: Impacts on Jobs, Liberty, and 
the Economy
    Date: March 2, 2011
    Purpose: To hear justification of the Agency's proposed 
fiscal year 2012 budget, including extra-regulatory activities 
such as the promulgation of guidance, the use of numerical 
nutrient standards throughout the country and other expansions 
of the Agency's regulations.

    Title: Review of the FY 2012 Budget and Priorities of the 
Army Corps of Engineers, Tennessee Valley Authority, and the 
Natural Resources Conservation Service: Finding Ways To Do More 
With Less
    Date: March 8, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from respective agencies 
regarding their proposed budget to the Subcommittee.

    Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs--
Parts I and II
    Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from state regulators, the 
mining industry, impacted organizations, economists, and Nancy 
Stoner, Assistant Administrator at the Office of Water at the 
EPA regarding the EPA's policies and actions toward Appalachian 
Mining. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's 
plan for oversight of Clean Water Act, specifically the 
permitting process and water quality standards. HR 2018, the 
Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, was introduced 
as a result of this hearing.

    Title: Running Roughshod Over States and Stakeholders: 
EPA's Nutrients Policies
    Date: June 24, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony pursuant to the Committee-
approved Oversight Plan to provide oversight of the EPA's 
nutrients policies and quest for States to adopt numerical 
nutrient water quality standards under the Clean Water Act.

    Title: Legislative Hearing on H.R. 104, the Realize 
America's Maritime Promise (RAMP) Act
    Date: July 8, 2011
    Purpose: Legislative hearing to review the competitiveness 
of the Nation's ports and review legislation to ensure Federal 
navigation channels are at their authorized widths and depths.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of 
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Commonsense Approach to 
Ballast Water Regulation.
    Date: July 13, 2011
    Purpose: Joint meeting of the Subcommittees on Water 
Resources and Environment and the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation on the feasibility of regulating ballast water 
discharges and explore opportunities to improve these 
regulations to ensure the free flow of commerce, promote job 
growth, and ensure environmental protection.

    Title: The Economic Importance and Financial Challenges of 
Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways Transportation 
System
    Date: September 21, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Corps, former chair of 
the Inland Waterways User Board, economists, special interest 
representatives, and impacted industry representatives 
regarding the Inland Waterways system, funding challenges and 
Administration mismanagement of the Inland Waterways Users 
Board

    Title: The Economic Importance of Seaports: Is the United 
States Prepared for 21st-Century Trade Realities?
    Date: October 26, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Federal witnesses, 
shipping interests, unions, and ports to review the 
competitiveness of the Nation's ports, the economic benefits of 
maritime trade, and future trends.

    Title: Hydraulic Fracturing of Shale Beds: Ensuring 
Regulatory Approaches that Will Help Protect Jobs and Domestic 
Energy Production
    Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Federal and state 
regulators and industry representatives on regulatory 
approaches to the hydraulic fracturing of shale beds. This 
hearing provided oversight to forthcoming EPA issued national 
effluent guidelines specifically created for the hydraulic 
fracturing of shale gas.

    Title: Missouri River Flood: An Assessment of River 
Management in 2011 and Operational Plans for the Future
    Date: November 30, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress 
representing Missouri River Valley districts, local officials, 
and residents impacted by the catastrophic Missouri River flood 
of 2011. This hearing provided oversight of Corps activities 
related to Missouri River management.

    Title: Integrated Planning and Permitting: An Opportunity 
for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to Make Smart 
Investments in Water Quality--Parts I and II
    Date: December 14, 2011 and July 25, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, the 
commissioner of a city's department of environmental 
protection, a municipal wastewater utility director, a state 
water quality program director, an environmental activist 
advocate, and the EPA on the Agency's proposed integrated 
planning and permitting regulatory prioritization effort under 
the Clean Water Act.

    Title: Review of Innovative Financing Approaches for 
Community Water Infrastructure Projects--Parts I & II
    Dates: February 28 and March 21, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, municipal and 
private water utility directors, experts in municipal and 
private capital project finance, associations of water quality 
professionals and contractors, and a State infrastructure 
financing authority on potential innovative financing tools, 
including public or private funding and investment mechanisms, 
to better enable local communities to finance wastewater and 
drinking water facilities mandated by State and Federal 
environmental laws and regulations.

    Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget 
Request for the Army Corps of Engineers
    Date: March 27, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Corps on their 
proposed budget and program priorities for fiscal year 2013 and 
provided Members with an opportunity to review the fiscal year 
2013 budget requests, as well as Administration priorities for 
consideration in the Subcommittee's legislative and oversight 
agenda for the Second Session of the 112th Congress.

    Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget 
Request for the Environmental Protection Agency
    Date: March 28, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from the EPA on their proposed 
budget and program priorities for fiscal year 2013, and 
provided Members with an opportunity to review the agencies' 
fiscal year 2013 budget requests, as well as Administration 
priorities for consideration in the Subcommittee's legislative 
and oversight agenda for the Second Session of the 112th 
Congress.

    Title: How Reliability of the Inland Waterway System 
Impacts Economic Competitiveness
    Date: April 18, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Corps and industry as 
to the challenges maintaining the Nation's antiquated inland 
waterway transportation system and its impacts on the Nation's 
competitiveness and job creation.

    Title: Forty Years after the Clean Water Act: Is it Time 
for the States to Implement Section 404 Permitting?
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from representatives of the 
EPA, the Corps, and state water quality agencies on the 
potential opportunities for enhancing Cooperative Federalism 
with the states through state assumption of the Clean Water Act 
section 404 permit program.

Summary of Any Additional Oversight Activities Undertaken by Committee 
                     or Recommendations or Actions


                                HEARINGS

    Title: Biometric IDs for Pilots and Transportation Workers: 
Diary of Failures
    Date: April 14, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above

    Title: How Best to Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's 
Highways
    Date: June 13, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above

    Title: TSA Oversight Part III: Effective Security or 
Security Theater?
    Date: March 26, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above

    Title: TSA Oversight Part IV: Is TSA Effectively Procuring, 
Deploying, and Storing Aviation Security Equipment and 
Technology?
    Date: May 9, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above

Summary of Oversight Hearings Pursuant to Clauses 2(n), (o), and (p) of 
          Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives

    In the 112th Congress, Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires each standing Committee, or a 
Subcommittee thereof, to hold at least one hearing during each 
120-day period following the establishment of the Committee on 
the topic of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in 
government programs as documented by any report from an 
Inspector General or the Comptroller General. Further, the 
Committee shall hold at least one hearing on disclaimers of 
agency financial statements from auditors and one hearing on 
issues raised by reports issued by the Comptroller General 
indicating that Federal programs under the Committee's 
jurisdiction are at high risk for waste, fraud, and 
mismanagement, known as the ``high-risk list.'' The Committee 
complied with the requirements of Rule XI by conducting the 
following hearings:

                             Full Committee

    Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
    Date: May 4, 2011
    Purpose: The Full Committee met on May 4, 2011, pursuant to 
House Rule XI, clause 2(n), to examine the audit work performed 
by the General Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of 
Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG), and the 
Environmental Protection Agency Inspector General (EPA IG) on 
implementation the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
(ARRA). GAO and the two IGs performed extensive audit work on 
the implementation of funded programs from the DOT, including 
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA), the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA), and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The audits uncovered 
significant lapses in oversight by the implementing agencies, 
mismanagement of grants and funds, and lack of transparency.
    See full summary in summary section above.

                                Aviation

    Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program: 
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
    Date: October 5, 2011
    Purpose: Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 2(n), this 
hearing examined the audit work performed by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) and the Department of 
Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG) on implementation of 
the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Next Gen Program. 
While the benefits from the NextGen project were not disputed, 
the problems in executing such a large program were 
highlighted, including poor management by the FAA.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
    Date: April 25, 2012
    Purpose: Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 2(n), this 
hearing examined the audit work performed by the GAO and DOT IG 
on aviation system safety issues, including the recent rise in 
operational errors and runway incursions, and potential causes 
and remedies of them.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: A Review of FAA's efforts to reduce costs and ensure 
safety and efficiency through Realignment and Facility 
Consolidation
    Date: May 31, 2012
    Purpose: An oversight hearing on the FAA's facility 
consolidation and realignment plans and efforts.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: A Review of the FAA's Contract Tower Program
    Date: July 18, 2012
    Purpose: An oversight hearing to review the Federal 
Aviation Administration's (FAA) Contract Tower Program and 
receive testimony on the Department of Transportation Inspector 
General's audit of the FAA's Contract Tower Program.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: A Review of and Update on the Management of FAA's 
NextGen Program
    Date: September 12, 2012
    Purpose: To discuss the management and status of FAA's 
NextGen program.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA): A 
Review of the Department of Transportation Inspector General's 
(DOT IG) Findings and Recommendations
    Date: November 16, 2012
    Purpose: To discuss the DOT IG's November 1, 2012 report on 
the policies, practices, and programs of the MWAA.
    See full summary in summary section above.

                Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation

    Title: Improving and Streamlining the Coast Guard's 
Acquisition Program
    Date: April 13, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony, pursuant to House Rule XI, 
clause 2(n), as a result of a report issued by the General 
Accountability Office (GAO) on the Coast Guard's acquisition 
process. In the report, the GAO made several recommendations to 
reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies within the Coast Guard's 
acquisition directorate to reduce cost overruns and delays.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: What Will It Cost? Protecting the Taxpayer from an 
Unachievable Coast Guard Acquisition Program
    Date: October 4, 2011
    Purpose: Subcommittee met to examine Coast Guard 
Acquisitions programs. This hearing was a follow up to the 
April 13, 2011, Subcommittee hearing on the same. This hearing 
reviewed issues raised in the July 2011 GAO report entitled 
``Action Needed as Approved Deepwater Program Remains 
Unachievable.''
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Creating American Jobs and Assuring the Safety and 
Security of America's Waterways: A Review of the Coast Guard's 
5-year Capital Improvement Plan
    Date: May 16, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of the 
Coast Guard's current acquisition program and examine the 
program's sustainability. This was the third hearing the 
Subcommittee has held this Congress to review the Service's 
acquisition program. The last hearing was held on October 4, 
2011.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: The Challenges That Maintaining Legacy Assets Poses 
to United States Coast Guard Mission Performance
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the 
challenges the Coast Guard faces maintaining its legacy assets 
and how those challenges impact the Coast Guard's mission 
performance. This hearing reviewed issues raised in the GAO's 
report entitled ``Legacy Vessels' Declining Conditions 
Reinforce Need for More Realistic Operational Targets'' (July 
2012).
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private 
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
    Date: February 10, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of 
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their 
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through 
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs and 
Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) as a high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Managing Costs and Mitigating Delays in the Building 
of Social Security's New National Computer Center
    Date: February 11, 2011
    Purpose: A joint oversight hearing between the Subcommittee 
on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency 
Management and the Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on 
Social Security to receive testimony on the site selection and 
construction of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) new 
national computer processing and data storage facility to 
replace the National Computer Center (NCC), currently located 
in Woodlawn, Maryland. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
the Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and 
renovation of Federal property under the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and Clause 2(n) of House Rule 
XI and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO 
as a high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic 
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency 
Management Programs
    Date: March 30, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on how to better respond to disasters in the wake of 
the catastrophic earthquakes that devastated Japan in early 
March 2011. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency 
management programs and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, 
fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
    See full summary in summary section above

    Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal 
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
    Date: April 6, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on whether a civilian Base 
Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) process can 
effectively consolidate Federal office space, maximize value to 
the taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions. The hearing was 
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI and 
Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a 
high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above

    Title: Richard H. Poff Federal Building Renovation: Is it 
Costing the Taxpayer Too Much?
    Date: April 14, 2011
    Purpose: Receive testimony on the renovation and 
modernization of the Richard H. Poff Federal Building, located 
in Roanoke, Virginia. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and 
renovation of Federal property under the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) and Clause 2(n) of 
House Rule XI and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated 
by the GAO as a high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above

    Title: How to Stop Sitting on Our Assets: A Review of the 
Civilian Property Realignment Act
    Date: May 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on specific legislative 
proposals to employ a Base Realignment and Closure Commission 
(BRAC) like process to civilian properties to produce 
significant savings to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of real property 
management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI and Clause 2(p) on 
a management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk 
management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America
    Date: June 16, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the Security and Exchange 
Commission's (SEC) management of its independent authority to 
lease space and the May 16, 2011 Security and Exchange 
Commission Inspector General (SEC IG) report related to SEC's 
lease procurement of 900,000 square feet of space under a ten 
year lease worth over $500 million. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of agencies with 
independent leasing authority and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI 
on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs 
and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a 
high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500 
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
    Date: July 6, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive 
testimony on the SEC mismanagement of its independent authority 
to lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC IG report related to 
SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square feet of space under a 
ten year lease of Constitution Center in Washington, District 
of Columbia, worth over $500 million. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of agencies with 
independent leasing authority, Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs, 
and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a 
high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million 
Los Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
    Date: November 4, 2011
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on 
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles, 
California, including the size, scope, compliance with 
courtroom sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the 
entire courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
    Summary: Received testimony from the United States courts, 
the GSA, and the GAO. The hearing was conducted pursuant to 
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p) on a 
management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk management 
issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
    Date: February 9, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex 
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue NW 
in downtown Washington, District of Columbia, to receive 
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well 
as the status of other underperforming and vacant Federal 
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted 
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of real property 
management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, 
abuse or mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p) 
on a management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk 
management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
    Date: March 22, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW in downtown Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to 
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant Federal properties, 
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can 
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming 
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's 
plan for oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n) 
of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of 
government programs and Clause 2(p) on a management area 
designated by the GAO as a high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of 
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
    Date: April 17, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive 
testimony on GSA's waste of taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010 
Western Regional Conference (WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee 
rewards program, and other waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. 
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for 
oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n) of House 
Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government 
programs and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the 
GAO as a high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
    Date: June 19, 2012
    Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the 
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street, NW in Washington, 
District of Columbia, to receive testimony on the costs to 
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that 
the process for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating 
Plant provides the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs and 
Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a 
high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Vacant Federal Courthouse 
in Miami
    Date: August 6, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the United States 
courts, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the 
General Services Administration (GSA). The hearing focused on 
the costs to the taxpayer of the underperforming or vacant 
assets and the overbuilding of Federal courthouses. The hearing 
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of 
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on 
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs and 
Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a 
high-risk management issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: LA Courthouse: GSA's Plan to Spend $400 Million to 
Create Vacant Space
    Date: August 17, 2012
    Purpose: To receive testimony from the General Services 
Administration (GSA), the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), and the United States Courts about the justification and 
cost implications of building a third courthouse in Los 
Angeles, California. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the 
Committee's plan for oversight of real property management and 
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or 
mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p) on a 
management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk management 
issue.
    See full summary in summary section above.

                          Highways and Transit

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia Field Hearing
    Date: February 14, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local 
area surrounding Beckley. This hearing addressed issues related 
to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a 
topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio Field Hearing
    Date: February 19, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of Ohio, and the local area 
surrounding Columbus. This hearing addressed issues related to 
``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a topic 
contained on General Accountability Office's (GAO) 2011 High 
Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
    Date: February 23, 2011
    Committee: Transportation and Infrastructure; Joint Hearing 
with the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
    Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing in Los 
Angeles, California, with the Senate on the local 
transportation challenges facing Southern California and the 
State of California. This bi-cameral field hearing was part of 
the Committee's effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to 
prepare for the reauthorization of the Federal surface 
transportation programs under Safe, Accountable, Flexible and 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 
(SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 2009, but was 
extended through September 30, 2011. This hearing addressed 
issues related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation 
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Field Hearing
    Date: February 24, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of Oklahoma, and the local area 
surrounding Oklahoma City. This hearing addressed issues 
related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation 
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs: Central Florida Field Hearing
    Date: March 14, 2011
    Purpose: Receive testimony on the local transportation 
challenges facing the State of Florida, and the greater Orlando 
area. This hearing addressed issues related to ``Funding the 
Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a topic contained on 
GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface 
Transportation Programs
    Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
    Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the 
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs. 
This hearing addressed issues related to ``Funding the Nation's 
Surface Transportation System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 
2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform 
the Nation's Surface Transportation Programs
    Date: April 5, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on 
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal 
surface transportation programs. This hearing addressed issues 
related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation 
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: How Best to Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's 
Highways
    Date: June 13, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the 
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing 
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal 
surface transportation programs under Safe, Accountable, 
Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 
Users (SAFETEA-LU), which expired on September 30, 2009, but 
was extended through September 30, 2011.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and 
More Red Tape
    Date: October 12, 2011
    Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's 
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the 
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). This hearing addressed 
issues related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation 
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series.
    See full summary in summary section above.

    Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of DOT's Truck and Bus 
Safety Program
    Date: September 13, 2012
    Purpose: Received testimony from the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration, the trucking and bus industry, 
enforcement officials, and a safety advocate on the 
Administration's Compliance, Safety, Accountability program 
(CSA).
    See full summary in summary section above.

 Oversight or Legislative Activity Conducted as Part of or as a Result 
    of the Inventory and Review of Existing, Pending, and Proposed 
                         Regulations and Orders


                             Full Committee

    Title: A Review of the Delays and Problems Associated with 
TSA's Transportation Worker Identification Credential
    Date: June 28, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA): A 
Review of the Department of Transportation Inspector General's 
(DOT IG) Findings and Recommendations
    Date: November 16, 2012
    Summary: Review of the DOT IG's November 1, 2012 report on 
the policies, practices, and programs of the MWAA.

                                Aviation

    Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry 
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and 
Costly Government Burdens
    Date: June 23, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program: 
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
    Date: October 5, 2011
    Summary: An oversight hearing on the Next Generation Air 
Traffic Control System (NextGen) by the Subcommittee on 
Aviation to receive testimony on benefits, costs, and the 
progress of NextGen implementation.

    Title: Roundtable--Terminal Area Safety
    Date: November 17, 2011
    Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to 
discuss the rise in terminal area air traffic control safety 
incidents in which aircraft pass too close to one another.

    Title: A Review of Issues Associated with Protecting and 
Improving our Nation's Aviation Satellite-based Global 
Positioning System Infrastructure
    Date: February 8, 2012
    Summary: An oversight hearing on the importance of the 
Global Positioning System (GPS) as a critical part of 
transportation infrastructure and how to protect it to ensure 
the transportation safety and efficiencies provided by GPS 
technologies and innovations.

    Title: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
    Public Law: P.L. 112-95
    Bill Number: H.R. 658
    Date: February 14, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emissions Trading 
Scheme
    Date: March 28, 2012
    Summary: The Subcommittee met in an open, but informal 
setting to discuss the European Union's (EU) Emissions Trading 
Scheme (ETS) and its impact on the American aviation industry, 
international law, and global trade.

    Title: Roundtable--NextGen Coalition Building
    Date: April 18, 2012
    Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to 
discuss air traffic control modernization (NextGen) benefits 
and coalition building.

    Title: A Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
    Date: April 25, 2012
    Summary: An oversight hearing on the Federal Aviation 
Administration's safety oversight of the aviation system, as 
well as ways to improve our very safe system.

    Title: Roundtable--FAA's Airport District Office 
Reorganization Plans
    Date: April 27, 2012
    Summary: The Subcommittee, in conjunction with Congressman 
Howard Coble (R-North Carolina) and the North Carolina 
Congressional Delegation, met in an informal setting to discuss 
the FAA's Airport District Office reorganization plans.

    Title: A Review of FAA's efforts to reduce costs and ensure 
safety and efficiency through Realignment and Facility 
Consolidation
    Date: May 31, 2012
    Summary: An oversight hearing on the Federal Aviation 
Administration's facility consolidation and realignment plans 
and efforts.

    Title: Roundtable--A Review of Airline Ancillary Fees
    Date: June 27, 2012
    Summary: A Roundtable to discuss airline ancillary fees and 
their impact on the travelling public.

    Title: A Review of the FAA's Contract Tower Program
    Date: July 18, 2012
    Summary: Review of the Federal Aviation Administration's 
(FAA) Contract Tower Program and the Department of 
Transportation Inspector General's audit of the FAA's Contract 
Tower Program.

    Title: A Review of and Update on the Management of FAA's 
NextGen Program
    Date: September 12, 2012
    Summary: Review of the ongoing management and status of the 
FAA's NextGen program.

                              Coast Guard

    Title: Creating U.S. Maritime Industry Jobs by Reducing 
Regulatory Burdens
    Date: May 24, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S. Exports by 
Enhancing the Marine Transportation System
    Date: June 14, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of 
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Commonsense Approach to 
Ballast Water Regulation
    Date: July 13, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Assuring the Safety of Domestic Energy Production: 
Lessons Learned from the DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill
    Date: November 2, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Recent Regulation of the Maritime Industry: Ensuring 
U.S. Job Growth While Improving Environmental and Worker Safety
    Date: April 26, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Tenth Anniversary of the Maritime Transportation 
Security Act: Are We Safer?
    Date: September 11, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management

    Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic 
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency 
Management Programs
    Date: March 30, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in 
Recovery
    Date: July 14, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving 
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
    Date: October 13, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

                          Highways and Transit

    Title: The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
    Bill Number: H.R. 7
    Date: Reported to the House on February 13, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012, Part 
II
    Bill Number: H.R. 4348
    Date: Passed House on April 18, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of DOT's Truck and Bus 
Safety Program
    Date: September 13, 2012
    Purpose: See summary section above.

              Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials

    Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad 
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
    Date: March 17, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe 
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
    Date: April 12, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

                  Water Resources and the Environment

    Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 872
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs 
Parts I and II
    Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011
    Bill Number: H.R. 2018
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Integrated Planning and Permitting: An Opportunity 
for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to Make Smart 
Investments in Water Quality, Parts I and II
    Date: December 14, 2011 and July 25, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.

    Title: Forty years After the Clean Water Act: Is it Time 
for the States to Implement Section 404 Permitting?
    Date: September 20, 2012
    Summary: See summary section above.
    <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
    

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    In the wake of the worst recession since the Great 
Depression and with more than one million construction workers 
out of work, Committee Democrats had hoped to work closely with 
our Republican colleagues in this Congress on a bipartisan 
agenda of increasing infrastructure investment to create 
family-wage construction jobs and lay the foundation for future 
economic growth. Regrettably, the House of Representatives 
slashed infrastructure investment at every turn, jeopardizing 
the Nation's economic recovery. However, we were heartened that 
the Senate did not agree to these reckless cuts in 
infrastructure investment and the Committee's enacted 
legislation often reflected a fair compromise that we could 
support.
    Although we agree with our Republican colleagues on the 
importance of the legislative and oversight activities of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, we cannot agree 
with the way in which some issues are presented in this report. 
The report mischaracterizes some issues and includes some 
misstatements of fact.
    We are hopeful that the 113th Congress will present an 
opportunity for the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure to rekindle its storied bipartisan tradition and 
refocus on efforts to develop a bipartisan agenda with one 
overriding goal: putting Americans back to work.

                                                Nick J. Rahall, II.