Home > Committee Reports > 114th Congress > S. Rept. 114-243

S. Rept. 114-243 - TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2017114th Congress (2015-2016)

Committee Report

Show Overview

Report Type:	Senate Report
Accompanies:	S.2844
Committees:	Senate Appropriations Committee

Listen to this page

Report text available as:

TXT
PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

Calendar No. 433
114th Congress { } Report
SENATE
2d Session { } 114-243

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

TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2017
_______

April 21, 2016.--Ordered to be printed

_______

Ms. Collins, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 2844]

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2844)
making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation,
and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other purposes,
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2017

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $56,474,000,000
Amount of 2016 appropriations........................... 57,600,707,000
Amount of 2017 budget estimate\1\....................... 51,992,343,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2016 appropriations................................ -1,126,707,000
2017 budget estimate................................ +4,481,657,000

\1\The budget estimate proposed shifting $7,415,017,000 in discretionary
surface transportation programs to mandatory funding from the
Transportation Trust Fund. The Committee recommendation does not
reclassify the funding for these programs. For proper comparison, the
2017 budget estimate should include the additional $7,415,017,000.

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page
Overview and Summary of the Bill................................. 3
Program, Project, and Activity................................... 4
Reprogramming Guidelines......................................... 4
Congressional Budget Justifications.............................. 5
Guidance Documents............................................... 6
Transparency Requirement......................................... 6
Title I: Department of Transportation:
Office of the Secretary...................................... 8
Federal Aviation Administration.............................. 24
Federal Highway Administration............................... 43
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.................. 50
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration............... 54
Federal Railroad Administration.............................. 59
Federal Transit Administration............................... 66
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation................ 73
Maritime Administration...................................... 74
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration....... 79
Office of Inspector General.................................. 81
General Provisions--Department of Transportation............. 82
Title II: Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Management and Administration................................ 84
Administrative Support Offices............................... 88
Program Offices Salaries and Expenses........................ 89
Public and Indian Housing.................................... 95
Community Planning and Development........................... 112
Housing Programs............................................. 119
Federal Housing Administration............................... 125
Government National Mortgage Association..................... 126
Policy Development and Research.............................. 127
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity........................... 128
Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes.............. 130
Information Technology Fund.................................. 131
Office of Inspector General.................................. 134
General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban
Development................................................ 134
Title III: Independent Agencies:
Access Board................................................. 138
Federal Maritime Commission.................................. 139
National Railroad Passenger Corporation: Office of Inspector
General.................................................... 139
National Transportation Safety Board......................... 140
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation........................ 141
Surface Transportation Board................................. 142
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness............ 143
Title IV: General Provisions--This Act........................... 147
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 148
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 149
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 149
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 166
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................ 167

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies appropriations bill provides funding for a
wide array of Federal programs, mostly in the Departments of
Transportation [DOT] and Housing and Urban Development [HUD].
These programs include investments in road, transit, rail,
maritime, and airport infrastructure; the operation of the
Nation's air traffic control system; housing assistance for
those in need, including the homeless, elderly, and disabled;
resources to support community planning and development;
activities to improve road, rail, and pipeline safety; and a
wide range of research efforts.
The bill also provides funding for the Federal Housing
Administration and Government National Mortgage Association to
continue their traditional roles of providing access to
affordable homeownership in the United States.
The programs and activities supported by this bill include
significant responsibilities entrusted to the Federal
Government and its partners to protect human health and safety,
support a vibrant economy, and achieve policy objectives
strongly supported by the American people. The funding provided
in this bill supports the investments necessary for a strong
and economically competitive Nation. The ability to fulfill
these responsibilities and make important investments is made
challenging by pressure on available levels of discretionary
spending as a consequence of the overall public debate on
Federal spending, revenues, and the size of the Federal debt.
This bill makes the operation of the interstate highway
system possible, as well as the world's safest air
transportation system. It ensures safe and sanitary housing for
nearly 5 million low and extremely low-income families and
individuals, over half of whom are elderly and/or disabled. It
provides funding that is leading to the gradual elimination of
homelessness among veterans, youth, individuals and families.
This bill also includes funding for competitive grants to
communities to support transportation infrastructure projects
of national or regional importance.
In the context of overall pressures on spending and the
competing priorities that the Committee faces, this bill, as
reported, provides the proper amount of emphasis on
transportation, housing, community development, and other
programs and activities funded within it. It is consistent with
the subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2017. All
accounts in the bill have been closely examined to ensure that
an appropriate level of funding is provided to carry out the
programs of DOT, HUD, and related agencies. Details on each of
the accounts, the funding level, and the Committee's
justifications for the funding levels are included in the
report.

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

During fiscal year 2017, for the purposes of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and
activity'' [PPA] shall mean any item for which a dollar amount
is contained in appropriations acts (including joint
resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or
accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint
explanatory statements of the committee of conference. This
definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget
(obligational) authority is provided, as well as to
discretionary grants and discretionary grant allocations made
through either bill or report language.

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

The Committee includes a provision (section 405)
establishing the authority by which funding available to the
agencies funded by this act may be reprogrammed for other
purposes. The provision specifically requires the advanced
approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
of any proposal to reprogram funds that:
--creates a new program;
--eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA];
--increases funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds
have been denied or restricted by the Congress;
--proposes to redirect funds that were directed in such
reports for a specific activity to a different purpose;
--augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10
percent, whichever is less;
--reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent,
whichever is less; or
--creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different
from the congressional budget justifications or the
table at the end of the Committee report, whichever is
more detailed.
The Committee retains the requirement that each agency
submit an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this
act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming
and transfer authorities provided in this act. Specifically,
each agency should provide a table for each appropriation with
columns displaying the prior year enacted level; budget
request; adjustments made by Congress; adjustments for
rescissions, if appropriate; and the fiscal year enacted level.
The table shall delineate the appropriation and prior year
enacted level both by object class and by PPA, as well as
identify balances available for use under section 406 of the
bill. The report must also identify items of special
congressional interest.
The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit
reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a
thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a
detailed justification of increases and reductions and the
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget
request for the following fiscal year. Except in emergency
situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later
than June 30.
The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs
and activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The
Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should
be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or
a situation that could not have been anticipated when
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year.
Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency
submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees
on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses from
the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the
Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before
proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider
the request to reprogram funds unapproved.
The Committee would also like to clarify that this section
applies to the Department of Transportation's Working Capital
Fund, and that no funds may be obligated from such funds to
augment programs, projects or activities for which
appropriations have been specifically rejected by the Congress,
or to increase funds or personnel for any PPA above the amounts
appropriated by this act.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

Budget justifications are the primary tool used by the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the
resource requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The
Committee is aware that the format and presentation of budget
materials is largely left to the agency within presentation
objectives set forth by OMB. In fact, OMB Circular A-11, part 6
specifically states that the ``agency should consult with your
congressional committees beforehand to ensure their awareness
of your plans to modify the format of agency budget
documents.'' The Committee expects that all agencies funded
under this act will heed this directive. The Committee expects
all of the budget justifications to provide the data needed to
make appropriate and meaningful funding decisions.
While the Committee values the inclusion of performance
data and presentations, it is important to ensure that vital
budget information that the Committee needs is not lost.
Therefore, the Committee directs that justifications submitted
with the fiscal year 2018 budget request by agencies funded
under this act contain the customary level of detailed data and
explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests
at the level of detail contained in the funding table included
at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall
provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives,
proposed changes in the agency's financial plan from prior year
enactment, and detailed data on all programs and comprehensive
information on any office or agency restructurings. At a
minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification
for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and
materials that compare programs, projects, and activities that
are proposed for fiscal year 2018 to the fiscal year 2017
enacted level.
The Committee is aware that the analytical materials
required for review by the Committee are unique to each agency
in this act. Therefore, the Committee expects that the each
agency will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its
budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year
2018 budget request.
The Committee directs each agency to include within its
budget justification a report on all efforts made to address
the duplication identified by the annual GAO reports along with
legal barriers preventing the agency's ability to further
reduce duplication and legislative recommendations, if
applicable.

GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

The Committee is increasingly concerned about the use of
guidance documents, or interpretive rules, to impose new
requirements on regulated entities even though such documents
are not legally binding. The Supreme Court has recognized there
can be a fine line between what should be issued as a
regulation for purposes of notice and comment rulemaking under
the Administrative Procedure Act and what can be issued as
guidance. The Supreme Court has also recognized that Federal
agencies may sometimes issue guidance to circumvent the notice
and comment rulemaking process. Legal scholars and multiple
members of Congress have also expressed concern about the use
of guidance to avoid rulemaking. Finally, the Government
Accountability Office found that if an agency periodically
reviews its guidance it can significantly reduce unnecessary
guidance. For example, after a sub-agency in the Department of
Labor reviewed its guidance to determine if it was relevant and
current, the sub-agency was able to reduce its guidance by 85
percent. GAO also found that the dissemination of guidance to
the public can be improved.
The Committee recommends the Departments of Transportation
and Housing and Urban Development clearly label in a plain,
prominent, and permanent manner that the agency's guidance
documents are not legally binding and may not be relied upon by
the agency as grounds for agency action. The Committee also
recommends this include a thorough explanation on an agency's
guidance document about why the agency believes it is
appropriate to issue guidance about a matter instead of
proposing a regulation and what specific statutory provisions
or regulation(s) the guidance is interpreting. The Committee
further recommends this guidance be updated every 2 years, with
input solicited from the public, to determine if any of its
guidance is duplicative, outdated, ineffective, insufficient,
or excessively burdensome and needs to be modified,
streamlined, or repealed and place all guidance documents in
one place on its Web site as well as on the relevant sub-agency
Web page. This information should be easily accessible for the
public to comment on guidance and should be sent to the Office
of Management and Budget to determine if the guidance is
significant.

TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENT

The Committee is aware that agencies funded in this act use
resources for advertising purposes. The Committee directs the
agencies in this act to state within the text, audio, or video
used for new advertising purposes, including advertising/
posting on the Internet, that the advertisements are printed,
published, or produced and disseminated at U.S. taxpayer
expense. The agencies may exempt any such advertisements from
this requirement if it creates an adverse impact on safety or
impedes the ability of these agencies to carry out their
statutory authority.

TITLE I

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

The Committee regularly receives technical assistance from
the Department in order to ensure that Appropriations bills are
implemented as intended by Congress. While the vast majority of
technical assistance from the Department is accurate and
timely, )the Committee is disappointed in certain instances of
poor technical assistance in recent years. Specifically, the
Department has withheld information from the Committee
regarding idle funding that could have been more appropriately
spent and has made inaccurate statements regarding the
availability of resources the Committee intended to provide.
Additionally, the Department provided inaccurate technical
assistance to the Committee, inconsistent with the intent of
Congress, which could lead to devastating impacts on the
commercial motor vehicle industry and increase costs to
consumers all while knowing the intent of Congress was not the
case. Therefore, the Committee directs the Department to report
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30
days of any Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies appropriations bill passing the House or
Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding any concerns or
challenges with implementation of funding levels or policy
directives contained in each bill or report.

Office of the Secretary

Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for the
establishment of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation
[OST]. OST is comprised of the Secretary and the Deputy
Secretary immediate and support offices; the Office of the
General Counsel; the Office of the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Policy, including the offices of the
Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs and
the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy; four
Assistant Secretarial offices for Budget and Programs,
Governmental Affairs, Research and Technology, and
Administration; and the Offices of Public Affairs, the
Executive Secretariat, Intelligence, Security and Emergency
Response, and Chief Information Officer. OST also includes the
Department's Office of Civil Rights and the Department's
Working Capital Fund.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $108,750,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 114,396,000
Committee recommendation................................ 116,396,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation finances the costs of policy development
and central supervisory and coordinating functions necessary
for the overall planning and direction of the Department. It
covers the immediate secretarial offices as well as those of
the assistant secretaries, and the general counsel.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $116,396,000 for
salaries and expenses of OST, including $60,000 for reception
and representation expenses. The recommendation is $2,000,000
more than the budget request and $7,646,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The accompanying bill
stipulates that none of the funding provided may be used for
the position of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. The
request to merge the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization with Minority Business Outreach is approved and
these functions are now consolidated into the new Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Outreach.
The accompanying bill authorizes the Secretary to transfer
up to 5 percent of the funds from any office within the Office
of the Secretary to another. The Committee recommendation also
continues language that permits up to $2,500,000 of fees to be
credited to the Office of the Secretary for salaries and
expenses.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendation in comparison to the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level and the budget request:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
------------------------------------ Committee
2016 enacted 2017 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary................................... $2,734,000 $2,758,000 $2,758,000
Office of the Deputy Secretary............................ 1,025,000 1,040,000 1,040,000
Office of the General Counsel............................. 20,609,000 20,772,000 20,772,000
Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy 9,941,000 11,108,000 11,108,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs. 13,697,000 14,020,000 16,020,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs 2,546,000 2,569,000 2,569,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration...... 25,925,000 30,054,000 30,054,000
Office of Public Affairs.................................. 2,029,000 2,142,000 2,142,000
Office of the Executive Secretariat....................... 1,737,000 1,760,000 1,760,000
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.... 1,434,000 ................ ................
Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response.. 10,793,000 11,089,000 11,089,000
Office of the Chief Information Officer................... 16,280,000 17,084,000 17,084,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 108,750,000 114,396,000 116,396,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Secretary of Transportation provides leadership and has
the primary responsibility to provide overall planning,
direction, and control of the Department.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,758,000 for fiscal year 2017
for the Immediate Office of the Secretary. The recommendation
is equal to the budget request and $24,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.
Mobile Wireless Devices.--On February 24, 2014, the
Department published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Docket No. DOT-OST-2014-0002) regarding the use of mobile
wireless devices for voice calls on commercial aircraft. The
approval of voice communication over mobile wireless devices
during commercial airline flights would be problematic for many
of the nearly 2 million Americans who fly each day and
challenging for the airlines. The Committee is strongly
concerned with the duration of this rulemaking process and
directs the Department to complete its rulemaking expeditiously
and put in place a clear rule that takes into account the full
impact on consumers and the commercial aviation industry.
Puget Sound.--The Committee commends FTA's Region 10 and
the FHWA's Washington Division for signing the Puget Sound
Federal Caucus Memorandum of Understanding in 2014. The
recovery and cleanup of Puget Sound is essential to the
regional economy and continued coordination and sharing of
expertise among Federal partners is critical to furthering
current efforts. The Committee directs the DOT agencies that
are party to the Memorandum to work with their counterparts in
the Puget Sound Federal Caucus to renew and strengthen the MOU
prior to its expiration on March 27, 2017.

IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Deputy Secretary has the primary responsibility of
assisting the Secretary in the overall planning and direction
of the Department.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,040,000 for the Immediate
Office of the Deputy Secretary, which is equal to the budget
request and $15,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level.

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of the General Counsel provides legal services
to the Office of the Secretary, including the conduct of
aviation regulatory proceedings and aviation consumer
activities, and coordinates and reviews the legal work in the
chief counsels' offices of the operating administrations. The
General Counsel is the chief legal officer of the Department
and the final authority on all legal questions.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,772,000 for expenses of the
Office of the General Counsel for fiscal year 2017. The
recommended funding level is equal to the budget request and
$163,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION FOR POLICY

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Under Secretary for Policy is the chief policy officer
of the Department and is responsible to the Secretary for the
analysis, development, and review of policies and plans for
domestic and international transportation matters. The Office
administers the economic regulatory functions regarding the
airline industry and is responsible for international aviation
programs, the essential air service program, airline fitness
licensing, acquisitions, international route awards,
computerized reservation systems, and special investigations,
such as airline delays.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $11,108,000 for the Office of the
Under Secretary for Policy. The recommended funding level is
equal to the budget request and $1,167,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level. The request to fund a new Office of
Safety Oversight is denied. Instead, funding is provided
directly to the operating modes to address critical safety
needs.

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs serves as
the Chief Financial Officer for the Department and provides
leadership on all financial management matters. The primary
responsibilities of this office include ensuring the
development and justification of the Department's annual budget
submissions for consideration by the Office of Management and
Budget and the Congress. The Office is also responsible for the
proper execution and accountability of these resources. In
addition, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer for the
Office of the Secretary is located within the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $16,020,000 for the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs. The recommended
level is $2,000,000 more than the budget request and $2,323,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee
recommendation includes not less than $2,000,000 to assist the
Department in complying with the Digital Accountability and
Transparency Act. The amount provided is $2,000,000 less than
the budget request, which was requested as a separate
appropriation.

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs advises
the Secretary on all congressional and intergovernmental
activities and on all departmental legislative initiatives and
other relationships with Members of Congress. The Assistant
Secretary promotes effective communication with other Federal
agencies and regional Department officials, and with State and
local governments and national organizations for development of
departmental programs; and ensures that consumer preferences,
awareness, and needs are brought into the decisionmaking
process.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $2,569,000 for the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs. The
recommended level is equal to the budget request and $23,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible
for establishing policies and procedures, setting guidelines,
working with the operating administrations to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of the Department in human
resource management, security and administrative management,
real and personal property management, and acquisition and
grants management.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $30,054,000 for the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Administration. The recommended funding
level is equal to the budget request and $4,129,000 more than
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Director of Public Affairs is the principal advisor to
the Secretary and other senior departmental officials on public
affairs questions. The Office is responsible for managing the
Secretary's presence in the media, writing speeches and press
releases, and preparing the Secretary for public appearances.
The Office arranges media events and news conferences, and
responds to media inquiries on the Department's programs and
other transportation-related issues. It also provides
information to the Secretary on the opinions and reactions of
the public and news media on these programs and issues.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,142,000 for the Office of
Public Affairs, which is equal to the budget request and
$113,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Executive Secretariat assists the Secretary and the
Deputy Secretary in carrying out their management functions and
responsibilities by controlling and coordinating internal and
external written materials.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,760,000 for the Executive
Secretariat. The recommendation is equal to the budget request
and $23,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
has primary responsibility for providing policy direction for
small and disadvantaged business participation in the
Department's procurement and grant programs, and effective
execution of the functions and duties under sections 8 and 15
of the Small Business Act, as amended.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation is consistent with the budget
request for the Office to merge with Minority Business Outreach
into the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
and Outreach.

OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE, SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency
Response ensures the development, coordination, and execution
of plans and procedures for the Department to balance
transportation security requirements with the safety, mobility,
and economic needs of the Nation. The Office keeps the
Secretary and his advisors apprised of current developments and
long-range trends in international issues, including terrorism,
aviation, trade, transportation markets, and trade agreements.
The Office also advises the Department's leaders on policy
issues related to intelligence, threat information sharing,
national security strategies and national preparedness and
response planning.
To ensure the Department is able to respond in disasters,
the Office prepares for and coordinates the Department's
participation in national and regional exercises and training
for emergency personnel. The Office also administers the
Department's Continuity of Government and Continuity of
Operations programs and initiatives. Additionally, the Office
provides direct emergency response and recovery support through
the National Response Framework and operates the Department's
Crisis Management Center. The center monitors the Nation's
transportation system 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and is the
Department's focal point during emergencies.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $11,089,000 for the Office of
Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response. The
recommendation is equal to the budget request and $296,000 more
than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO] serves
as the principal adviser to the Secretary on matters involving
information technology, cybersecurity, privacy, and records
management.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $17,084,000 for the Office of the
Chief Information Officer, which is equal to the budget request
and $804,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $13,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 18,007,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,044,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and
Technology has taken over the responsibilities previously held
by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration. The
responsibilities include coordinating, facilitating, and
reviewing the Department's research and development programs
and activities; coordinating and developing positioning,
navigation and timing [PNT] technology; maintaining PNT policy,
coordination and spectrum management; implementing the civil
signal performance monitoring requirements in the Global
Positioning Systems NextGen Operational Control System in
collaboration with the Air Force; and overseeing and providing
direction to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, the
Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, the
University Transportation Centers program, the Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center and the Transportation Safety
Institute.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,044,000
for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and
Technology. This amount is $4,963,000 less than the budget
request and $44,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendation in comparison to the budget request and the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level:

University Transportation Centers.--The Committee continues
to support University Transportation Centers, which is funded
through the Federal Highway Administration. Under the Committee
recommendation, University Transportation Centers will continue
to receive the levels authorized under the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation Act.
Small Business Innovation Research.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of the Small Business Innovation
Research [SBIR] program and its previous success in
commercialization from federally funded research and
development projects. The SBIR program encourages domestic
small business to engage in Federal research and development
and creates jobs in the smallest firms. The Committee therefore
urges the Department to place an increased focus on awarding
SBIR awards to firms with fewer than 50 people. In addition,
the Committee encourages the Department to take steps to ensure
SBIR spending levels meet or exceed statutory requirements.
Technology Solutions.--The Committee encourages the
Department of Transportation to review and test nano-technology
solutions that may provide a benefit to Federal, State and
local governments by extending the life and utility of
materials such as cement, asphalt and steel.
Autonomous Vehicles.--The Committee recognizes the rapid
pace at which autonomous vehicle technology is developing, and
is interested in validating the safety of the new technology.
To help facilitate the deployment and safety testing of
autonomous vehicles, the Committee encourages the Secretary to
solicit applications under the Advanced Transportation and
Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Program for
autonomous vehicle projects to test the feasibility of
deployment through geographically contained ridesharing pilot
programs. In reviewing applications, the Secretary should
consider the extent to which applicants propose to include the
gathering and sharing of critical safety data with the
government and the extent to which applicants propose to test
the benefits of the technology with groups that might otherwise
have limited transportation options, such as older Americans
who no longer drive or those with disabilities or no driver's
license.

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $500,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................ 1,250,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 525,000,000

\1\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This program provides grants and credit assistance to State
and local governments, transit agencies, or a collaboration of
such entities for capital investments in surface transportation
infrastructure that will have a significant impact on the
Nation, a metropolitan area or a region. Eligible projects
include highways and bridges, public transportation, freight
and passenger rail, and port infrastructure. The Department
awards grants on a competitive basis; however, the Department
must ensure an equitable geographic distribution of funds and
an appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and
rural communities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $525,000,000 for
grants and credit assistance for investment in significant
transportation projects, which is $25,000,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The request shifts this program
to mandatory spending. The Committee, however, does not expect
the enactment of legislation that funds this program on the
mandatory side of the budget, and therefore provides its
funding recommendation in order to continue investment in these
important transportation projects. The recommendation does not
include funding for the 21st century clean transportation
investments plan.
Planning Activities.--The Committee recommendation allows
up to $25,000,000 to be used for the planning, preparation, or
design of projects eligible for funding under this heading.
Protections for Rural Areas.--The Committee continues to
believe that our Federal infrastructure programs must benefit
communities across the country. For this reason, the Committee
continues to require the Secretary to award grants and credit
assistance in a manner that ensures an equitable geographic
distribution of funds and an appropriate balance in addressing
the needs of urban and rural communities.
Investing in infrastructure in rural America is extremely
important for growing the economy, increasing exports, and
expanding markets. For this reason, the Committee has set aside
no less than 30 percent of the program's funding for projects
located in rural areas, and included specific provisions to
match grant requirements with the needs of rural areas.
Specifically, the Committee has lowered the minimum size of a
grant awarded to a rural area and increased the Federal share
of the total project cost.
Port Infrastructure.--The Committee recognizes the
important role that ports play in our Nation's transportation
network. With the prediction that the volume of trade through
our Nation's ports will substantially increase in the next
decade, our Nation's infrastructure will be challenged to
accommodate the increase in the movement of freight. Growth at
our Nation's ports simultaneously increases demand on our
transportation systems. Therefore, the Committee continues to
identify inland and land based ports as eligible recipients of
this program and directs the Secretary to take into
consideration, when selecting recipients, the annual tonnage,
existing terminal capacity, and potential economic benefits of
improvements to, or expansion of, ports.

NATIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND INNOVATIVE FINANCE BUREAU

Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $3,000,000
Committee Recommendation................................ 3,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Surface Transportation and Innovative Finance
Bureau will administer and coordinate or consolidate aspects of
the U.S. Department of Transportation's existing surface
transportation innovative finance programs as authorized in
section 9001 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation
[FAST] Act, contingent upon advance approval by the Committee.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 to establish and
fulfill the duties of the National Surface Transportation and
Innovative Finance Bureau, as authorized in section 9001 of the
FAST Act, which is equal to the budget request and $3,000,000
above fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee directs the
Bureau to report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations on streamlining the application approval
processes as required under 49 U.S.C. 116(d)(5).

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CAPITAL

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 4,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Financial Management Capital program is a multi-year
business transformation initiative to streamline and
standardize the financial systems and business processes across
the Department. The initiative includes upgrading and enhancing
the commercial software used for DOT's financial systems,
improving the cost and performance data provided to managers,
and instituting new accounting standards and mandates.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee is recommending $4,000,000 to complete the
Secretary's Financial Management Capital initiative, which is
equal to the budget request and $1,000,000 less than fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.

CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 to
support the Secretary's Cyber Security Initiative, which is
equal to the budget request and $7,000,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $9,678,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 9,751,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,751,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the
Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity
matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for
the operating administrations, investigating claims that small
businesses were denied certification or improperly certified as
disadvantaged business enterprises, and overseeing the
Department's conduct of its civil rights responsibilities and
making final determinations on civil rights complaints. In
addition, the Civil Rights Office is responsible for enforcing
laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in federally
operated and federally assisted transportation programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a funding level of $9,751,000 for
the Office of Civil Rights. The recommendation is equal to the
budget request and $73,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $8,500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 17,043,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,043,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of the Secretary performs those research
activities and studies which can more effectively or
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This
research effort supports the planning, research, and
development activities needed to assist the Secretary in the
formulation of national transportation policies. The program is
carried out primarily through contracts with other Federal
agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit research
organizations, and private firms.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $12,043,000 for Transportation
Planning, Research, and Development, which is $5,000,000 less
than the budget request and $3,543,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level. The Committee directs the Secretary to
dedicate $3,000,000 to support the Interagency Infrastructure
Permitting Improvement Center. Further, the Committee rejects
the request for the proposed Clean Energy Research--Green Ports
Study.
Nonmotorized User Safety.--The Committee is aware that
adults 65 and over make up a disproportionate share of
pedestrian fatalities and that pedestrian fatalities continue
to rise. Consistent with section 1442 of the FAST Act, the
Secretary of Transportation should conduct rigorous outreach to
States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations for the purpose
of creating safe communities and reducing traffic fatalities
among nonmotorized users. Specifically through the Safer
People, Safer Streets initiative, the Secretary should expand
the availability of technical assistance and training workshops
to help States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations [MPOs]
revise their practices, standards and performance measurements
in all phases of project planning, development, and operation
with the goal of reducing fatalities among nonmotorized users.
In fulfilling the report required in section 1442, the
Secretary should include guidance to States on how to identify
the design and accommodation needs for each class of roadway
user, separated by categories of age and ability, as well as
actions that could be taken by State and local partners to
improve safe and adequate accommodations for all users of the
transportation network, including recommendations on changing
policies and procedures; practical steps to modify planned and
existing infrastructure; a list of common barriers to
implementation and recommendations to overcome such barriers;
guidance on evaluating the costs and benefits of safe and
adequate accommodations; and recommendations for maximizing
State and local cooperation.

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Limitation, 2016........................................ $190,039,000
Budget estimate, 2017...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 190,389,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Working Capital Fund provides technical and
administrative services to the Department's operating
administrations and other Federal entities. The services are
centrally performed in the interest of economy and efficiency,
are funded through negotiated agreements with Department
operating administrations and other Federal customers, and are
billed on a fee-for-service basis to the maximum extent
possible.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $190,389,000 on
activities financed through the Working Capital Fund. The
recommended limit is $350,000 more than the limit enacted for
fiscal year 2016. The Department requested that no limitation
be included for fiscal year 2017.
As in past years, the bill specifies that the limitation on
the Working Capital Fund shall apply only to the Department and
not to services provided for other entities. The Committee
directs services to be provided on a competitive basis to the
maximum extent possible.
The Committee notes that the ``transparency paper''
included in the justifications for fiscal year 2017 provides
essential information on total budgetary resources for the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and the
Office of the Chief Information Officer, including the balance
of resources provided through the Working Capital Fund and
direct appropriations. Therefore, the Committee directs the
Department to update this ``transparency paper'' and include it
in the budget justifications for fiscal year 2018.

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on
Appropriations guaranteed
loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016.................... $933,000 $18,367,000
Budget estimate, 2017................... 941,000 ..............
Committee recommendation................ 941,000 18,367,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Minority Business Resource Center of the Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Outreach
provides assistance in obtaining short-term working capital for
disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The
program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime
interest rates for transportation-related projects. As required
by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this account records
the subsidy costs associated with guaranteed loans for this
program as well as administrative expenses of this program.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $339,000 to
cover the subsidy costs for guaranteed loans and $602,000 for
administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan
program. These recommended levels provide a total funding level
of $941,000 for the Minority Business Resource Center. This
total funding level is equal to the budget request and $8,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee
also recommends a limitation on guaranteed loans of
$18,367,000, equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION AND OUTREACH

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,084,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 4,646,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,646,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides contractual support to assist
small, women-owned, Native American, and other disadvantaged
business firms in securing contracts and subcontracts for
transportation-related projects that involve Federal spending.
Separate funding is provided for these activities since this
program provides grants and contract assistance that serve
Department-wide goals and not just OST purposes.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,646,000 for grants and
contractual support, which is $1,562,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. The
Committee supports the request to merge the Minority Business
Outreach program with the Office of Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization from the Salaries and Expenses accounts,
to be called the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization and Outreach. The Committee accepts this approach,
fully funding the request for this consolidation.

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides funding for the Essential Air
Service [EAS] program, which was created to continue air
service to communities that had received federally mandated air
service prior to deregulation of commercial aviation in 1978.
The program currently provides subsidies to air carriers
serving small communities that meet certain criteria.
The Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] collects user
fees that cover the air traffic control services the agency
provides to aircraft that neither take off from, nor land in,
the United States. These fees are commonly referred to as
``overflight fees'' and the receipts from the fees are used to
help finance the EAS program.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations Mandatory Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, 2016............................................. $175,000,000 $108,000,000 $283,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017........................................... 150,000,000 104,000,000 254,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................ 150,000,000 104,000,000 254,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee recommends the appropriation of $150,000,000
for the EAS program. This appropriation would be in addition to
an estimated $104,000,000 of overflight fees collected by the
FAA, allowing the Department to support a total program level
for EAS of $254,000,000. The appropriation and the level of
funding from overflight fees under the Committee's
recommendation are both equal to the budget request. The total
program level under the Committee's recommendation is
$29,000,000 less than the total program level enacted for
fiscal year 2016, which was comprised of an appropriation of
$175,000,000 plus $108,000,000 in overflight fees.
Proximity to the Nearest Hub Airport.--The Committee
continues to include a provision that prohibits the Department
from entering into a new contract with an EAS community located
less than 40 miles from the nearest hub airport before the
Secretary has negotiated with the community over a local cost
share.
Aircraft Size Requirement.--The Committee continues to
include a provision that removes the requirement for 15-
passenger seat aircraft. This requirement adds to the cost of
the EAS program because the fleet of 15-passenger seat aircraft
continues to age and grow more difficult for airlines to
maintain. The Committee, however, expects that the Department
will use this flexibility judiciously. The Department should
use it for communities where historical passenger levels
indicate that smaller aircraft would still accommodate the
great majority of passengers, or for communities where viable
proposals for service are not available. The Committee does not
expect the Department to use this flexibility simply to lower
costs if a community can show regular enplanement levels that
would justify larger aircraft.
EAS Airports.--The Committee recognizes that seasonal
airports may need to operate beyond current dates and therefore
recommends that the FAA utilize existing budget authorities to
ensure seasonal EAS airports are able to operate when airport
resources and weather permit.
Passenger Levels and Subsidy Rates.--The following table
reflects the points in the continental United States currently
receiving EAS service, their annual subsidy rates, and their
level of subsidy per passenger.

ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE SUBSIDY PER PASSENGER
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Est. miles
to nearest Average Annual subsidy Passenger Subsidy per
State EAS communities hub (S, M, enplanements rates at 9/30/15 totals at 9/ passenger
or L) per day 30/15 at 9/30/15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALMuscle Shoals\1\ 60 1.9 $605,728 1,208 $501
AREl Dorado/Camden 117 13.4 1,624,636 8,390 194
ARHarrison 86 15.5 2,168,360 9,734 223
ARHot Springs 51 9.9 1,423,980 6,198 230
ARJonesboro 82 15.3 1,921,026 9,571 201
AZKingman\2\ 121 1.3 856,348 787 n/a
AZPage 282 9.1 1,891,308 5,727 330
AZPrescott 102 11.0 2,056,469 6,916 297
AZShow Low 173 5.6 1,112,976 3,508 317
CACrescent City\1\ 231 18.1 1,261,488 11,315 111
CAEl Centro 101 8.4 1,947,342 5,228 372
CAMerced\1\ 60 10.7 1,918,704 6,705 286
CAVisalia 47 14.9 1,899,753 9,297 204
COAlamosa 164 9.8 1,604,276 6,119 262
COCortez 255 7.5 1,122,323 4,705 239
COPueblo\1\ 36 4.9 1,502,092 3,069 489
GAMacon\1\ 82 0.3 193,851 188 n/a
IABurlington 98 21.2 1,949,808 13,300 147
IAFort Dodge\1\ 91 10.5 2,140,470 6,599 324
IAMason City\1\ 131 17.7 3,268,588 11,078 295
IASioux City 88 79.8 600,222 49,959 12
IAWaterloo 63 76.8 911,778 48,101 19
ILDecatur 126 23.7 2,668,817 14,859 180
ILMarion/Herrin 123 30.6 2,129,562 19,148 111
ILQuincy 111 29.4 1,974,896 18,419 107
KSDodge City 150 6.9 1,558,776 4,339 359
KSGarden City 202 82.7 1,412,990 51,774 27
KSGreat Bend\2\ 114 0.7 697,477 462 1,510
KSHays 166 27.9 2,219,610 17,496 127
KSLiberal/Guymon, OK 228 8.4 1,558,290 5,280 295
KSSalina 97 4.5 997,557 2,824 353
KYOwensboro 115 12.0 1,551,120 7,481 207
KYPaducah 146 68.1 1,956,717 42,621 46
MDHagerstown 78 3.8 1,453,430 2,374 612
MEAugusta/Waterville 58 15.8 1,764,038 9,903 178
MEBar Harbor 157 14.0 1,620,836 8,785 185
MEPresque Isle/Houlton 274 40.5 4,680,585 25,322 185
MERockland 76 21.3 1,824,399 13,306 137
MIAlpena 174 32.6 2,128,800 20,405 104
MIEscanaba 227 51.9 3,318,111 32,485 102
MIHancock/Houghton 321 76.7 649,152 48,033 14
MIIron Mountain/Kingsford 223 34.6 2,794,707 21,659 129
MIIronwood/Ashland, WI 213 14.8 3,439,386 9,265 371
MIManistee/Ludington 121 15.9 1,481,048 9,983 148
MIMuskegon 49 48.4 1,325,415 30,305 44
MIPellston 213 79.8 1,004,018 49,958 20
MISault Ste. Marie 281 71.8 1,601,568 44,939 36
MNBemidji 128 74.7 1,133,001 46,754 24
MNBrainerd 123 53.2 1,581,872 33,291 48
MNChisholm/Hibbing 199 37.1 2,537,352 23,227 109
MNInternational Falls 298 41.8 1,789,868 26,195 68
MNThief River Falls 129 3.4 2,119,062 2,151 985
MOCape Girardeau/Sikeston 127 18.6 1,649,760 11,631 142
MOFort Leonard Wood 85 24.5 2,561,219 15,363 167
MOJoplin 70 86.9 427,518 54,373 8
MOKirksville 137 17.0 1,655,208 10,626 156
MSGreenville\1\ 124 0.7 309,600 441 702
MSLaurel/Hattiesburg 85 31.2 3,805,284 19,539 195
MSMeridian 84 67.4 3,769,249 42,178 89
MSTupelo 94 8.3 1,725,914 5,181 333
MTButte 75 85.4 737,880 53,466 14
MTGlasgow 285 12.0 2,054,790 7,504 274
MTGlendive 223 7.8 1,931,811 4,885 395
MTHavre 230 7.7 2,024,704 4,795 422
MTSidney 272 30.6 3,773,979 19,170 197
MTWest Yellowstone 89 65.4 497,170 15,952 31
MTWolf Point 293 11.9 2,160,390 7,462 290
NDDevils Lake 159 16.6 2,997,834 10,379 289
NDJamestown ND 92 24.2 3,042,799 15,164 201
NEAlliance 233 3.4 923,316 2,124 435
NEChadron 290 3.3 842,014 2,036 414
NEGrand Island 138 82.5 1,673,526 51,633 32
NEKearney 181 15.2 2,077,827 9,493 219
NEMcCook 256 1.3 695,303 791 879
NENorth Platte 255 12.0 1,743,106 7,501 232
NEScottsbluff 192 11.9 1,621,737 7,480 217
NHLebanon/White River Junction, VT 74 31.8 2,883,284 19,926 145
NMCarlsbad 149 4.4 1,288,380 2,767 466
NMClovis 102 15.7 3,234,816 9,815 330
NMSilver City/Hurley/Deming 134 9.5 2,804,544 5,954 471
NYJamestown NY 76 5.3 1,790,066 3,289 544
NYMassena 138 13.8 2,253,178 8,634 261
NYOgdensburg 105 14.8 2,034,732 9,243 220
NYPlattsburgh 82 26.0 2,807,973 16,253 173
NYSaranac Lake/Lake Placid 138 15.7 1,835,530 9,826 187
NYWatertown NY 54 61.5 3,273,620 38,521 85
ORPendleton 185 13.5 1,797,333 8,422 213
PAAltoona 112 7.3 1,920,171 4,568 420
PABradford\1\ 77 7.3 1,315,318 4,546 289
PADuBois 112 10.9 2,199,516 6,793 324
PAFranklin/Oil City\1\ 85 2.9 934,506 1,815 515
PAJohnstown 84 13.6 2,338,824 8,485 276
PALancaster 28 4.2 2,002,455 2,620 764
SDAberdeen 176 85.4 1,058,488 53,450 20
SDHuron\2\ 121 3.1 2,500,160 1,920 1,302
SDWatertown SD 102 4.3 2,446,273 2,688 910
TNJackson 86 3.9 1,435,281 2,427 591
TXVictoria 119 9.5 2,420,118 5,977 405
UTCedar City 179 41.6 2,351,695 26,045 90
UTMoab\1\ 256 12.5 1,361,409 7,851 173
UTVernal\1\ 150 8.4 819,864 5,279 155
VAStaunton 113 17.2 1,823,986 10,751 170
VTRutland 69 16.9 1,352,052 10,562 128
WIEau Claire 92 53.5 1,492,861 33,512 45
WIRhinelander 190 69.5 1,878,684 43,524 43
WVBeckley 168 7.6 2,946,550 4,729 623
WVClarksburg/Fairmont 96 14.7 2,278,596 9,218 247
WVGreenbrier/White Sulphur Springs 162 18.3 3,488,764 11,431 305
WVMorgantown 75 24.0 2,316,855 15,015 154
WVParkersburg/Marietta, OH 110 14.2 3,338,140 8,907 375
WYCody 106 104.8 1,340,218 65,574 20
WYLaramie 145 40.5 1,908,913 25,328 75
WYWorland\2\ 161 2.7 1,866,872 1,697 1,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Service Hiatus:
Bradford, PA--no service between 10/31/14 and 2/28/15
Crescent City, CA--no service between 4/7/15 and 9/15/15
Fort Dodge, IA--no service between 10/1/14 and 2/23/15
Franklin/Oil City, PA--no service between 11/1/14 and 3/4/15
Greenville, MS--no service between 10/1/14 and 3/16/15
Macon, GA--no service between 11/5/14 and 9/30/15
Mason City, IA--no service between 10/1/14 and 11/17/14
Merced, CA--no service between 8/31/15 and 9/30/15
Moab, UT--no service between 4/30/15 and 9/30/15
Muscle Shoals, AL--no service between 10/1/14 and 1/12/15
Pueblo, CO--no service between 6/3/15 and 9/30/15
Vernal, UT--no service between 5/1/15 and 9/30/15.
\2\Termination:
Kingman, AZ--the Department issued Order 2015-3-6 on 3/13/2015 to terminate Kingman's eligibility as of 4/
30/15, because the
subsidy per passenger exceeded the $1,000 statutory limit during fiscal year 2014.
DOT has tentatively terminated the eligibility of Great Bend, KS, Huron, SD, and Worland, WY because the
subsidy per passenger ex-
ceeded the $1,000 statutory limit during fiscal year 2015.
\3\Actual subsidy paid may be less than obligated amounts because air carriers may have completed fewer
flights than proposed.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

Section 101 prohibits the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation from obligating funds originally provided to a
modal administration in order to approve assessments or
reimbursable agreements, unless the Department follows the
regular process for the reprogramming of funds, including
congressional notification.
Section 102 allows the Department of Transportation to make
use of the Working Capital Fund in providing transit benefits
to Federal employees.
Section 103 places simple administrative requirements on
the Department of Transportation's Council on Credit and
Finance. These requirements include posting a schedule of
meetings on the DOT Web site, posting the meeting agendas on
the Web site, and recording the minutes of each meeting.

Federal Aviation Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] is responsible
for the safe movement of civil aviation and the evolution of a
national system of airports. The Federal Government's
regulatory role in civil aviation began with the creation of an
Aeronautics Branch within the Department of Commerce pursuant
to the Air Commerce Act of 1926. This act instructed the agency
to foster air commerce; designate and establish airways;
establish, operate, and maintain aids to navigation; arrange
for research and development to improve such aids; issue
airworthiness certificates for aircraft and major aircraft
components; and investigate civil aviation accidents. In the
Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, these activities were
transferred to a new, independent agency named the Civil
Aeronautics Authority.
Congress streamlined regulatory oversight in 1957 with the
creation of two separate agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency
and the Civil Aeronautics Board. When the Department of
Transportation [DOT] began its operations in 1967, the Federal
Aviation Agency was renamed the Federal Aviation Administration
[FAA] and became one of several modal administrations within
DOT. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out with
enactment of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and ceased
to exist in 1984. Responsibility for the investigation of civil
aviation accidents was given to the National Transportation
Safety Board in 1967. FAA's mission expanded in 1995 with the
transfer of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation from
the Office of the Secretary, and decreased in December 2001
with the transfer of civil aviation security activities to the
Transportation Security Administration.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The total recommended funding level for the FAA for fiscal
year 2017 amounts to $16,412,354,000 including new budget
authority and a limitation on the obligation of contract
authority. This funding level is $512,502,000 more than the
budget request and $131,630,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for fiscal year 2017 in comparison to the
budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted level:

OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $9,909,724,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 9,994,352,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,048,352,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides funds for the operation,
maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air
traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers
administrative and managerial costs for the FAA's regulatory,
international, commercial space, medical, research, engineering
and development programs, as well as policy oversight and
agency management functions. The Operations appropriation
includes the following major activities:
--the Air Traffic Organization which operates, on a 24-hour
daily basis, the national air traffic system, including
the establishment and maintenance of a national system
of aids to navigation, the development and distribution
of aeronautical charts and the administration of
acquisition, and research and development programs;
--the regulation and certification activities, including
establishment and surveillance of civil air regulations
to assure safety and development of standards, rules
and regulations governing the physical fitness of
airmen, as well as the administration of an Aviation
Medical Research Program;
--the Office of Commercial Space Transportation; and
--headquarters and support offices.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $10,048,352,000 for FAA
Operations. This funding level is $54,000,000 more than the
budget request, and $138,628,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. The Committee recommendation derives
$9,190,000,000 of the appropriation from the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund. The balance of the appropriation will be drawn from
the General Fund of the Treasury.
As in past years, the FAA is directed to report immediately
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in the
event resources are insufficient to operate a safe and
effective air traffic control system.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate and fiscal
year 2016 enacted level:

FAA OPERATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-------------------------------------- Committee
2016 enacted 2017 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic organization............................... $7,505,293,000 $7,539,785,000 $7,593,785,000
Aviation safety........................................ 1,258,411,000 1,286,982,000 1,286,982,000
Commercial space transportation........................ 17,800,000 19,826,000 19,826,000
Finance and Management................................. 760,500,000 771,342,000 771,342,000
NextGen Operations and Planning........................ 60,089,000 60,155,000 60,155,000
Security and hazardous materials safety................ 100,880,000 107,161,000 107,161,000
Staff offices.......................................... 206,751,000 209,101,000 209,101,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ 9,909,724,000 9,994,352,000 10,048,352,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] Reform--
Reauthorization of FAA Programs and Air Traffic Control
Governance.--The last multi-year authorization for FAA programs
and activities expired on September 30, 2015. As a result, the
FAA's programs are in the midst of its second short-term
extension. The Committee believes there is broad consensus on
needed reforms to the FAA's certification process; oversight of
unmanned aircraft systems; implementation of NextGen
technologies; and the important safety oversight role of the
FAA. However, there remains vigorous dispute over proposals to
separate air traffic control functions from the rest of the
FAA's operations. The attempt to remove the air traffic control
system from the FAA is fraught with risk, could lead to
uncontrollable cost increases to consumers, and could
ultimately harm users of and operators in the system, including
the flying public, the aviation community, FAA's workforce, and
the small towns in rural America that rely on access to the
national air space.
The Committee strongly believes that air traffic control
should remain an inherently governmental function where the Air
Traffic Control Organization [ATO] is subject to on-going
congressional oversight so that resource needs and activities
are reviewed. The annual congressional oversight process is
best suited to protect consumers and preserve access to urban,
suburban and rural communities. The Senate affirmed this
position by not including any structure changes to privatize
the air traffic control system in the recent passage of the
Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2016.
The Committee is confident that the able leadership of the
authorizing committees can reach an expeditious resolution to a
multi-year authorization bill while avoiding a prolonged and
contentious fight over removing the ATO from the FAA. Given the
growing congressional opposition to removing the ATO from the
FAA, the Committee will prohibit funding for this purpose
should there be any effort to bypass the will of Congress.
Mission Support Network Capacity Upgrades.--The demand for
space on the administrative telecom network at air traffic
control facilities is increasing due to each new application
and program requiring more space on the network. This slows
down all the programs on the network where, at some facilities,
the problem is so acute that only few users can be on one
application at a time. This problem is affecting the ability of
air traffic controllers to carry out safety-critical electronic
training while carrying out other administrative duties.
Therefore, the Committee provides $5,000,000 to acquire
additional bandwidth on its administrative telecom network to
support electronic training and other duties of air traffic
controllers and other air traffic facility personnel.
Contract Towers.--The Committee recommendation provides
$159,000,000 for the contract tower program, including the
cost-share contract towers. This total funding level is
sufficient to cover all towers that will be operating during
fiscal year 2017. Current law limits contributions in the
contract tower cost share program to 20 percent of total costs.
The Committee finds that Federal Contract Towers are a safe and
efficient means to provide air traffic control services. The
Committee also finds that some contract towers have
insufficient staffing and hours of operation. The Committee
suggests that the FAA respond within 30 days of formal request
from airports or ATC contracts for additional authority to
expand contract tower operational hours and staff to
accommodate flight traffic outside of current tower operational
hours. The Committee also suggests that the FAA accommodate
needs, especially when the airport and ATC contractor are in
agreement.
Contract towers serve as vital public safety and economic
development assets to hundreds of communities. Municipalities
depend on the contract tower program to provide commercial and
general aviation services, jobs, and public safety, such as air
ambulance services. The Committee believes future budgets must
include adequate funding to prevent reduced operations and
support at contract towers.
Radar Approach Control.--The Committee finds that radar
approach control enhances aviation safety and efficiency for
regularly scheduled commercial airline service. The Committee,
therefore, recommends that the FAA utilize existing budget
authorities to promptly provide radar to all FAA ``Type 4'' air
traffic control towers.
Aircraft Certification.--The Committee continues to support
modernizing and streamlining FAA certification processes. The
Committee supports the budget request of nine FTEs to support
UAS integration in addition to six FTEs for FAA's Aircraft
Certification Service to increase capacity and support the
certification of new technologies. These efforts help provide
an efficient and effective system for new aviation products and
technologies to be manufactured and brought to market.
Additionally, it is crucial to improving the safety of old and
new aircraft.
The FAA and industry have developed a number of
recommendations to make improvements to the certification
system. These recommendations cover a number of items related
to maximizing utilization of organizational designation
authority, more effective safety oversight, better workforce
training, and meaningful performance metrics. The Committee
believes that the FAA must view implementation of these
recommendations as one of its critical and highest priorities.
The Committee also remains concerned about the
implementation of the Small Airplane Revitalization Act (Public
Law 113-53) and notes that the FAA has missed statutory
deadlines to modernize the part 23 airworthiness certification
process, including issuing a final rule by December 15, 2015.
Implementation of this law will reduce costs, enhance security,
and ensure that the FAA and the U.S. aviation manufacturing
sector remain international leaders on safety and certification
standards. Therefore, the Committee directs the Administrator
to implement the recommendations developed with industry as a
result of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act and
leverage Aircraft Certification Service funding to promote and
facilitate the acceptance of U.S. aeronautical products in
international markets.
Safety, Security and Infrastructure.--After the fire at the
Chicago Air Route Traffic Control Center on September 26, 2014,
FAA conducted a comprehensive security review, which resulted
in identifying 42 recommendations, of which 24 of them were
deemed significant to improve safety. The funding provided will
support activities recommended for implementation of facility
security, personnel security, and the insider threat program
necessary to improve the security and support resiliency of FAA
critical operations.
The Committee expects FAA's continued commitment toward
restoring operations immediately following an emergency
situation, while improving the physical and personnel security
to ensure air traffic is not brought to a halt, similar to what
occurred at ZAU.
Aeronautical Navigation Products.--The Committee remains
concerned about Aeronautical Navigation Products' [AeroNav]
plans to impose a per person charge and erect a digital
copyright on digital products produced by the FAA for the
public benefit. The FAA has previously made these products
available for download from its Web site without charge. The
Committee is concerned that the proposed scheme will be used to
support the declining paper chart services by charging those
that are moving to a digital format. In contrast to AeroNav's
efforts, Executive Order 13642 was issued on May 14, 2013, to
make government data available to foster entrepreneurship and
innovation. This order builds on another order issued in 2012
to open up government systems with public interfaces for
commercial application providers. With these concerns in mind,
the Committee continues to include bill language that prohibits
AeroNav from implementing new charges on AeroNav products until
the FAA provides the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations a report that describes: (1) the estimated cost
of producing only its digital products, on a product-by-product
basis (for example, delineating costs for electronic navigation
charts and vector charts separately), for use on computers,
tablets, and other displays; (2) the cost of producing both
digital products and paper products, on a product-by-product
basis; (3) safety and operational benefits of using digital
products; and (4) how AeroNav's actions conflict with the
direction in Executive Order 13642 to support open data for
entrepreneurship, innovation, and scientific discovery.
Human Intervention Motivation Study.--The Committee
recognizes the effectiveness of the Human Intervention
Motivation Study and the Flight Attendant Drug and Alcohol
Program in mitigating drug and alcohol abuse through a peer
identification and intervention program. The Committee directs
the FAA to continue to prioritize this program and use
resources made available within Operations to support this
program.
FAA Public Hearing.--The Committee remains concerned with
the proposed modifications to the Condor 1 and Condor 2
military operating areas and encourages the FAA to continue
working with its partner agencies by holding a public hearing
with representatives from the relevant Federal agencies in
western Maine upon completion of the Air National Guard's
environmental impact statement [EIS] and the record of
decision. The Committee recognizes that the Air National Guard,
as the lead agency under the NEPA process, has sought to meet
the minimum legal requirements for public participation and
comment. However, the Committee remains troubled with how the
authorization of low-altitude military training in the proposed
airspace would affect areas that significantly contribute to
the local economy and areas that are culturally and
environmentally sensitive. Furthermore, the Committee notes the
FAA is the only Federal agency that can modify special airspace
and that the FAA may adopt the Air National Guard's EIS in
whole, or in part, once the Final EIS has been issued. In
addition, the Committee directs the FAA to report to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations prior to the issuance
of a record of decision regarding the modification of the
Condor 1 and Condor 2 military operations areas that includes a
summary of any public meeting and hearing and a list of the
comments, questions, and responses presented at these meetings
and hearings.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems [UAS]--Broadcast Media.--The
Committee urges the FAA to consider the important public
interest role of credentialed newsgatherers in disseminating
critical information to the public following major news events
and natural disasters. The Committee further urges the FAA to
immediately establish procedures to enable credentialed news
and broadcast media, in coordination with public safety
officials and Air Traffic Control if necessary, to use UAS to
gather images and information and to inform the public and
disseminate information during and following emergencies and
natural disasters, including at night, over people and beyond
the line of sight of the UAS operator.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems [UAS].--Section 333 of the FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorized the FAA to
approve, where appropriate and consistent with criteria
specified in the law, the operation of certain UAS before the
completion of certain rules and planning requirements specified
in the law. The Committee encourages the FAA to consider
whether UAS test sites may be appropriate in assisting the
Secretary in making determinations under section 333. The
Committee also urges the FAA to communicate clearly with the
UAS industry regarding its priorities for section 333
consideration.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems--Electronic Registration.--The
Committee supports the Federal Aviation Administration's
establishment of an electronic registration system through the
Web or an app to register UAS, as opposed to the current paper-
based FAA Aircraft Registry system for manned aircraft. The
Committee believes that online, interactive education program
links on the electronic registration process would provide the
education necessary to reduce the risk of unknowing or
negligent mistakes by recreational operators of small unmanned
aircraft thus promoting aviation safety. Therefore, the
Committee directs the FAA to include in its electronic
registration system a link for registrants to undergo a
suitable and interactive online education and training program.
The Committee also directs the FAA to report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations on the FAA's implementation
of such online interactive training for registrants, including
the number of registrants who have attempted and completed the
training course and recommendations for any improvements or
changes to this system within 120 days of enactment of this
act.
Commercial Space Launches.--The Committee understands that
current FAA regulations requiring launch providers to clearly
obtain insurance to cover property damage in the event of an
accident fail to address the status of State and local
property. With the rapid growth in the number of State
spaceports over the last decade as well as anticipated growth
over the next several years, the Committee believes the FAA
should update regulations for those developments involving
Federal property assigned to a State government, particularly
those developments located at Federal ranges, the State
government should qualify as a ``contractor'' or Government
Launch Participant with the right to make claims under 14 CFR
440.9(d).
Landing Strips.--The Committee finds that backcountry
landing strips on Federal lands are important assets to the
national aviation infrastructure. The Committee recommends the
FAA assist Federal Land Managers, including but not limited to
the Bureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service,
and National Park Service in charting airstrips located on
Federal Lands that are and may be useful for administrative,
recreational, and emergency purposes.
Contract Weather Observers.--The FAA's Contract Weather
Observer [CWO] program provides operationally-significant
weather information and support to the entire aviation
community. CWO safety professionals observe and report
operationally-significant weather conditions at airports across
the country. These trained specialists augment the Automated
Surface Observing System [ASOS], which detects and reports
basic weather information for aviation and forecasting.
The Committee has serious concerns about the FAA's proposal
to eliminate the CWO program at 57 of these airports and
replace it with Limited Aviation Weather Reporting Services
[LAWRS]. Under LAWRS, air traffic controllers, or airport
staff, would be responsible for the accuracy of weather
information at the 57 airports identified by the FAA. However,
air traffic controllers already perform a critical role,
managing separation of aircraft, and are required to remain
inside of their towers. By law, weather observing would be
their lowest priority duty. Adding this responsibility to the
other important duties of air traffic controllers would
seriously degrade the speed and accuracy of operationally-
significant weather observations and reduce air traffic control
coverage, particularly at a time when air traffic controller
staffing shortages are a continuing issue for the FAA.
The Committee is also concerned that, to come to its
determination on eliminating CWOs at 57 airports, the FAA
removed the frequency of thunderstorms and low visibility as
considerations for which airports receive CWO service, without
soliciting or receiving sufficient stakeholder input. These
types of conditions create serious safety hazards that should
have been explored by all stakeholders and adequately taken
into account by the FAA in its decision-making processes.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the FAA to conduct a
comprehensive study, with public and stakeholder input, and
issue a report examining of all safety risks, hazard effects,
and operational effects on airlines and other stakeholders that
could result from loss of CWO services at the 57 airports
currently targeted for the loss of service. The Committee
further directs the FAA to identify how these targeted airports
will accurately report rapidly changing severe weather
conditions including thunderstorms, lightning, fog, visibility,
cloud layers and ceilings, ice pellets, and freezing rain/
drizzle without contract weather observers and include the
process through which FAA analyzed the safety hazards
associated with eliminating the program. Additionally, the
Committee directs the FAA to provide this report to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of its
completion.
Tarmac Vehicle Safety.--The Committee notes that there is
no national standard that requires markings on airport vehicles
and equipment that operate in busy night time conditions. The
Committee directs the FAA to study one large hub airport, one
medium hub airport, and one small hub airport to determine
whether national standards for conspicuity of surface vehicles
operating at airports are necessary. The FAA is directed to
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations its
finding and recommendations within 1 year after enactment of
this act.
NextGen--Performance Goals.--NextGen implementation is
critical for the United States to remain the global leader in
safe and efficient air traffic control. Establishing
performance objectives and holding the NextGen Office
accountable to those objectives is critical in timely
implementation. Therefore, the Committee directs the FAA's
NextGen Advisory Committee to establish annual performance
objectives for the implementation of NextGen and report to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180 days
of enactment of this act.
Medical Kits.--The Senate's Federal Aviation Administration
Reauthorization Act of 2016 includes a provision requiring the
Administrator to evaluate and revise emergency medical
equipment requirements. The Committee strongly encourages the
FAA to examine current policy regarding the supplies currently
required in the Emergency Medical Kits [EMKs], including
epinephrine auto-injectors.

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $2,855,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 2,838,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,838,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Facilities and Equipment appropriation provides funding
for modernizing and improving air traffic control and airway
facilities, equipment, and systems. The appropriation also
finances major capital investments required by other agency
programs, experimental research and development facilities, and
other improvements to enhance the safety and capacity of the
National Airspace System [NAS]. The program aims to keep pace
with the increasing demands of aeronautical activity and remain
in accordance with the Federal Aviation Administration's [FAA]
comprehensive 5-year capital investment plan [CIP].

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,838,000,000
for the Facilities and Equipment account of the FAA. The
recommended level is equal to the budget request and
$17,000,000 below the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Capital Investment Plan.--In fiscal year 2016, the
Committee included a provision that lowered the appropriation
for FAA's facilities and equipment by $100,000 for each day the
agency was late in submitting its capital investment plan to
Congress. The Committee continues this provision and expects
the FAA to provide the plan by the deadline.
Budget Activities Format.--The Committee directs that the
fiscal year 2018 budget request for the Facilities and
Equipment account conform to the same organizational structure
of budget activities as displayed below.
The following table shows the Committee's recommended
distribution of funds for each of the budget activities funded
by this appropriation and by resources provided under Grants-
in-Aid to Airports:

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-------------------------------------- Committee
2016 enacted 2017 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 1--Engineering, Development, Test and
Evaluation:
Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.... $21,300,000 $24,800,000 $24,800,000
William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Improvement.......................................
William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory 19,050,000 19,000,000 19,000,000
Sustainment.......................................
William J. Hughes Technical Center Infrastructure 12,200,000 12,200,000 12,200,000
Sustainment.......................................
Separation Management Portfolio.................... 31,500,000 25,800,000 25,800,000
Improved Surface Portfolio......................... 17,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
On Demand NAS Portfolio............................ 11,000,000 8,500,000 8,500,000
Environment Portfolio.............................. 1,000,000 ................. .................
Improved Multiple Runway Operations Portfolio...... 8,000,000 6,500,000 6,500,000
NAS Infrastructure Portfolio....................... 11,000,000 17,660,000 17,660,000
NextGen Support Portfolio.......................... 10,000,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
Performance Based Navigation & Metroplex Portfolio. 13,000,000 17,500,000 17,500,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Activity 1................................. 156,050,000 146,960,000 146,960,000

Activity 2--Air Traffic Control Facilities and
Equipment:

a. En Route Programs:
En Route Automation Modernization [ERAM]--System 79,400,000 78,000,000 78,000,000
Enhancements and Tech Refresh.....................
En Route Communications Gateway [ECG].............. 2,650,000 2,650,000 2,650,000
Next Generation Weather Radar [NEXRAD]--Provide.... 6,500,000 6,300,000 6,300,000
Air Route Traffic Control Center [ARTCC] & Combined 74,200,000 74,870,000 74,870,000
Control Facility [CCF] Building Improvements......
Air Traffic Management [ATM]....................... 13,700,000 20,000,000 20,000,000
Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure........... 11,750,000 8,750,000 8,750,000
Air Traffic Control En Route Radar Facilities 5,810,000 5,800,000 5,800,000
Improvements......................................
Voice Switching and Control System [VSCS].......... 9,900,000 11,300,000 11,300,000
Oceanic Automation System.......................... 20,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
Next Generation Very High Frequency Air/Ground 43,600,000 50,500,000 50,500,000
Communications [NEXCOM]...........................
System-Wide Information Management................. 37,400,000 28,800,000 28,800,000
ADS-B NAS Wide Implementation...................... 184,600,000 31,100,000 181,400,000
Windshear Detection Service........................ 5,200,000 4,500,000 4,500,000
Collaborative Air Traffic Management Technologies.. 14,770,000 13,820,000 13,820,000
Time Based Flow Management Portfolio............... 42,600,000 50,600,000 50,600,000
ATC Beacon Interrogator [ATCBI]--Sustainment....... 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
NextGen Weather Processors......................... 7,000,000 27,800,000 27,800,000
Airborne Collision Avoidance System X [ACASX]...... 10,800,000 8,900,000 8,900,000
Data Communications in Support of NG Air 234,900,000 232,000,000 232,000,000
Transportation System.............................
Non-Continental United States [Non-CONUS] ................. 3,000,000 3,000,000
Automation........................................
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal En Route Programs....................... 805,780,000 683,690,000 833,990,000

b. Terminal Programs:
Airport Surface Detection Equipment--Model X [ASDE- 13,500,000 8,400,000 8,400,000
X]................................................
Terminal Doppler Weather Radar [TDWR]--Provide..... 4,900,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System 81,100,000 64,200,000 64,200,000
[STARS] (TAMR Phase 1)............................
Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement 159,350,000 108,900,000 108,900,000
Program (TAMR Phase 3)............................
Terminal Automation Program........................ 7,700,000 7,700,000 7,700,000
Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities--Replace... 45,500,000 58,800,000 58,800,000
ATCT/Terminal Radar Approach Control [TRACON] 58,990,000 47,720,000 47,720,000
Facilities--Improve...............................
Terminal Voice Switch Replacement [TVSR]........... 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards 39,600,000 42,700,000 42,700,000
Compliance........................................
Airport Surveillance Radar [ASR-9]................. 3,800,000 4,500,000 4,500,000
Terminal Digital Radar [ASR-11] Technology Refresh 9,900,000 6,100,000 6,100,000
and Mobile Airport Surveillance Radar [MASR]......
Runway Status Lights............................... 24,170,000 4,800,000 4,800,000
National Airspace System Voice System [NVS]........ 53,550,000 48,400,000 48,400,000
Integrated Display System [IDS].................... 23,300,000 7,700,000 7,700,000
Remote Monitoring and Logging System [RMLS]........ 4,700,000 9,900,000 9,900,000
Mode S Service Life Extension Program [SLEP]....... 16,300,000 37,900,000 37,900,000
Surveillance Interface Modernization............... 23,000,000 26,800,000 26,800,000
Improved Surface/TFDM Portfolio.................... ................. 42,200,000 42,200,000
National Air Space [NAS] Voice Recorder Program 3,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
[NVRP]............................................
Integrated Terminal Weather System [ITWS].......... 5,400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Next Generation: Surveillance and Weather Radar ................. 6,000,000 6,000,000
Capability & Back-up Surveillance Capability......
Flight and Interfacility Data Interface [FIDI] 9,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000
Modernization.....................................
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Terminal Programs....................... 592,760,000 561,720,000 561,720,000

c. Flight Service Programs:
Aviation Surface Observation System [ASOS]......... 8,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000
Future Flight Services Program..................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Alaska Flight Service Facility Modernization 2,650,000 2,650,000 2,650,000
[AFSFM]...........................................
Weather Camera Program............................. 1,000,000 2,200,000 2,200,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Flight Service Programs................. 14,650,000 17,850,000 17,850,000

d. Landing and Navigational Aids Program:
VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range [VOR] with Distance 4,500,000 7,000,000 7,000,000
Measuring Equipment [DME].........................
Instrument Landing System [ILS]--Establish......... 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000
Wide Area Augmentation System [WAAS] for GPS....... 107,200,000 85,000,000 85,000,000
Runway Visual Range [RVR] and Enhanced Low 6,000,000 6,500,000 6,500,000
Visibility Operations [ELVO]......................
Approach Lighting System Improvement Program 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
[ALSIP]...........................................
Distance Measuring Equipment [DME]................. 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Visual NAVAIDS--Establish/Expand................... 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Instrument Flight Procedures Automation [IFPA]..... 3,371,000 9,400,000 9,400,000
Navigation and Landing Aids--Service Life Extension 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Program [SLEP]....................................
VASI Replacement--Replace with Precision Approach 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Path Indicator....................................
GPS Civil Requirements............................. 15,000,000 ................. .................
Runway Safety Areas--Navigational Mitigation....... 30,000,000 14,000,000 14,000,000
Integrated Control and Monitoring System [ICMS]-- ................. 2,000,000 2,000,000
NAVAIDS Monitoring Equipment......................
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Landing and Navigational Aids Programs.. 189,071,000 146,900,000 146,900,000

e. Other ATC Facilities Programs:
Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Management....... 18,700,000 22,700,000 22,700,000
Unstaffed Infrastructure Sustainment............... 39,640,000 40,490,000 40,490,000
Aircraft Related Equipment Program................. 9,000,000 13,000,000 13,000,000
Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support...... 12,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000
Alaskan Satellite Telecommunications Infrastructure 12,500,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
[ASTI]............................................
Facilities Decommissioning......................... 6,000,000 6,200,000 6,200,000
Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support.......... 125,000,000 105,000,000 105,000,000
FAA Employee Housing and Life Safety Shelter System 2,500,000 ................. .................
Service...........................................
Energy Management and Compliance [EMC]............. 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Child Care Center Sustainment...................... 1,600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure.............. 1,000,000 10,360,000 10,360,000
System Capacity, Planning, and Improvements........ ................. 6,500,000 6,500,000
Subtotal Other ATC Facilities Programs........... 229,940,000 221,250,000 221,250,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Activity 2................................. 1,832,201,000 1,631,410,000 1,781,710,000

Activity 3--Non-Air Traffic Control Facilities and
Equipment:

a. Support Equipment:
Hazardous Materials Management..................... 26,400,000 31,000,000 31,000,000
Aviation Safety Analysis System [ASAS]............. 20,200,000 11,300,000 11,300,000
Logistics Support Systems and Facilities [LSSF].... 4,000,000 ................. .................
National Air Space [NAS] Recovery Communications 12,000,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
[RCOM]............................................
Facility Security Risk Management.................. 15,000,000 21,000,000 21,000,000
Information Security............................... 12,000,000 24,970,000 24,970,000
System Approach for Safety Oversight [SASO]........ 18,900,000 17,200,000 17,200,000
Aviation Safety Knowledge Management Environment 7,500,000 4,200,000 4,200,000
[ASKME]...........................................
Aerospace Medical Equipment Needs [AMEN]........... 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
System Safety Management Portfolio................. 17,000,000 17,000,000 17,000,000
National Test Equipment Program.................... 4,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Mobile Assets Management Program................... 4,800,000 5,760,000 5,760,000
Aerospace Medicine Safety Information Systems 3,000,000 12,000,000 12,000,000
[AMSIS]...........................................
Tower Simulation System [TSS] Technology Refresh... 7,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Support Equipment....................... 154,300,000 167,430,000 167,430,000

b. Training, Equipment and Facilities:
Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization... 15,200,000 14,000,000 14,000,000
Distance Learning.................................. 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Training, Equipment and Facilities...... 16,700,000 15,500,000 15,500,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Activity 3................................. 171,000,000 182,930,000 182,930,000

Activity 4--Facilities and Equipment Mission Support:

a. System Support and Services:
System Engineering and Development Support......... 35,000,000 35,000,000 35,000,000
Program Support Leases............................. 46,700,000 46,600,000 46,600,000
Logistics and Acquisition Support Services......... 11,000,000 11,000,000 11,000,000
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center Leases........... 18,800,000 19,300,000 19,300,000
Transition Engineering Support..................... 19,200,000 24,100,000 24,100,000
Technical Support Services Contract [TSSC]......... 23,000,000 23,000,000 23,000,000
Resource Tracking Program [RTP].................... 4,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
Center for Advanced Aviation System Development 60,000,000 60,000,000 60,000,000
[CAASD]...........................................
Aeronautical Information Management Program........ 5,000,000 10,400,000 10,400,000
Cross Agency NextGen Management.................... 3,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Activity 4................................. 225,700,000 237,400,000 237,400,000

Activity 5--Personnel and Related Expenses:
Personnel and Related Expenses..................... 470,049,000 489,000,000 489,000,000

Activity 6--Sustain ADS-B services and Wide Area
Augmentation Services [WAAS] GEOs:
ADS-B services and WAAS GEOs....................... ................. 150,300,000 .................
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal All Activities.......................... 2,855,000,000 2,838,000,000 2,838,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADS-B NAS Wide Implementation.--ADS-B uses GPS signals to
transmit an aircraft's location to receivers installed on the
ground throughout the United States. The ground receivers
transmit that information to air traffic controller screens and
flight deck displays on any aircraft equipped with the
appropriate avionics. Using ADS-B will improve the safety and
efficiency of the national airspace, and it is a foundational
program of the FAA's NextGen effort to modernize our air
traffic control system. Therefore, the Committee recommendation
includes $181,400,000 for the implementation of ADS-B across
the national airspace.
The Committee's recommendation is equal to the budget
request, which included $150,300,000 in Activity 2. The
recommendation is also $3,200,000 less than the fiscal year
2016 enacted level. The Committee recommendation rejects the
request to create a new Activity 6 and instead provides ADS-B
resources for both activities within Activity 2.
NextGen Separation Management Portfolio.--The Committee
recommends $25,800,000 for the activities of the NextGen
Separation Management Portfolio, which is equal to the budget
estimate and $5,700,000 below the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. This amount includes $15,000,000 specifically for space-
based ADS-B. For the past two fiscal years, the Committee has
appropriated additional funding and urged the FAA to accelerate
its planning and activities to keep pace with neighboring air
navigation service providers [ANSPs], but the FAA has not shown
any urgency. In fact, the Committee is aware that the FAA is
postponing key decisions that will delay its schedule for
incorporating space-based ADS-B and for implementing reduced
oceanic aircraft separation. Despite delays by the FAA, the
international aviation community is preparing to be able to use
space-based ADS-B in 2018. The International Civil Aviation
Organization [ICAO] is in the process of approving a 15/15
nautical mile separation standard for oceanic traffic under
surveillance for use in 2018, and foreign ANSPs in neighboring
airspace, particularly in the busy North Atlantic, are taking
the necessary steps to implement the ICAO reduced oceanic
separation standard in 2018. In order to increase safety and
enhance efficiency in U.S.-controlled oceanic airspace in the
same timeframe as neighboring ANSPs, the Committee directs the
FAA to streamline its current Joint Resources Council strategy
by making a final investment decision not later than September
2016 for the implementation of a 15/15 nautical mile oceanic
separation capability by September 2018 and to provide this new
surveillance capability in the same manner that terrestrial
ADS-B surveillance is provided.
Wide Area Augmentation System [WAAS].--The Committee
recognizes that the upcoming WAAS Dual Frequency Operations
Segment 2 will implement dual frequency algorithms into the
WAAS system and will provide the integrity validation required
for safety-of-life applications. The Committee, therefore,
directs the FAA to begin algorithm development in support of
dual frequency GPS. As part of that effort, the Committee
recommends that the FAA dedicate sufficient funding for
definition, modelling, and prototyping in collaboration with
the FAA systems engineering team as well as the original WAAS
algorithm developer. This collaboration will ensure that the
FAA has access to the expertise of the original algorithm
developer who understands the end-to-end system impacts for
algorithm changes, and who has a vested interest in solving
this problem expeditiously.
Very High Frequency Omni-Directional Range.--The Committee
is aware of efforts underway to address the rationalization and
recapitalization of aging en route navigational aids. These
systems are critical to the safety, resiliency, and on-going
operations of both civilian and military air navigation. The
Committee directs the FAA to move ahead with the issuance of a
request for proposals to implement a service-based procurement
for Very High Frequency [VHF] Omni-Directional Range [VOR] and
Tactical Air Navigation systems this fiscal year. The Committee
supports the goal of ensuring that the greatest amount of
savings are derived from the VOR MON program. Therefore, the
Committee supports the outsourcing of total performance-based
solutions to industry for the realization of highest efficiency
gains and recommends a systems integrator approach to develop
the most efficient decommissioning and maintenance support
without tying the government to any single vendor.
Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement [TAMR].--
The Committee is concerned that the FAA has not effectively
proceeded with required software tools and decision aids for
air traffic controllers to enable pilots to fully utilize
NextGen capabilities, especially PBN, at all locations at all
times in the NAS. Therefore, the Committee directs the FAA to
develop and maintain a Standard Terminal Automation Replacement
Systems [STARS] automation roadmap to prepare for an investment
decision that identifies and prioritizes STARS enhancements
that assist controllers during Performance Based Navigation and
other NextGen technology operations. The roadmap should consist
of a series of Work Packages that ensures utilization of STARS
in support of NextGen technologies that are in the midst of
nationwide deployment. The roadmap should describe the
capabilities that will be developed and explain the benefits to
controllers and airspace users. The Committee directs FAA to
describe how they intend to maximize the taxpayer investments
in STARS to ensure that NextGen technologies, to include PBN,
ADS-B, weather products, Data Comm, and Terminal Flight Data
Manager, are fully integrated in a timely manner so as to
maximize user and FAA investment in NextGen technologies.
Military Operations Areas.--The Committee finds that radar
and future NextGen systems capable of controlling airspace down
to 500 feet above ground level enhances aviation safety in
Military Operations Areas that overlay public use airports with
more than 5,000 operations per year. The Committee recommends
that the FAA utilize existing resources to promptly provide
radar or NextGen capability in such areas.
Approach Lighting.--The Committee notes the benefit of
enhanced approach lighting systems that improve safety and
reliability especially in areas with challenging approaches in
non-radar environments, with mountainous terrain and inclement
weather conditions where use of conventional navigational aids
do not allow for a close-in low approach. The Committee directs
FAA to consider these factors in selecting projects for funding
in the Approach Lighting System Improvement Program.
Aging Facilities.--The Committee instructs FAA to work to
address aging and antiquated air traffic control facilities
that it leases from airport authorities to ensure they are
fully compliant with current building codes consistent with
being occupied by air traffic controllers. The Committee
recognizes that this, in many cases, may require the
construction of new air traffic facilities to replace existing
ones. Recognizing continual funding constraints, the Committee
instructs FAA to utilize creative financing options and to
include consideration of long-term cost recovery leases, when
conditions warrant the construction of new air traffic control
towers.

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $166,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 167,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 176,002,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Research, Engineering, and Development appropriation
provides funding for long-term research, engineering, and
development programs to improve the air traffic control system
by increasing its safety and capacity, as well as reducing the
environmental impacts of air traffic, as authorized by the
Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the Federal Aviation
Act, as amended. The programs are designed to meet the expected
air traffic demands of the future and to promote flight safety
through improvements in facilities, equipment, techniques, and
procedures to ensure that the system will safely and
efficiently handle future volumes of aircraft traffic.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $176,002,000 for the FAA's
Research, Engineering, and Development activities. The
recommended level of funding is $8,502,000 more than the budget
request and $10,002,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level.
A table showing the fiscal year 2016 enacted level, the
fiscal year 2017 budget estimate and the Committee
recommendation follows:

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-------------------------------- Committee
2016 enacted 2017 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety:
Fire research and safety.................................... $6,000,000 $7,925,000 $7,925,000
Propulsion and fuel systems................................. 2,034,000 2,574,000 2,074,000
Advanced materials/structural safety........................ 7,409,000 4,113,000 9,409,000
Aircraft icing /digital system safety....................... 5,500,000 5,102,000 5,102,000
Continued airworthiness..................................... 8,987,000 10,269,000 9,669,000
Aircraft catastrophic failure prevention research........... 1,433,000 1,528,000 1,428,000
Flightdeck/maintenance/system integration human factors..... 5,000,000 8,513,000 7,913,000
System safety management.................................... 6,063,000 7,000,000 6,500,000
Air traffic control/technical operations human factors...... 5,410,000 6,165,000 6,165,000
Aeromedical research........................................ 8,467,000 9,538,000 9,038,000
Weather program............................................. 15,031,000 17,976,000 14,976,000
Unmanned aircraft systems research.......................... 17,635,000 8,422,000 18,420,000
NextGen--Alternative fuels for general aviation............. 7,000,000 5,792,000 7,000,000
Commercial Space Transportation Security.................... .............. 2,953,000 2,473,000
Economic competitiveness:
NextGen--Wake turbulence.................................... 8,541,000 8,609,000 7,759,000
NextGen--Air ground integration human factors............... 8,000,000 8,575,000 6,675,000
NextGen--Weather technology in the cockpit.................. 4,048,000 4,059,000 3,509,000
NextGen Information Security................................ .............. 1,000,000 1,000,000
Commercial Space Transportation Safety...................... 2,000,000 .............. ..............
Environmental sustainability:
Environment and energy...................................... 16,074,000 15,013,000 16,013,000
NextGen--Environmental research aircraft technologies, 25,823,000 26,174,000 27,174,000
fuels, and metrics.........................................
Mission support:
System planning and resource management..................... 2,100,000 2,788,000 2,368,000
William J. Hughes Technical Center.......................... 3,445,000 3,412,000 3,412,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 166,000,000 167,500,000 176,002,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advanced Materials/Structural Safety.--The Committee is
encouraged by the capabilities that stitched unitized
composites can provide to the aerospace industry. Therefore,
the Committee recommendation includes $9,409,000 for Advanced
Materials and Structural Safety, an increase of $2,000,000 over
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. This increase over the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level is provided for the FAA to work
with public and private partners who provide leading-edge
research, development and testing of composite materials and
structures.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems [UAS] Research--Center of
Excellence.--The Committee recognizes the valuable role of the
Center of Excellence in advising the FAA as it attempts to
address a host of research challenges associated with the
integration of UAS into the National Airspace System. The
Committee recommendation includes $18,420,000 for UAS research,
an increase of $9,998,000 above the budget request and $785,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. Of the funds
provided for UAS research, $10,000,000 is directed to support
the expanded role of the Center of Excellence in areas of UAS
research, including cybersecurity, agricultural applications,
beyond visual line of sight technology, and continuation of air
and ground collision studies. Furthermore, the Center of
Excellence shall establish a UAS safety research facility to
study appropriate safety standards for UAS and to develop and
validate certification standards for such systems. The
Committee notes that even with this additional funding, private
sector contributions to the Center will likely continue to
outmatch Federal investment.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research--Test Sites.--The
Committee notes that integration of UAS into the National
Airspace System remains a national priority with the potential
to increase public safety and bring economic benefits to a wide
range of industries, including agriculture. Of the amount
provided for UAS research, the Committee expects UAS research
to be conducted as part of the Center of Excellence to be
performed at, a minimum of, one of the FAA-designated UAS test
sites, to evaluate different counter UAS technologies and
develop recommendations for securing data links, including GPS
and control links, that could drive UAS engineering standards
development. The Committee also directs the FAA's William J.
Hughes Technical Center to use these test sites in conducting
its research and operational tests. The funding provided for
the Tech Center may be used to support the center's research
activities and operational tests conducted at the test sites.
Alternative Fuels for General Aviation.--The Committee
recommendation includes $7,000,000 for research that supports
alternative fuels for general aviation. This funding level is
$1,208,000 above the budget request and equal to the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.
Environmental Sustainability.--The Committee recommendation
includes a total of $43,187,000 for research related to
environmental sustainability, which is $2,000,000 above the
budget request and $1,290,000 above the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. This total includes $16,013,000 under the
``Environment and energy'' and another $27,174,000 under
``NextGen--Environmental research aircraft technologies, fuels,
and metrics.''
Unmanned Aircraft Systems--[UAS] Traffic Management.--The
Committee directs the FAA to conduct research and development
on the design, testing, and implementation of a UAS Traffic
Management [UTM] system in the National Airspace to ensure the
safety, reliability, security, and accountability of small UAS
operation. The Committee further directs FAA to participate in
partnership with the ongoing UTM work conducted by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, the FAA's Pathfinder
projects, and the FAA's Assure program as part of the Center
for Excellence.

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

(INCLUDING RESCISSION)

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Funding for Grants-in-Aid for airports pays for capital
improvements at the Nation's airports, including those
investments that emphasize capacity development, safety
improvements, and security needs. Other priority areas for
funding under this program include improvements to runway
safety areas that do not conform to FAA standards, investments
that are designed to reduce runway incursions, and aircraft
noise compatibility planning and programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of
$3,350,000,000 for Grants-in-Aid for airports for fiscal year
2017. The recommended limitation on obligations is equal to the
enacted level for fiscal year 2016, and $450,000,000 more than
the budget request. Under the request, large commercial
airports no longer receive formula grants from the program, but
they would be allowed to raise their passenger facility charges
to finance capital improvements. The Committee notes that an
increase to passenger facility charges was considered as part
of the debate over the current FAA authorization bill. That
increase, however, was not included in the final legislation.
The Committee, therefore, recommends a funding level that would
fund capital improvements at all airports that support our
Nation's air transportation system.
In addition, the Committee recommends a liquidating cash
appropriation of $3,750,000,000 for Grants-in-Aid for Airports.
The recommended level is $250,000,000 more than the budget
estimate and $150,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. This appropriation is sufficient to cover the
liquidation of all obligations incurred pursuant to the
limitation on obligations set forward in the bill.
Finally, the Committee recommendation includes a rescission
of any contract authority that would be created under section
48112 in fiscal year 2017. This rescission would not affect the
baseline set by the Congressional Budget Office.
Administrative Expenses.--The Committee recommends
$107,691,000 to cover administrative expenses. This funding
level is equal to the budget request and $591,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Airport Cooperative Research.--The Committee recommends
$15,000,000 for the Airport Cooperative Research program. This
funding level is equal to the budget estimate and the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.
Airport Technology.--The Committee recommends $31,375,000
for Airport Technology Research. This funding level is equal to
the budget request and $375,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
level.
Small Community Air Service Development Program [SCASDP].--
The Committee recommends $10,000,000. This funding level is
$5,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The
budget request included no funds for this program for fiscal
year 2017.
Allocation of Resources.--The Committee recognizes many
States have short construction seasons due to inclement weather
and require certainty about airport grant allocations when
making planning decisions. FAA is encouraged to work
expeditiously to make entitlement and discretionary grant
allocations, in order to provide certainty to northern State
airports. The Committee also understands that certain physical
topography, environments, and circumstances prohibit certain
existing airports that are in critical need of expansion due to
their essential economic impact on their surrounding
communities from expanding, and as such are required to
physically relocate their premises. Therefore, the Committee
directs the FAA to ensure sufficient funding is available to
relocate these airports in a timely and expedited manner.
General Aviation Runways.--The Committee instructs FAA to
give greater consideration to projects at public-use airports
that will relocate existing general aviation runways that do
not meet current FAA safety standards related to runway/taxiway
separation distances, safety area and object free area
requirements, and obstruction standards, especially in cases
where the existing runway has deteriorated such that it is at
the end of its service life and rehabilitation is no longer
cost effective.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Section 110 limits the number of technical staff years at
the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to no more
than 600 in fiscal year 2017.
Section 111 prohibits funds in this act from being used to
adopt guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to
provide the FAA ``without cost'' buildings, maintenance, or
space for FAA services. The prohibition does not apply to
negotiations between the FAA and airport sponsors concerning
``below market'' rates for such services or to grant assurances
that require airport sponsors to provide land without cost to
the FAA for air traffic control facilities.
Section 112 permits the Administrator to reimburse FAA
appropriations for amounts made available for 49 U.S.C.
41742(a)(1) as fees are collected and credited under 49 U.S.C.
45303.
Section 113 allows funds received to reimburse the FAA for
providing technical assistance to foreign aviation authorities
to be credited to the Operations account.
Section 114 prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium
pay except in those cases where the individual actually worked
on a Sunday.
Section 115 prohibits the FAA from using funds provided in
the bill to purchase store gift cards or gift certificates
through a Government-issued credit card.
Section 116 allows all airports experiencing the required
level of boardings through charter and scheduled air service to
be eligible for funds under 49 U.S.C. 47114(c).
Section 117 requires approval from the Assistant Secretary
for Administration of the Department of Transportation for
retention bonuses for any FAA employee.
Section 118 requires that, upon request by a private owner
or operator of an aircraft, the Secretary block the display of
that owner or operator's aircraft registration number in the
Aircraft Situational Display to Industry program.
Section 119 prohibits funds in this act for salaries and
expenses of more than nine political and Presidential
appointees in the Federal Aviation Administration.
Section 119A requires the FAA to conduct public outreach
and provide justification to the Committee before increasing
fees under section 44721 of title 49, United States Code.
Section 119B requires the FAA to notify the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations at least 90 days before
closing a regional operations center or reducing the services
it provides.
Section 119C prohibits funds from being used to change
weight restrictions or prior permission rules at Teterboro
Airport in New Jersey.
Section 119D prohibits funds from being used to withhold
from consideration and approval any application for
participation in the Contract Tower Program, pending as of
January 1, 2016, including applications from Cost-share Program
participants if the Administrator determines such tower is
eligible under the criteria set forth in the Federal Aviation
report, Establishment and Discontinuance Criteria for Airport
Traffic Control Towers (FAA-APO-90-7).
Section 119E allows airports that met the 10,000
enplanement qualification for AIP funds in calendar year 2012
to continue to receive AIP funds in fiscal year 2017.
Section 119F modifies the Federal share for a primary non-
hub airport located in a public lands State within 15 miles
from the border of another public lands State to use the
greater of the two State's Federal share.
Section 119G directs the FAA to develop a joint plan and
carry out research with NASA and the Departments of Energy and
Agriculture facilitating research in aviation jet fuel areas
and encourages Federal agencies that are signatories to Farm to
Fly 2 to collaborate with each other in the leadership and
funding of research at the center.
Section 119H clarifies the eligibility of unmanned aircraft
system test sites.
Section 119I allows for the exchange of passenger facility
charges between airports to meet the terms and conditions of a
transfer agreement.

Federal Highway Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The principal mission of the Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA] is, in partnership with State and local governments, to
foster the development of a safe, efficient, and effective
highway and intermodal system nationwide including access to
and within national forests, national parks, Indian lands, and
other public lands.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level
of $41,794,100,000 is provided for the activities of the
Federal Highway Administration in fiscal year 2017. The
recommendation is $7,275,000,000 less than the budget request
and $1,305,900,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The recommendation does not include funding for the 21st
century clean transportation plan investments, but does rescind
$2,211,000,000 in unused contract authority. The following
table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation, 2016........................................ $429,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 435,795,000
Committee recommendation................................ 435,795,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This limitation on obligations provides for the salaries
and expenses of the Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] for
program management, direction, and coordination; engineering
guidance to Federal and State agencies; and advisory and
support services in field offices.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of
$435,795,000 for administrative expenses of the agency, of
which $2,500,000 is for administrative expenses of the
Appalachian Regional Commission in accordance with section 104
of title 23, United States Code. This limitation is equal to
the budget request and $6,795,000 more than the fiscal year
2016 enacted level.

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2016........................................ $42,361,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 43,266,100,000
Committee recommendation................................ 43,266,100,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal-aid highway program provides financial support
to States and localities for development, construction, and
repair of highways and bridges through grants. The program is
financed from the Highway Trust Fund and most of the funds are
distributed through apportionments and allocations to States.
Title 23 of the United States Code and other supporting
legislation provide authority for the various activities of the
FHWA. Funding is provided by contract authority, with program
levels established by annual limitations on obligations set in
appropriations acts.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends limiting fiscal year 2017
obligations to $43,266,100,000, which is equal to the budget
request, excluding the 21st century clean transportation
investments, and $905,100,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level for the Federal-aid highway program. This funding
level is consistent with current funding levels under the most
recent authorization law, the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation [FAST] Act. In addition, the bill includes a
provision that allows the FHWA to collect and spend fees in
order to pay for the services of expert firms in the field of
municipal and project finance to assist the agency in the
provision of credit instruments.
Autonomous Vehicles.--The Committee is aware of the
potential impact of autonomous vehicles on all segments of the
economy, and suggests the Secretary conduct studies to assess
the economic effects of these vehicles. The Department is
encouraged to use funds authorized to carry out section 503(b)
and 503 (c) of title 23, United States Code to commission the
Transportation Research Board of the National Academies of
Sciences to conduct a study on the cost benefit impact of
multimodal autonomous self-driving vehicles. The Committee
suggests that the study focus on impact of autonomous vehicles
on motor carriers, ports, transit, and related industries, and
on the so-called crash economy that includes the insurance and
healthcare industries.
Job Order Contracting.--The Committee directs FHWA, within
30 days of enactment of this act, to approve job order
contracting, as currently allowed through the Special
Experimental Projects No. 14 Program, as an operational
contracting technique for all Federal-aid Highway Program-
funded projects.
Corrosion Prevention.--The Committee directs FHWA to
conduct a study comparing the cost effectiveness of industry-
recognized corrosion prevention worker certifications on
federally funded corrosion prevention bridge and overpass
projects. The study shall compare no less than twelve currently
obligated projects preserving the structure of bridges using
corrosion prevention and mitigation systems, including at least
six projects that utilize an industry recognized corrosion
prevention worker standard and no less than six similar
currently obligated projects that do not use an industry
recognized worker standard. The study shall include a
comparison of the time to complete projects, initial quality
control reports, and budgetary overruns. FHWA shall submit the
results from its study in a report to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations no more than 2 years after
enactment of this act.
Permeable Pavements.--The Committee encourages the
Secretary to accelerate research, demonstration, and deployment
for permeable pavements to achieve flood mitigation, pollutant
reduction, stormwater runoff reduction and conservation.
Projects may include roadway shoulder load testing and
documenting life-cycle cost efficiency.
Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System.--The
Committee supports research and deployment to capitalize on
investment in the Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Integrated
Bridge System Program. The Committee encourages the Secretary
to complete cost studies of geosynthetic-reinforced soil
abutments/walls and to distribute reports to State DOTs,
consider AID Demonstration grants to deploy innovations in
geosynthetic-reinforced abutments, segmental sound barriers,
and flooding scour countermeasures, and address technical
specifications for segmental face durability and geosynthetics
connections.
Planning for Better Commutes.--The Committee recognizes the
role that employers and the private sector can play in
expanding options for commuters. The Committee directs FHWA to
continue its efforts related to technical assistance for
metropolitan planning organizations [MPOs] to improve planning
engagement with employers and the private sector, and to
explore innovative ways to mitigate congestion.
Composites.--The Committee recognizes that composites can
improve the performance of bridge structures and prove valuable
for other uses, including road signs. Proven benefits of
composites include strength, low weight, corrosion resistance,
and long-term durability, and these characteristics can lead to
improved performance for bridges and other structures. The
Committee urges the Department to use composites in
demonstration projects and recommends the continued research,
development, and regulatory reform needed, if any, to clear
hurdles for deploying composites into our highway and bridge
system.
Highway Guide Signs Font.--In early 2016, the FHWA notified
State transportation agencies of its intention to rescind
approval for the use of an alternate font on highway guide
signs. The decision appears to have been made without any
public consideration or input, immediately impacting an
estimated 26 States that have been given prior approval for
alternate font use as a safe way to communicate with the
traveling public. In order to fully consider the impact of this
decision, FHWA is directed to suspend enforcement of action
terminating interim approval of this alternate font for highway
guide signs until the agency provides opportunity for public
comment on this matter, and documents the safety and cost
implications of this decision for affected States. FHWA is
directed within 30 days after enactment of this act to brief
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding the
process it will undertake to receive public comment and further
research this matter.
Border Infrastructure.--Section 1437 of the FAST Act
provided border State departments of transportation new
opportunities to dedicate resources to infrastructure in the
border region, including at our Nation's critical border
crossings and the roadway network often tasked with
facilitating high volume commercial or passenger traffic.
However, many projects within the land port of entry
environment tend to fall outside traditional Federal planning
requirements, which largely focus on resource needs for ``on-
system'' infrastructure, including Interstates and the National
Highway System. To ensure States are equipped to take on a more
thorough and complete project selection process for resources
dedicated under the provisions of section 1437 or otherwise
allocated to the qualified border region projects, the
Committee directs FHWA not less than 45 days of enactment of
this act to provide guidance to States that identifies best
practices across border State transportation agencies for
considering and selecting projects within the range of eligible
uses, at land port of entry.
Environmental Reviews.--The Committee recognizes the
Department's efforts to implement the administratively related
streamlining provisions included in the FAST Act. The Committee
encourages the Department to continue its efforts to implement
these changes nationally, and recognizes the efforts made by
the Administration to work cooperatively with other Federal
agencies and with the State governments, including its work
with the State of Utah for a regional transportation, land use,
natural resource and economic solution. The Committee
encourages the Department to continue participating in the
streamlined facilitation of the environmental impact processes
for regional and national transportation projects in
conjunction with multiple Federal agencies, diverse public and
private interests including State and local governments and
public interest groups.
Dynamic Highway Message Signs.--The Committee believes it
is essential to use all effective means to remind motorists of
current traffic safety laws and safe driving practices. One
available low-cost tool is the dynamic highway message signs
that are in place on major roads throughout the country. The
Committee commends States currently using these signs, some in
creative ways, to deliver safe driving messages. In order to
further take advantage of this communication system, the
Committee directs FHWA to coordinate with NHTSA, State
departments of transportation, and State highway safety
offices, to increase State participation in the use of dynamic
highway message signs to help save lives and prevent injuries.
A particular focus should be to assure that these signs
maximize important and effective national safety emphasis
campaigns that are also supported by national paid media, such
as ``Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over'', ``Click It or Ticket'',
and National Distracted Driving Awareness Month, in order to
create a multiplier effect for the ongoing investment in these
campaigns. The signs can also be effective in warning
caregivers about the dangers of leaving young children alone in
vehicles during the hot weather months. The Committee further
directs FHWA to report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations within 120 days of enactment of this act on the
number of motorists exposed to dynamic highway message signs on
a daily basis, the extent to which States use such signs to
support safety activities, possible impediments to using such
signs for traffic safety, and plans for broader deployment of
such signs.
State Apportionments.--The following table shows the
expected obligation limitation provided to each State under the
Committee's recommended funding level:

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAM OBLIGATION LIMITATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
------------------------------------ Committee
2016 enacted 2017 estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Formula Programs
Alabama................................................... $718,193,418 $734,106,078 $734,106,078
Alaska.................................................... 453,571,291 463,600,423 463,600,423
Arizona................................................... 689,276,768 704,623,520 704,623,520
Arkansas.................................................. 479,215,508 489,814,257 489,814,257
California................................................ 3,413,411,372 3,488,766,125 3,488,766,125
Colorado.................................................. 496,238,608 507,202,747 507,202,747
Connecticut............................................... 464,764,375 475,064,913 475,064,913
Delaware.................................................. 156,917,461 160,385,014 160,385,014
District of Columbia...................................... 151,196,174 154,542,947 154,542,947
Florida................................................... 1,793,513,693 1,833,252,518 1,833,252,518
Georgia................................................... 1,216,877,969 1,243,960,726 1,243,960,726
Hawaii.................................................... 153,423,443 156,808,517 156,808,517
Idaho..................................................... 270,912,348 276,911,555 276,911,555
Illinois.................................................. 1,347,592,985 1,377,414,613 1,377,414,613
Indiana................................................... 879,470,562 898,990,495 898,990,495
Iowa...................................................... 465,298,970 475,606,951 475,606,951
Kansas.................................................... 357,802,906 365,729,026 365,729,026
Kentucky.................................................. 629,032,323 642,968,189 642,968,189
Louisiana................................................. 634,550,564 648,561,596 648,561,596
Maine..................................................... 171,136,207 174,918,814 174,918,814
Maryland.................................................. 569,712,716 582,317,695 582,317,695
Massachusetts............................................. 573,705,651 586,445,248 586,445,248
Michigan.................................................. 997,792,873 1,019,877,126 1,019,877,126
Minnesota................................................. 604,304,634 617,663,548 617,663,548
Mississippi............................................... 447,647,643 457,548,275 457,548,275
Missouri.................................................. 876,358,184 895,739,463 895,739,463
Montana................................................... 379,981,225 388,383,353 388,383,353
Nebraska.................................................. 273,727,580 279,790,090 279,790,090
Nevada.................................................... 344,238,874 351,855,485 351,855,485
New Hampshire............................................. 156,557,427 160,023,005 160,023,005
New Jersey................................................ 943,518,427 964,461,918 964,461,918
New Mexico................................................ 340,020,446 347,539,606 347,539,606
New York.................................................. 1,592,003,170 1,627,212,411 1,627,212,411
North Carolina............................................ 987,932,334 1,009,807,940 1,009,807,940
North Dakota.............................................. 230,006,417 235,091,606 235,091,606
Ohio...................................................... 1,216,610,017 1,243,449,331 1,243,449,331
Oklahoma.................................................. 600,405,162 613,707,231 613,707,231
Oregon.................................................... 463,004,294 473,241,333 473,241,333
Pennsylvania.............................................. 1,554,665,862 1,589,080,502 1,589,080,502
Rhode Island.............................................. 202,671,917 207,152,256 207,152,256
South Carolina............................................ 633,948,635 647,993,466 647,993,466
South Dakota.............................................. 259,758,519 265,534,977 265,534,977
Tennessee................................................. 782,891,123 800,199,870 800,199,870
Texas..................................................... 3,269,713,792 3,342,114,445 3,342,114,445
Utah...................................................... 328,873,330 336,156,562 336,156,562
Vermont................................................... 188,181,637 192,340,798 192,340,798
Virginia.................................................. 943,257,497 964,107,697 964,107,697
Washington................................................ 642,273,878 656,493,056 656,493,056
West Virginia............................................. 413,826,350 422,992,496 422,992,496
Wisconsin................................................. 712,577,597 728,359,430 728,359,430
Wyoming................................................... 232,000,764 237,121,473 237,121,473
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 36,704,564,920 37,517,030,716 37,517,030,716
-----------------------------------------------------
Allocated programs........................................ 5,250,644,793 5,334,321,057 5,334,321,057
Sections 154 and 164 Penalties............................ 382,356,953 391,314,893 391,314,893
High Risk Rural Roads Special Rule........................ 23,433,334 23,433,334 23,433,334
-----------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 42,361,000,000 43,266,100,000 43,266,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $43,100,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 44,005,100,000
Committee recommendation................................ 44,005,100,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal-aid highway program is funded through contract
authority paid out of the Highway Trust Fund. Most forms of
budget authority provide the authority to enter into
obligations and then to liquidate those obligations. Put
another way, it allows a Federal agency to commit to spending
money on specified activities and then to actually spend that
money. In contrast, contract authority provides only the
authority to enter into obligations, but not the authority to
liquidate those obligations. The authority to liquidate
obligations--to actually spend the money committed with the
contract authority--must be provided separately. The authority
to liquidate obligations under the Federal-aid highway program
is provided under this heading. This liquidating authority
allows FHWA to follow through on commitments already allowed
under current law; it does not provide the authority to enter
into new commitments for Federal spending.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation
of $44,005,100,000. The recommended level is equal to the
budget request and $905,100,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. This level of liquidating authority is necessary
to pay outstanding obligations from various highway accounts
pursuant to this and prior appropriations acts.

RESCISSION

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... -$2,436,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -2,211,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal-aid highway program currently has over $24
billion in unobligated balances of contract authority. The FAST
Act rescinds $7.569 billion in unobligated balances of
apportioned contract authority in fiscal year 2020. The FAST
Act rescission encompasses most apportioned funds except:
Appalachian Development Highway System Program, Coordinated
Border Infrastructure Program, Safe Routes to School Program,
Highway Safety Improvement Program, Railway-Highway Grade
Crossings Program, Surface Transportation Program funds that
are suballocated by population, and old set-asides for safety.
The rescission amounts for each State and each program within
such States are calculated based on unobligated balances of
contract authority for programs subject to the rescission.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a rescission of $2,211,000,000.
The recommended level is $225,000,000 less than the budget
request and $2,211,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. The bill requires the rescission to be applied
consistent with the rescission in the FAST Act.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

Section 120 distributes obligation authority among Federal-
aid Highway programs.
Section 121 continues a provision that credits funds
received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the
Federal-aid highways account.
Section 122 provides requirements for any waiver of Buy
America requirements.
Section 123 requires congressional notification before the
Department provides credit assistance under the TIFIA program.
Section 124 allows State DOTs to repurpose certain highway
project funding to be used within 50 miles of its original
designation.
Section 125 requires 60-day notification for any grants for
a project under 23 U.S.C. 117.
Section 126 identifies a certain route as a high priority
corridor on the national highway system and designates it as an
Interstate route.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [FMCSA] was
established within the Department of Transportation by the
Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act [MCSIA] (Public Law 106-
159) in December 1999. Prior to this legislation, motor carrier
safety responsibilities were under the jurisdiction of the
Federal Highway Administration.
MCSIA, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users [SAFETEA-LU], the
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act [MAP-21], and
the Fixing America's Surface Transportation [FAST] Act provide
funding authorization for FMCSA's Motor Carrier Safety
Operations and Programs and Motor Carrier Safety Grants.
FMCSA's mission is to promote safe commercial motor vehicle
and motor coach operations, as well as reduce the number and
severity of accidents. Agency resources and activities prevent
and mitigate commercial motor vehicle and motor coach accidents
through education, regulation, enforcement, stakeholder
training, technological innovation, and improved information
systems. FMCSA is also responsible for ensuring that all
commercial vehicles entering the United States along its
southern and northern borders comply with all Federal motor
carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations. To
accomplish these activities, FMCSA works with Federal, State,
and local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier industry,
highway safety organizations, and the public.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total level of $644,200,000 for
obligations and liquidations from the Highway Trust Fund. This
level is $150,000,000 less than the request and $63,800,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The
recommendation does not include any funding for the 21st
century clean transportation plan investments.

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2016........................................ $267,400,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 277,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 277,200,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides the necessary resources to support
motor carrier safety program activities and maintain the
agency's administrative infrastructure. Funding supports
nationwide motor carrier safety and consumer enforcement
efforts, including Federal safety enforcement activities at the
United States-Mexico border to ensure that Mexican carriers
entering the United States are in compliance with FMCSA
regulations. Resources are also provided to fund motor carrier
regulatory development and implementation, information
management, research and technology, safety education and
outreach, and the 24-hour safety and consumer telephone
hotline.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations and
authority to liquidate an equal amount of contract
authorization of $277,200,000 for FMCSA's Operations and
Programs. The recommendation is $9,800,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. Of the
total limitation on obligations, $9,180,000 is for research and
technology.
Bus Lease and Interchange Rule.--On March 16, 2016, FMCSA
announced it was extending the compliance date for its final
rule concerning the lease and interchange of passenger carrying
motor vehicles [Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0103], based on issues
raised in numerous petitions for reconsideration. The Committee
is pleased by this action, and directs FMCSA to expeditiously
complete its review and modify the rule to resolve the issues
raised, and ensure the rule appropriately targets unsafe
passenger carriers without unduly interfering in compliant
business operations. The Committee is confident FMCSA can
resolve all outstanding issues prior to January 2018; however,
if it is unable to effect a modification of the rule within
this time period, the Committee expects FMCSA to grant an
additional extension, until the rule can be modified.
Heavy Vehicle Speed Limiters.--A coalition of trucking
industry and safety advocates petitioned the Department in 2006
to initiate a rulemaking mandating all class 7 and 8 trucks to
have their top speeds electronically limited to no more than 65
miles per hour. NHTSA finally granted this petition in 2011 and
has been developing a proposed rulemaking with FMCSA that would
consider new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for the
installation of speed limiting devices. The agency has stated
that the rulemaking would have minimal costs and decrease fatal
crashes, but continues to delay publication of the proposed
rule. The Committee directs the Department to issue its
proposed rule by April 28, 2016.
High-Risk Carriers.--Under FMCSA regulations, carriers
identified as high risk must have a compliance review conducted
within 1 year. In fiscal year 2015, the Committee provided
additional resources to improve the agency's capacity to better
target high risk carriers and to conduct better oversight of
carriers operating under a consent decree. In fiscal year 2014,
FMCSA met this requirement for only 84 percent of the mandatory
carriers due to resources being diverted for the Enhanced
Investigation Techniques initiative. The Committee expects the
number of mandatory high risk inspections to increase with the
improved staff training and enhanced IT systems. The Committee
directs the agency to provide the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations with an updated report on its ability to meet
its requirements to evaluate mandatory carriers by April 15,
2017 for the preceding fiscal year.
Natural Gas Vehicle Regulations.--The Committee recognizes
the significant growth and value in the market for natural gas
as a transportation fuel and is aware that certain DOT
regulations that address the safety of natural gas vehicles
have not been updated to keep pace with new developments and
the advancement of natural gas vehicles. Accordingly, the
Department is encouraged to develop new safety regulations and
inspection procedures for liquefied natural gas [LNG] fuel
tanks and fuel systems on commercial motor vehicles, and revise
and harmonize requirements for compressed natural gas [CNG]
cylinders that address the inspection of such cylinders. The
Department is also encouraged to work with industry and
manufacturers to clarify and address the ability of bus
manufacturers to continue to deploy buses that have roof-top
mounted CNG cylinders. In addition, as there are no Federal
regulations that prohibit the interstate movement of natural
gas vehicles as it relates to the fuel stored onboard for
motive power, the Secretary is encouraged to clarify through
guidance that rules restricting access to bridges and tunnels
in the case of an alternative fuel vehicle should not be any
more restrictive than those addressing gasoline and diesel
fueled vehicles, unless there is a determination of a
significant risk to safety.
Windshield Mounted Safety Technologies.--The Committee is
aware of current FMCSA regulations that limit the ability of
commercial motor carriers to voluntarily mount vehicle safety
technologies on windshields. Due to the significant safety
benefits brought about by certain types of windshield mounted
technologies, the Committee directed the DOT, in Senate Report
114-75, to move forward in prescribing regulations to
permanently allow the use of such technologies. Congress later
codified this directive into law in section 5301 of the FAST
Act. The Committee is eager to see the implementation of
section 5301 and is hopeful that the Department will meet the
deadline set out in law. Accordingly, the Committee directs
FMCSA to provide an update on the status of this effort within
30 days of enactment of this act.

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2016........................................ $313,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 367,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 367,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides the necessary resources for Federal
grants to support State compliance, enforcement, and other
programs. Grants are also provided to States for enforcement
efforts at both the southern and northern borders to ensure
that all points of entry into the United States are fortified
with comprehensive safety measures; improvement of State
commercial driver's license [CDL] oversight activities to
prevent unqualified drivers from being issued CDLs; and the
Performance Registration Information Systems and Management
[PRISM] program, which links State motor vehicle registration
systems with carrier safety data in order to identify unsafe
commercial motor carriers.

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations and
authority to liquidate an equal amount of contract
authorization of $367,000,000 for motor carrier safety grants.
The recommended limitation is $54,000,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. The
Committee recommends a separate limitation on obligations for
each grant program funded under this account with the funding
allocation identified below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor carrier safety assistance program [MCSAP]......... $292,600,000
High priority activities program........................ 42,200,000
Commercial motor vehicle operator grants program........ 1,000,000
Commercial driver's license program implementation 31,200,000
program................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

Section 130 subjects the funds in this act to section 350
of Public Law 107-87 in order to ensure the safety of all
cross-border long haul operations conducted by Mexican-
domiciled commercial carriers.
Section 131 makes a technical correction to the hours of
service provision in section 133 of division L of title I of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Public Law 114-113.
If the 34-hour restart rule in effect on June 30, 2013, is
restored, then drivers who use the 34-hour restart may not
drive after being on duty more than 73 hours in a 7-day period.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA]
was established as a separate organizational entity in the
Department of Transportation in March of 1970 to administer
motor vehicle and highway safety programs. It was the successor
agency to the National Highway Safety Bureau, which was housed
in the Federal Highway Administration. NHTSA is responsible for
motor vehicle safety, highway safety behavioral programs, motor
vehicle information, and automobile fuel economy programs.
NHTSA's mission is to reduce deaths, injuries, and economic
losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes. To accomplish
these goals, NHTSA establishes and enforces safety performance
standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment,
investigates safety defects in motor vehicles, and conducts
research on driver behavior and traffic safety. NHTSA provides
grants and technical assistance to State and local governments
to enable them to conduct effective local highway safety
programs. Together with State and local partners, NHTSA works
to reduce the threat of drunk, impaired, and distracted
driving, and to promote policies and devices with demonstrated
safety benefits including helmets, child safety seats, airbags,
and graduated license. NHTSA establishes and ensures compliance
with fuel economy standards, investigates odometer fraud,
establishes and enforces vehicle anti-theft regulations, and
provides consumer information on a variety of motor vehicle
safety topics.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $891,347,000, including both
budget authority and limitations on the obligation of contract
authority. This funding is $289,925,000 less than the
President's request and $22,315,000 more than the fiscal year
2016 enacted level. The recommendation does not include any
funding for the 21st century clean transportation plan
investments.
The following table summarizes Committee recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway trust
General fund fund Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation 2016.............................................. $152,800,000 $716,232,000 $869,032,000
Budget estimate, 2017........................................... .............. 1,181,272,000 1,181,272,000
Committee recommendation........................................ 160,075,000 731,272,000 891,347,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These programs support traffic safety programs and related
research, demonstrations, technical assistance, and national
leadership for highway safety programs conducted by State and
local governments, the private sector, universities, research
units, and various safety associations and organizations. These
highway safety programs emphasize alcohol and drug
countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law
enforcement, emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic
records and licensing, State and community traffic safety
evaluations, protection of motorcycle riders, pedestrian and
bicyclist safety, pupil transportation, distracted driving
prevention, young and older driver safety, and improved
accident investigation procedures.

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway trust
General fund fund Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2016................................. $152,800,000 $142,900,000 $295,700,000
Budget estimate, 2017........................................... .............. 395,900,000 395,900,000
Committee recommendation........................................ 160,075,000 145,900,000 305,975,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $305,975,000 for Operations and
Research, which is $89,925,000 less than the President's budget
request and $10,275,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. Of the total amount recommended for Operations and
Research, $160,075,000 is derived from the general fund and
$145,900,000 is derived from the Highway Trust Fund. For
vehicle safety research, the Committee recommendation includes
$23,510,000 for rulemakings, $18,494,000 for enforcement, and
$38,100,000 for research and analysis. For highway safety
research and development, the Committee recommendation includes
$56,143,000 for highway safety programs, and $42,993,000 for
the National Center for Statistics and Analysis. The
recommendation fully funds the annualization of staff provided
in fiscal year 2016, but does not include funding for any new
positions.
Autonomous Vehicles.--The Committee believes that the
development of autonomous vehicles and automated technologies
can significantly reduce roadway fatalities and improve
mobility options, particularly to rural America. The
recommendation includes not less than $6,600,000 for vehicle
electronics and emerging technologies and directs NHTSA to use
these resources to ensure that potentially life-saving
autonomous vehicle technologies with proven safety benefits can
be safely integrated into vehicles available to the public.
Within the funds provided, the Committee directs the agency to
also reduce cybersecurity risks associated the vehicle's
electronic and communications systems. The Committee is also
concerned that the Department not create regulatory burdens to
the safe integration of autonomous vehicles and encourages the
Department to take into consideration the variations in rural
infrastructure, such as unmapped, gravel, and snow-covered
roads, wildlife encounters, and other situations unique to
rural roads.
Office of Defects Investigations [ODI].--The Committee is
disappointed that in spite of additional resources and repeated
promises of improvement, the agency continues to stumble from
one recall crisis to another. In fact, an OIG report issued
this February, ``Additional Efforts Are Needed To Ensure
NHTSA's Full Implementation of OIG's 2011 Recommendations'',
found that NHTSA lacks sufficient controls for full compliance
with recommendations issued in 2011 and has yet to execute a
formal training program for ODI staff. For example, while NHTSA
told the OIG that it would document justifications for
exceeding investigation timeliness goals, over 70 percent of
delayed investigations reviewed did not include such
justifications. NHTSA also agreed to establish a procedure to
store and retain pre-investigation records to better address
potential safety concerns, but 42 percent of the pre-
investigation documents reviewed were not included in ODI's
case management system. The OIG also issued a 2015 report,
``Inadequate Data and Analysis Undermine NHTSA's Efforts To
Identify and Investigate Vehicle Safety Concerns'', which
included 17 recommendations to improve ODI's processes for
collecting and analyzing vehicle safety data and for
determining which potential safety issues warrant
investigation. NHTSA anticipates completing these
recommendations in fiscal year 2016. The Committee directs
NHTSA shall to fully and consistently implement all OIG
recommendations from the 2011, 2015, and 2016 reports. Further,
the Committee directs the OIG to continue to assess NHTSA's
progress in implementation of these recommendations and report
to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this act on the
agency's progress to resolve these issues.
Plastics and Polymer Composite Materials.--The Committee
recognizes the importance that plastics and polymer-based
composite materials play in reducing vehicle weight. They
provide vehicle manufacturers with innovative tools to reduce
fuel consumption and, by association, vehicle emissions. As
manufacturers plan for future fleets, composite materials offer
benefits for meeting new targets established under NHTSA's
recent vehicle fuel efficiency rules. At the same time, the
Committee recognizes that composite manufacturing is a new and
growing industry, providing highly skilled jobs in the
automotive industry. The Committee directs NHTSA to use funding
provided for the Fuel Economy program to accelerate the
advancement of plastic and polymer composites, including
testing and evaluation techniques, while validating the safety
performance of polymer-based composites in structural
applications for the automotive industry. This research will
help facilitate a foundation of cooperation between DOT, the
Department of Energy, and industry stakeholders for the
development of safety-centered approaches for future light-
weight automotive design.
Impaired Driving.--Removing drivers from the road who are
under the influence of drugs and alcohol is key to reducing
highway crashes and fatalities. As States adopt new laws
regarding marijuana, they and the Federal Government are
challenged to understand the risk of marijuana-impaired
driving, how to accurately measure drug impaired driving, and
how to set uniform regulations regarding impairment. The
Committee has advocated for NHTSA to advances its work on drug
impaired driving by expanding public education, data
collection, the development of standard practices for drug
toxicology testing, and guidelines for post-accident drug
testing and reporting. In fiscal year 2015, the Committee also
directed GAO to study strategies that the NHTSA, the Office of
National Drug Control Policy, States, and local law enforcement
have used to detect and reduce drug impaired driving. GAO found
that a lack of a clear link between impairment and drug
concentrations in the body makes it difficult to define drug
impairment, and highlighted the lack of public awareness and
inadequate data available to set standards. Subsequently,
section 4008 of the FAST Act required the Secretary to conduct
a study of marijuana-impaired driving to develop standards for
impairment and assess technologies for measuring driver
impairment within 1 year. In executing this requirement, the
Committee also directs NHTSA to develop criteria for roadside
drug testing.
Tire Efficiency.--The FAST Act includes three tire-related
provisions under section 24331, the ``Tire Efficiency, Safety,
and Registration Act of 2015'' or the ``TESR Act''. The
provisions will contribute significantly to consumer safety,
vehicle fuel economy and the competitiveness of the U.S. tire
manufacturing industry and deserve the Department's timely
attention and resources. The Committee encourages the Secretary
to implement these regulations promptly and directs the
Department to submit a report to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations within 60 days after enactment of
this act on the Department's schedule and plan for promulgating
these regulations. Further, the Committee urges DOT to move
forward with promulgating its pending updates to passenger Tire
Pressure Monitoring System [TPMS] standards as required by
section 24115 of the FAST Act. The risk of unintentional reset
or recalibration in some models of TPMS is a concern and DOT
should not delay in taking action on this issue.
Motorcoach Safety.--The Committee is concerned by DOT's
inability to meet the deadlines required for roof strength of
motorcoaches, anti-ejection rules, or avoidance measures for
motorcoaches as required by MAP-21. The Committee urges the
agency to finalize anti-ejection and crash avoidance rulemaking
in fiscal year 2017 and directs NHTSA to submit a report to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 6 months
of the date of enactment of this act on the status of those
efforts. Section 32704 of MAP-21, required NHTSA to conduct
research on the causes of motorcoach fires, prevention and
mitigation and determine whether there was a need to issue fire
prevention standards within 3 years. While NHTSA released its
research, the agency has not yet made a decision about whether
or not to issue prevention and mitigation standards. NHTSA
should move forward with this determination to fully meet the
requirements of the law.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2016........................................ $573,332,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 585,372,000
Committee recommendation................................ 585,372,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The most recent surface authorization, the FAST Act,
reauthorizes the Sec. 402 State and community formula grants,
the high visibility enforcement grants, and the consolidated
National Priority Safety Program which consists of occupant
protection grants, State traffic safety information grants,
impaired driving countermeasures grants, distracted driving
grants, motorcycle safety grants, State graduated driver
license grants, and nonmotorized safety grants.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations and
authority to liquidate an equal amount of contract
authorization of $585,372,000 for the highway traffic safety
grant programs funded under this heading. The recommended
limitation is equal to the budget estimate and $12,040,000
above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee continues to recommend prohibiting the use of
section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or
remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for
State, local, or private buildings or structures.
The authorized funding for administrative expenses and for
each grant program is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway Safety Programs (section 402)................... 252,300,000
National Priority Safety Programs (section 405)......... 277,500,000
High Visibility Enforcement Program..................... 29,500,000
Administrative Expenses................................. 26,072,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drunk Driving Prevention.--NHTSA has partnered with leading
automobile manufacturers in the Automotive Coalition for
Traffic Safety [ACTS] on an ambitious research program to
develop in-vehicle technology to prevent alcohol-impaired
driving that is publicly acceptable, unobtrusive for drivers
below the legal limit of .08 BAC, reliable, and relatively
inexpensive. To date, progress has been significant, including
the identification of two competing technological approaches
which were demonstrated at DOT headquarters in June 2015. The
FAST Act provides $21,248,000 between fiscal year 2017 and 2020
for in-vehicle alcohol detection device research. The Committee
continues to strongly support this promising research
partnership, which has the potential to prevent thousands of
drunk-driving deaths annually. The Committee recommends
$5,312,000 for continuation of this research in fiscal year
2017 and encourages NHTSA to take steps in fiscal year 2017 to
accelerate the program, including field tests of the research
vehicles.
Testing for Drug Impairment.--The FAST Act reauthorizes the
Impaired Driving Countermeasure Grants to States, which allow
for a number of activities including the purchase of equipment
and training for the detection of drugs and alcohol in drivers.
The Committee directs NHTSA to include activities related to
roadside drug testing, including the purchase and training in
the use of instrumented drug testing devices, such as oral
fluid and blood testing at the roadside, where shown to be
accurate and reliable, as allowable activities under this
section.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION

Section 140 makes available $130,000 of obligation
authority for section 402 of title 23 U.S.C. to pay for travel
and expenses for State management reviews and highway safety
staff core competency development training.
Section 141 exempts obligation authority, made available in
previous public laws, from limitations on obligations for the
current year.

Federal Railroad Administration

The Federal Railroad Administration [FRA] became an
operating Administration within the Department of
Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau of
Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, the
Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the Department
of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the Department of the
Interior. FRA is responsible for planning, developing, and
administering programs to achieve safe operating and mechanical
practices in the railroad industry. Grants to the National
Railroad Passenger Corporation [Amtrak] and other financial
assistance programs to rehabilitate and improve the railroad
industry's physical infrastructure are also administered by the
Federal Railroad Administration.

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $199,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 213,298,000
Committee recommendation................................ 208,500,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Safety and Operations account provides support for FRA
rail safety activities and all other administrative and
operating activities related to staff and programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recognizes the importance of taking a
holistic approach to improving railroad safety and supports a
comprehensive strategy of data-driven regulatory and inspection
efforts, proactive approaches to identify and mitigate risks,
and strategic capital investments in order to improve safety.
The Committee recommends $208,500,000 for Safety and
Operations for fiscal year 2017, which is $4,798,000 less than
the budget request and $9,500,000 more than the fiscal year
2016 enacted level. The bill specifies that $15,900,000 shall
remain available until expended to cover the cost of the
Automated Track Inspection Program, the Railroad Safety
Information System, research and development activities, and
contract support.
While there have been several high profile incidents
involving passenger trains in the past year, the Committee
remains confident that the passenger rail system is safe. In
fact, according to the FRA's Office of Safety Analysis,
calendar year 2015 actually saw the lowest rate of total
accidents/incidents per million passenger train miles in the
last several years. That being said, even one passenger train
incident is one too many, and as such, the recent incidents
underscore the need for continued safety improvements. The
Committee believes it is essential that all stakeholders--
railroads management, unions, and regulatory agencies--work
together in a collaborative process to promote railroad safety
and prevent future accidents. The Committee maintains its
commitment to prioritizing passenger rail safety and the
increase in funding supports the annualization of 32 safety
personnel provided in fiscal year 2016, as well as additional
safety initiatives detailed below.
Safe Transport of Energy Products [STEP].--The Committee's
recommendation includes funding to support FRA's efforts to
improve the safe transport of energy products. The STEP
initiative supports crude oil safety inspectors, crude oil
route safety managers, and tank car quality assurance
specialists, tank car research, as well as supports increased
mileage of a dedicated Automated Track Inspection Program
vehicle on routes with energy products traffic.
Automated Track Inspection Program.--The Automated Track
Inspection Program [ATIP] provides track geometry information,
as well as other track-related performance data, to assess
compliance with Federal Track Safety Standards. The data
collected under ATIP is used by FRA inspectors and by railroads
to ensure proper track maintenance and to assess track safety
trends within the industry. The Committee supports FRA's budget
request to expand the use of ATIP vehicles, including
autonomous ATIP vehicles, to support the inspection of crude
oil routes.
Nationwide Bridge Inventory.--The Committee's
recommendation includes $500,000 for FRA to create a Web-based
portal to collect electronic data from railroads on the number
and condition of railroad bridges. This database should
document information including the age of bridges and the last
date of inspection, and the Committee urges FRA to target its
inspections to the areas of highest risk.
Small Business Participation Study.--The Committee urges
FRA to complete a nationwide disparity and availability study
on the use of small business concerns owned and controlled by
socially and economically disadvantaged individuals and
veteran--owned small businesses in publicly funded intercity
rail passenger transportation projects.
Gulf Coast Working Group.--The Committee urges FRA to
complete the evaluation of restoration of intercity rail
passenger service as required by the FAST Act.

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $39,100,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 53,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 40,100,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Railroad Research and Development program provides
science and technology support for FRA's rail safety rulemaking
and enforcement efforts. It also supports technological
advances in conventional and high-speed railroads, as well as
evaluations of the role of railroads in the Nation's
transportation system.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,100,000
for railroad Research and Development, which is $13,400,000
less than the budget request and $1,000,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Short Line Safety Institute.--Short Line railroads operate
approximately 50,000 miles of track, which is one-third of the
national railroad network. They are an important feeder system
for the larger Class I railroads, helping connect local
communities to the national railroad network. There are 550
short line railroads operating in the United States, 73 of
which currently handle some volume of energy products. The
safety management system of short lines is extremely varied.
Many small railroads with limited personnel and limited
financial capital need additional resources to conduct
hazardous materials safety training and other operational
safety assessments. The Committee supports FRA's efforts, in
partnership with short line and regional railroads, to continue
to build a stronger, sustainable safety culture in this segment
of the rail industry. To date, several Class III railroads,
including those that transport crude oil, have received safety
conformance assessments in order to improve railroad safety
culture. The Committee's recommendation includes $2,000,000 to
further the Short Line Safety Institute's mission, including
continued efforts to improve the safe transportation of crude
oil and other hazardous materials by rail.
Tank Car Research.--The Committee's recommendation includes
$2,000,000 to conduct tank car research activities related to
STEP in partnership with PHMSA and DOE.
Intelligent Railroad Systems.--The Committee's
recommendation includes $1,000,000 for university research and
development in collaboration with FRA to advance the goals and
objectives of an Intelligent Railroad System through conversion
of the Intelligent Transportation Systems technology for
highways in an effort to serve as a resource for developments
in track mapping and inspections, train and railcar tracking,
and grade crossing safety. The impacts of recent rail closures
in Central Appalachia, including West Virginia, highlights the
need to advance research that would help States retain and
attract major rail activity.

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM

The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing
[RRIF] program was established by Public Law 109-178 to provide
direct loans and loan guarantees to State and local
governments, Government-sponsored entities, and railroads.
Credit assistance under the program may be used for
rehabilitating or developing rail equipment and facilities.
The Committee directs FRA to continue to provide a summary
of loan activity for the preceding fiscal years in its fiscal
year 2018 budget justification. At a minimum, FRA should detail
the number of loans pending and issued, and the processing time
for these loans.

CONSOLIDATED RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016\1\................................. $50,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\2\................................
Committee recommendation................................ 50,000,000

\1\Funded under Railroad Safety Grants.
\2\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
Improvements [CRISI] Grants provide support for projects
authorized in section 11301 of Public Law 114-94 that improve
rail safety. While the Committee is sympathetic to the need for
funding for projects that improve the efficiency and
reliability of passenger and freight rail transportation
systems, under current budget constraints the Committee is
committed to prioritizing projects that improve railroad
safety.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the CRISI Grants.
The budget request provides funding under a new $3,700,000,000
Rail Service Improvements program that would be supported by
mandatory resources and would require enactment of a new
comprehensive surface transportation act, ignoring current law
under the FAST Act. The recommendation does not include funding
for the 21st century clean transportation plan investments.
The Committee included $50,000,000 in Rail Safety Grants in
fiscal year 2016. With the recently enacted authorization bill
supporting these efforts under CRISI, the Committee provides
$25,000,000 for section 24407(c)(1) of title 49 United States
Code; and $25,000,000 for section 24407 (c)(5), (c)(6), (c)(7),
and (c)(10). Funding for projects eligible under section 24407
(c)(6) and (c)(7) is limited to projects that improve railroad
safety.

FEDERAL-STATE PARTNERSHIP FOR STATE OF GOOD REPAIR GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016....................................
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000

\1\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair
Grant program provides support for capital projects that reduce
the state of good repair backlog with respect to qualified
railroad assets.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Federal-State
Partnership for State of Good Repair Grants. The budget request
provides funding under a new $2,300,000,000 Current Passenger
Rail Service program that would be supported by mandatory
resources and would require enactment of a new comprehensive
surface transportation authorization act, ignoring current law
under the FAST Act. The recommendation does not include funding
for the 21st century clean transportation investments plan.
The Committee is aware of the growing backlog of state of
good repair and improvement needs on many of the country's
important passenger routes. The Committee directs FRA to take
into consideration the needs of the entire national rail
network when awarding funding for this program.

RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016....................................
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000

\1\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Restoration and Enhancement Grant program provides
support for operating assistance and capital investments to
initiate, restore, or enhance intercity passenger rail service.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for Restoration and
Enhancement Grants. The budget request provides funding under a
new $3,700,000,000 Rail Service Improvements program that would
be supported by mandatory resources and would require enactment
of a new comprehensive surface transportation authorization
act, ignoring current law under the FAST Act. The
recommendation does not include funding for the 21st century
clean transportation plan investments. The Committee recommends
$5,000,000 for section 2408 of title 49, United States Code,
and $10,000,000 for capital grants for restoration and
initiation of intercity passenger rail service.

THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,390,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,420,000,000

\1\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
operates intercity passenger rail services in 46 States and the
District of Columbia, in addition to serving as a contractor in
various capacities for several commuter rail agencies. Congress
created Amtrak in the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970
(Public Law 91-518) in response to private carriers' inability
to profitably operate intercity passenger rail service.
Thereafter, Amtrak assumed the common carrier obligations of
the private railroads in exchange for the right to priority
access to their tracks for incremental cost.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$1,420,000,000 for Amtrak, which is $30,000,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The budget request would shift
funding for Amtrak into a new $2,300,000,000 Current Passenger
Rail Service program that would be supported by mandatory
resources and would require enactment of a new comprehensive
surface transportation authorization ignoring current law under
the FAST Act. The recommendation does not include funding for
the 21st century clean transportation plan investments. The
Committee understands that FRA and Amtrak are working to
complete the necessary changes to comply with the new grant
structure created in the FAST Act and that the division of
funds between the Amtrak grants represents the best estimate at
the time of enactment of this act.
The Committee directs FRA to make a timely disbursement of
funds in accordance with the FAST Act to maximize the
Corporation's ability to efficiently manage its cash flow. Each
year, Amtrak is responsible for significant one-time cash
overflows at the beginning of the calendar year. In order to
help facilitate these payments, the Committee encourages the
FRA to release adequate funding in the first quarter of the
fiscal year in order to efficiently manage Amtrak's financial
obligations in a timely manner.
Budget, and Business Plan.--The Committee continues to
direct Amtrak to submit a business plan in accordance with
section 11203(b) of Public Law 114-94 for fiscal year 2017. The
Corporation shall continue to submit a budget request for
fiscal year 2018 to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations in similar format and substance to those
submitted by executive agencies of the Federal Government.
FRA Grant Administration and Report Streamlining.--The
Committee recognizes that Amtrak fields a myriad of grant
requirements from the FRA. The Committee is supportive of
robust oversight by the FRA; however, to the extent
practicable, the FRA is encouraged to work with Amtrak to
reduce duplication and streamline their report requirements.
ADA Compliance.--The Committee continues to believe that
compliance with the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act [ADA] is essential to ensuring that all people
have equal access to transportation services. Amtrak reports
that it has some degree of ADA responsibility at 365 stations,
that it has provided mobile lifts at the 97 stations that have
less than 7,500 riders annually, and that approximately 190 of
the remaining 268 stations will need some type of set-back
level boarding solution. Many of the platforms in these
stations are owned by freight railroads and reconciling the
requirements of existing freight traffic with the needs of
passengers is a complex challenge. The Committee encourages
Amtrak to use its funds to address compliance requirements that
are the responsibility of other parties at the stations it
serves where the work involved is not more than 10 percent of
the cost of all ADA compliance work at that station, and where
doing so would expedite completion of its compliance efforts
and be a more efficient use of resources than compelling those
parties to act. With the level of funding recommended by the
Committee, Amtrak intends to advance construction at a total of
50 stations and intends to advance planning and design
requirements for another 99 stations. By the end of the fiscal
year 2016, Amtrak expects to complete work on a total of 60
stations.
Food and Beverage.--In 2013, Amtrak announced a plan to
eliminate food and beverage losses on its system. In response
to this announcement, the Committee required Amtrak to report
on its savings initiatives in fiscal years 2015 and 2016, and
the Committee is encouraged by the contents of those reports.
Subsequently, the FAST Act formalized this planning and
implementation process providing specific requirements to
eliminate operating losses associated with providing food and
beverage services on board Amtrak trains by 2020. The Committee
urges Amtrak to continue to take actions that would allow it to
produce a net loss of zero on its food and beverage services
ahead of the FAST Act deadline. The Committee directs Amtrak to
provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations no later than 120 days after enactment of this
act comparing the actual fiscal year 2016 savings with Amtrak
projections.
Passenger Rail in the Bakken Region.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of improving the financial viability
of Amtrak's Empire Builder and the growth in demand for
passenger rail service in the Bakken region. The Committee
directs Amtrak to continue to work with local officials, taking
into account the results of the updated Amtrak Empire Builder
feasibility study, to address the prospect of adding new
passenger rail stops.
Promoting Rail and Airport Connections.--The Committee
continues to support efforts to improve intercity passenger
rail connections at commercial airports that are adjacent to
the mainline of the NEC and not currently served by Amtrak, and
directs FRA, in coordination with Amtrak, to complete the study
required in Public Law 114-113 on the feasibility of
establishing service at such airports by December 31, 2016. The
assessment of feasibility should be a robust addition to
previous efforts considering how intercity passenger rail
service may complement existing or planned commuter passenger
rail service at such stations and contain thorough analysis of
the projected ridership and revenue levels, impacts on network
service levels and performance, operating and capital costs,
and local economic impacts associated with any service options.

NORTHEAST CORRIDOR GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION

The Committee recommends $345,000,000 for Northeast
Corridor Grants to Amtrak. The funding level provided includes
no more than $5,000,000 for use of the Northeast Corridor
Commission established under section 24905 of title 49, United
States Code.
Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Needs.--The Committee
acknowledges that the NEC has a state of good repair backlog of
more than $28,000,000,000. This includes several key components
of electrical and signal systems that date back to the 1930s as
well as critical bridges and tunnels that are more than 100
years old. According to the NEC Commission, the loss of the NEC
for a single day could cost the country $100,000,000 in added
congestion, productivity losses, and other transportation
impacts.

NATIONAL NETWORK GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

The Committee recommends $1,075,000,000 for National
Network Grants to Amtrak. The funding level provided includes
no more than $2,000,000 for use of the State-Supported Route
Committee established in the FAST Act.
Long-Distance State of Good Repair.--The Committee
recognizes the important role rail corridors, such as the Great
Northern Corridor, play in maintaining connectivity for both
freight and passengers on the national rail network.
Additionally, the Committee recognizes the strain placed on
rail infrastructure by aging equipment. The Committee urges FRA
and Amtrak to work with local communities and partners to
upgrade shared-use infrastructure on its long-distance routes.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Section 150 limits overtime payments to employees at Amtrak
to $35,000 per employee. However, Amtrak's president may waive
this restriction for specific employees for safety or
operational efficiency reasons. If the cap is waived, Amtrak
must notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
within 30 days and specify the reason for such waiver.
Section 151 provides additional flexibility to FRA
Restoration and Enhancement Grants for operating expenses.

Federal Transit Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Transit Administration [FTA] was established as
a component of the Department of Transportation by
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968,
which transferred most of the functions and programs under the
Federal Transit Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49
U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. The missions of the FTA are: to help develop
improved mass transportation systems and practices; to support
the inclusion of public transportation in community and
regional planning to support economic development; to provide
mobility for Americans who depend on transit for transportation
in both metropolitan and rural areas; to maximize the
productivity and efficiency of transportation systems; and to
provide assistance to State and local governments and agencies
in financing such services and systems.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level
of $12,332,434,043 is provided for FTA programs in fiscal year
2017. The recommendation is $7,436,272,000 less than the budget
request and $575,227,404 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The recommendation does not include funding for the 21st
century clean transportation investments plan.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway trust
General fund fund Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation 2016........................................ $2,409,602,000 $9,347,604,639 $11,757,206,639
Budget estimate, 2017..................................... 150,000,000 19,618,706,043 19,768,706,043
Committee recommendation.................................. 2,598,728,000 9,733,706,043 12,332,434,043
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $108,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................ 115,016,543
Committee recommendation................................ 110,665,000

\1\Requested as a set-aside within Formula Grants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Administrative expenses fund personnel, contract resources,
information technology, space management, travel, training, and
other administrative expenses necessary to carry out FTA's
mission to support, improve, and help ensure the safety of
public transportation systems.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $110,665,000 from the
general fund for the agency's salaries and administrative
expenses. The recommended level of funding is $4,351,543 less
than the budget request, which assumed that FTA's
administrative expenses would be provided as a set-aside within
the Formula Grants account. The Committee recommendation is
also $2,665,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Project Management Oversight [PMO] Activities.--The
Committee directs FTA to continue to submit to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations the quarterly PMO reports
for each project with a full funding grant agreement.
Full Funding Grant Agreements [FFGAs].--Section 5309(k) of
title 49, U.S.C. requires that FTA notify the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations, as well as the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on
Banking, 30 days before executing a FFGA. In its notification
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the
Committee directs FTA to submit the following information: (1)
a copy of the proposed FFGA; (2) the total and annual Federal
appropriations required for the project; (3) the yearly and
total Federal appropriations that can be planned or anticipated
for existing FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2019; (4) a
detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and
anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization, by
individual project; (5) a financial analysis of the project's
cost and sponsor's ability to finance the project, which shall
be conducted by an independent examiner and which shall include
an assessment of the capital cost estimate and finance plan;
(6) the source and security of all public and private sector
financing; (7) the project's operating plan, which enumerates
the project's future revenue and ridership forecasts; and (8) a
listing of all planned contingencies and possible risks
associated with the project.
The Committee also directs FTA to inform the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing 30 days before
approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any FFGA.
Correspondence relating to all changes shall include any budget
revisions or program changes that materially alter the project
as originally stipulated in the FFGA, including any proposed
change in rail car procurement.
The Committee directs FTA to continue to provide a monthly
Capital Investment Grant program update to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations, detailing the status of each
project. This update should include anticipated milestone
schedules for advancing projects, especially those within 2
years of a proposed FFGA. It should also highlight and explain
any potential cost and schedule changes affecting projects. In
addition, FTA should notify the Committees 10 days before any
project in the Capital Investment Grant program is given
approval by FTA to advance to project development or
engineering.

FORMULA GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obligation
limitation
(trust fund)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016.................................. $9,347,604,639
Budget estimate, 2017................................. 9,733,706,043
Committee recommendation.............................. 9,733,706,043
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Communities use Formula Grants funds for bus and railcar
purchases, facility repair and construction, maintenance, and
where eligible, planning and operating expenses. The Formula
Grants account includes funding for the following programs:
transit-oriented development; planning programs; urbanized area
formula grants; enhanced mobility for seniors and individuals
with disabilities; a pilot program for enhanced mobility;
formula grants for rural areas; public transportation
innovation; technical assistance and workforce development,
including a national transit institute; a bus testing facility;
the national transit database; state of good repairs grants;
bus and bus facilities formulas grants; growing States and
high-density States formula grants; and positive train control
grants. Set-asides from formula funds are directed to a grant
program for each State with rail systems not regulated by the
Federal Railroad Administration to meet the requirements for a
State Safety Oversight program. The account also provides
funding to support passenger ferry services and public
transportation on Indian reservations.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends limiting obligations in the
transit formula and bus grants account in fiscal year 2017 to
$9,733,706,043. The recommendation is equal to the budget
request and $386,101,403 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The recommendation is also consistent with the currently
authorized level under the FAST Act. The recommendation does
not include funding for the 21st century clean transportation
plan investments.
The Committee recommends $10,800,000,000 in authority to
liquidate contract authorizations. This amount is sufficient to
cover outstanding obligations from this account.
The following table displays the distribution of obligation
limitation among the program categories of formula grants:

DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATION LIMITATION AMONG MAJOR CATEGORIES OF FORMULA GRANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017
Formula grants (obligation -------------------------------------
limitation) Section number Fiscal year 2016 Administration Committee
proposal assumption
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transit Oriented Development..... 20005(b)............ $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000
Planning Programs................ 5305................ 130,732,000 133,398,933 133,398,933
Urbanized Area Formula Grants.... 5307................ 4,538,905,701 4,629,683,814 4,629,683,814
Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and 5310................ 262,949,400 268,208,388 268,208,388
Individuals with Disabilities.
Pilot Program for Enhanced 3006(b)............. 2,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Mobility.
Formula Grants for Rural Areas... 5311................ 619,956,000 632,355,120 632,355,120
Public Transportation Innovation. 5312................ 28,000,000 28,000,000 28,000,000
Technical Assistance and 5314................ 9,000,000 9,000,000 9,000,000
Workforce Development.
Bus Testing Facilities........... 5318................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
National Transit Database........ 5335................ 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
State of Good Repair Grants...... 5337................ 2,507,000,000 2,549,670,000 2,549,670,000
Bus and Bus Facilities Grants.... 5339................ 695,800,000 719,956,000 719,956,000
Growing States and High Density 5340................ 536,261,539 544,433,788 544,433,788
States.
Positive Train Control........... .................... ................. 199,000,000 199,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total...................... .................... 9,347,604,639 9,733,706,043 9,733,706,043
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transit Formula Allocations.--The Committee supports
increased funding levels authorized by the FAST Act for bus and
bus facility grants and encourages FTA to prioritize
competitive funding under this program for small and rural
systems.
Improving Rural Transit Access.--The Committee recognizes
the importance of ensuring safe, private transportation is made
available for seniors and people who do not drive, especially
in small and rural communities where distance and low
population density make traditional mass transportation
difficult. The efficiencies of information management can help
to provide on-demand transportation services and bring together
underutilized private transportation capacity through ride
share, car share, volunteer transport, and private community
transport. The Committee encourages FTA to consider innovative
transportation networks that leverage community volunteerism
and private resources in various forms to access underutilized
private transportation capacity to promote inclusive community
mobility and provide transportation for seniors and
disadvantaged populations in small and rural communities.
Further, the Committee supports the capacity of consumers to
plan their travel safely, independently and reliably through a
variety of techniques and tools.
Positive Train Control.--The Committee recommendation
includes $199,000,000 to help commuter and intercity railroads
implement Positive Train Control as authorized by the FAST Act.
Section 3028 of the FAST Act outlines eligible recipients of
these funds as entities that receive funds under chapter 53 of
title 49, United States Code. The Committee therefore believes
these funds are available to States that partner with Amtrak on
State supported routes.
Low or No Emission Vehicles.--The Committee supports the
FAST Act's inclusion of competitive grants for low or no
emission buses and bus facilities into the section 3017 buses
and bus facilities grant program. This change is aimed at
ensuring that low or no emission vehicles or facilities
financed under this program can be fully integrated into public
transportation systems. The Committee encourages FTA to
favorably consider grant applications focused on the cleanest
technologies available in the transit bus market, including
transit bus technologies and supporting facilities that have no
tailpipe/point source emissions.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $2,177,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................ 3,500,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,338,063,000

\1\Requested as mandatory funding from the transportation trust fund
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under the Capital Investment Grants [CIG] program, FTA
provides grants to fund the building of new fixed guideway
systems or extensions and improvements to existing fixed
guideway systems. Eligible services include light rail, rapid
rail (heavy rail), commuter rail, and bus rapid transit. The
program includes funding for four categories of eligible
projects authorized under section 5309 of title 49 of the
United States Code and section 3005(b) of the FAST Act: New
Starts, Small Starts, Core Capacity, and Expedited Project
Delivery Pilot Program. New Starts are projects with a Federal
share under this section of at least $100,000,000 or a total
net capital cost of at least $300,000,000. By comparison, Small
Starts are projects with a Federal share under this section of
less than $100,000,000 and total net capital cost less than
$300,000,000. Core Capacity projects are those that will expand
capacity by at least 10 percent in existing fixed-guideway
transit corridors that are already at or above capacity today,
or are expected to be at or above capacity within 5 years. The
FAST Act authorizes eight projects under the Expedited Project
Delivery Pilot Program, consisting of New Starts, Small Starts,
or Core Capacity, that require no more than a 25 percent
Federal share and are supported, in part, by a public private
partnership.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,338,063,000 for capital
investment grants, which is $161,063,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level, and $1,161,937,000 less than the
request. The Committee's recommendation includes $1,209,790,000
to cover the cost of existing full funding grant agreements
[FFGAs] in fiscal year 2017 and $511,280,000 for new starts
projects that the administration has recommended for FFGAs in
its budget request. Of the new FFGA projects in the budget
request, the Committee recommendation includes not less than
$250,000,000 for the three projects in California, $36,280,000
for the project in Washington, $125,000,000 for the project in
Maryland, and $100,000,000 for the project in Texas. In
addition, $332,850,000 is for core capacity projects,
$240,762,000 is for small starts projects, $20,000,000 is for
expedited project delivery, and $23,381,000 is for oversight
activities. The Committee directs FTA to allocate no more than
$100,000,000 per project in fiscal year 2017 funds for core
capacity, small starts, and expedited project delivery
projects.
Increasing Costs of Transit Projects.--Not later than 6
months after the enactment of this act, the GAO shall report to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding the
construction costs of transit capital projects in the United
States in comparison to other developed G-20 nations, such as
South Korea, Japan, Spain, France, Italy and Germany. The GAO
shall examine potential cost drivers, including: contracting
and procurement, project and station design, routing,
regulatory barriers, interagency cooperation and legal systems.
The report shall compare practices both between various cities
in the United States as well as to practices in other nations.
The report should, if appropriate, make recommendations to DOT
on steps it can take to address the issues identified by the
reports to help bring best practices in the United States in
line with international standards within the boundaries of
current U.S. law. These recommendations may take the form of
changes to funding guidelines or prioritization, regulatory
changes, contracting practices, or intergovernmental technical
assistance.

GRANTS TO THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $150,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 150,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 150,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides assistance to the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority [WMATA]. The Federal Rail
Safety Improvements Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, title VI,
section 601) authorized DOT to make up to $150,000,000
available to WMATA annually for capital and preventive
maintenance for a 10-year period.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $150,000,000 for
grants to WMATA for capital and preventive maintenance
expenses, including pressing safety-related investments, which
is equal to the budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. These grants are in addition to the funding local
jurisdictions have committed to providing to WMATA.
The Committee is very frustrated with the lack of
significant progress WMATA has made in fixing the system's
operational and financial problems and implementing a culture
of safety despite continued Federal support. This year marks
the seventh anniversary of the deadly WMATA crash at the Fort
Totten Station that killed nine people. This is the eighth
installment of appropriated Federal dedicated funding
authorized for WMATA.
The Committee is deeply troubled by the emergency cable
inspection that shut down the entire system for more than 24
hours in March 2016, uncovering a significant number of damaged
jumper cables and connector boots. It is especially troubling
to learn that these dangerous equipment conditions continue to
exist more than a year after the deadly Yellow Line Smoke
Incident at L'Enfant Plaza Station in January 2015. The
National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] directed WMATA to
fix this hardware in June 2015 following the incident.
The Committee commends the Secretary for his leadership and
active engagement on improving the operation and management of
WMATA. The Secretary has made improving WMATA's safety a top
priority including directing the FTA to conduct a safety
inspection of the metro system in March 2015. This audit
examined WMATA's safety culture including safety procedures and
protocols. The Secretary subsequently directed FTA to take over
safety oversight of WMATA from the ineffective Tri-State
Oversight Committee in October 2015. The FTA continues to serve
in this temporary role while it waits for the jurisdictions to
set up a more robust and independent oversight entity. In March
2016, the Secretary began another emergency safety inspection
focused on red signal overruns, track integrity, and rail
vehicle securement. This FTA inspection will likely result in
additional mandated corrective actions for WMATA. Given the
significant safety improvements that must still be made by the
troubled metro system, the bill once again requires the
Secretary to approve grants provided under this heading to
WMATA only after certifying that progress has been made to
improve safety in the system.
Financial Management.--FTA reported material weaknesses and
significant deficiencies in WMATA's internal financial controls
in a 2014 audit. In response to these serious findings, FTA
suspended WMATA's ability to automatically draw down its
Federal grants. FTA will review and approve each WMATA request
for reimbursement until these weaknesses are corrected and
WMATA shows significant improvement. The bill requires the
Secretary to approve grants provided under this heading to
WMATA only after certifying that WMATA is making progress
toward full implementation of the corrective actions identified
in the 2014 financial audit.
The bill also directs the Secretary to provide these grants
to WMATA only after receiving and reviewing a request for each
specific project to be funded under this heading. The bill
requires the Secretary to determine that WMATA has placed the
highest priority on funding projects that will improve the
safety of its public transit system before approving these
grants, using the recommendations and directives of the NTSB
and FTA as a guide.
Wireless Service Extension.--The Committee reluctantly
provides another 1-year extension for the wireless service
requirement in the authorization statute. The Committee directs
WMATA to continue to provide the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations a quarterly report detailing its progress
installing wireless service.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

Section 160 exempts authority previously made available for
programs of the FTA under section 5338 of title 49, United
States Code, from the obligation limitations in this act.
Section 161 requires that funds appropriated or limited by
this act for specific projects not obligated by September 30,
2021, and other recoveries, be directed to projects eligible to
use the funds for the purposes for which they were originally
provided.
Section 162 allows funds appropriated before October 1,
2016, that remain available for expenditure to be transferred
to the most recent appropriation heading.
Section 163 makes a technical correction to 49 U.S.C.
5303(r)(2)(C).
Section 164 rescinds any unobligated balances from funding
provided in fiscal year 2012 or earlier from the job access and
reverse commute program and makes them available for projects
under 49 U.S.C. 5309(q).
Section 165 allows small transit operators to use urbanized
area formula grants for operating assistance based on locally
determined planning processes and requirements, subject to
limitations.

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation [SLSDC]
is a wholly owned Government corporation established by the
Saint Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954 (33 U.S.C. 981).
SLSDC is a vital transportation corridor for the international
movement of bulk commodities such as steel, iron, grain, and
coal, serving the North American region that makes up one-
quarter of the United States population and nearly one-half of
the Canadian population. SLSDC is responsible for the
operation, maintenance, and development of the United States
portion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway [Seaway] between Montreal
and Lake Erie.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $28,400,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 36,028,000
Committee recommendation................................ 36,028,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund [HMTF] was established by
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
662). Since 1987, the HMTF has supported the operations and
maintenance of commercial harbor projects maintained by the
Federal Government. Appropriations from the HMTF and revenues
from non-Federal sources finance the operation and maintenance
of the Seaway, for which SLSDC is responsible.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $36,028,000 for the operations,
maintenance, and asset renewal of SLSDC. This amount is equal
to the budget request and $7,628,000 more than the fiscal year
2016 enacted level.
The Committee directs SLSDC to continue to submit an annual
report to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, not
later than April 30 of each year, summarizing the activities of
the Asset Renewal Program during the immediate preceding fiscal
year.

Maritime Administration

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Maritime Administration [MARAD] is responsible for
programs authorized by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as
amended (46 App. U.S.C. 1101 et seq.). MARAD is also
responsible for programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime
industry in support of the Nation's security and economic
needs. MARAD prioritizes the Department of Defense's [DOD] use
of ports and intermodal facilities during DOD mobilizations to
guarantee the smooth flow of military cargo through commercial
ports. MARAD manages the Maritime Security Program, the
Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement Program, and the Ready
Reserve Force, which assure DOD access to commercial and
strategic sealift and associated intermodal capacity. MARAD
also continues to address the disposal of obsolete ships in the
National Defense Reserve Fleet that are deemed a potential
environmental risk. Further, MARAD administers education and
training programs through the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and
six State maritime schools that assist in providing skilled
merchant marine officers who are capable of serving defense and
commercial transportation needs. The Committee continues to
fund MARAD in its support of the United States as a maritime
Nation.

MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $210,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 211,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 275,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Maritime Security Program [MSP] provides resources to
maintain a U.S.-flag merchant fleet crewed by U.S. citizens to
serve both the commercial and national security needs of the
United States. The program provides direct payments to U.S.-
flag ship operators engaged in U.S. foreign trade.
Participating operators are required to keep the vessels in
active commercial service and provide intermodal sealift
support to DOD in times of war or national emergency.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $275,000,000
for the MSP. This amount is $64,000,000 more than the budget
request and $65,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The recommended appropriation is based upon the
subcommittee's Defense allocation. A lack of funds to the
authorized level should not be interpreted in any way to
signify a lack of support for this critical National Security
program. The bill includes language directing MARAD to divide
the funding proportionally among the 60 ships in the program in
order to maintain these important maritime jobs.

OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $171,155,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 194,146,000
Committee recommendation................................ 175,160,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Operations and Training appropriation primarily funds
the salaries and expenses for MARAD headquarters and regional
staff in the administration and direction for all MARAD
programs. The account includes funding for the U.S. Merchant
Marine Academy, six State maritime schools, port and intermodal
development, cargo preference, international trade relations,
deep-water port licensing and administrative support costs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $175,160,000
for Operations and Training at MARAD for fiscal year 2017 to be
distributed between agency operations, the United States
Merchant Marine Academy, and State maritime academies as
outlined in the chart below. This amount is $4,005,000 more
than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and $18,986,000 less
than the budget request.

MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
2017 Senate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy............................ $83,218,000
Academy Operations.................................. 65,218,000
Capital Improvements................................ 15,000,000
Facilities Maintenance, Repair and Equipment........ 3,000,000
State Maritime Academies................................ 34,600,000
SMA Direct Payments................................. 3,000,000
Student Incentive Payments.......................... 2,400,000
Schoolship Maintenance and Repair................... 22,000,000
Fuel Assistance Payments............................ 1,200,000
National Security Multi-Mission Vehicle Design...... 6,000,000
MARAD Operations........................................ 57,342,000
Headquarter Operations.............................. 49,142,000
Environment and Technology Grants................... 3,000,000
Marine Highways Grants.............................. 5,000,000
---------------
Total........................................... 175,160,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Short Sea Shipping Program.--The Committee recommendation
includes $5,000,000 for the Short Sea Shipping program,
commonly known as the Marine Highway program. Projects funded
by this grant program will help mitigate landside congestion,
encourage shipper utilization, improve port and landside
infrastructure, and develop marine transportation strategies by
State and local governments.
National Security Multi-Mission Vessel [NSMV].--The
Committee supports MARAD's efforts to develop a replacement
vessel for the six State Maritime Academy training ships,
including the 53-year-old training ship Empire State. The
Committee is concerned that the budget request's exclusion of
funding for vessel design signaled a lack of interest in
maritime education and addressing this urgent need. The
Committee provides $6,000,000 to complete vessel design, and
conduct long-term planning activities for the incremental
replacement of the current academy training ships. The
Committee directs the agency to consult with the Navy, Coast
Guard, and any other relevant agencies that may benefit from
the NSMV prior to submitting any future budget request related
to the construction, acquisition, or conversion of a
replacement vessel.
United States Merchant Marine Academy Spend Plan.--The
Committee directs the Secretary, in consultation with the
Superintendent of the United States Merchant Marine Academy and
the Maritime Administrator, to complete a spend plan
anticipating Academy expenditures, and to provide this plan to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90
days of enactment of this act.
Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment at the United States
Merchant Marine Academy.--The Committee remains concerned about
the rate of incidents of sexual assault and sexual harassment
at the Academy. The most recent survey of sexual harassment and
sexual assault from the 2014-2015 academic year shows a
continuation of the disturbing results at the Academy seen in
prior surveys. Despite 17.1 percent of female and 2 percent of
male midshipmen reporting sexual assault on the survey, only
one of the incidents was reported to Academy leadership.
It is imperative that senior leadership throughout the
Department make improving conditions at the Academy a top
priority. The Academy has made strides by hiring a new Sexual
Assault Response Coordinator with relevant experience and
knowledge to address these issues, but a change in culture must
be made throughout the entire Academy. The Committee directs
the Secretary to provide the annual report required by section
3507 of Public Law 110-417 to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations no later than January 12, 2017.
United States Merchant Marine Academy Capital Improvements
Plan [CIP].--The Committee directs the Administrator to provide
an annual report by March 31, 2017, on the current status of
the CIP. The report should include a list of all projects that
have received funding and all proposed projects that the
Academy intends to initiate within the next 5 years: cost
overruns and cost savings for each active project; specific
target dates for project completion; delays and the cause of
delays; schedule changes; up-to-date cost projections for each
project; and any other deviations from the previous year's CIP.
Environment and Compliance.--The Committee commends MARAD's
initiative to support the domestic maritime industry's efforts
to comply with emerging international and domestic
environmental regulatory requirements. The Committee directs
MARAD to notify the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations not less than 3 business days before grant,
contract, or cooperative agreement is announced by the
Department or MARAD for the maritime environment and technology
assistance program as authorized by 46 U.S.C. 50307.
Small Shipyard Survey.--The Committee directs MARAD, in
consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers, to conduct a
survey of the dredging needs of small shipyards and to provide
the results to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations within 400 days of enactment of this act.

ASSISTANCE TO SMALL SHIPYARDS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017...................................
Committee recommendation................................ 10,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

As authorized under section 54101 of title 46, the
Assistance to Small Shipyards program provides assistance in
the form of grants, loans, and loan guarantees to small
shipyards for capital improvements and training programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for
assistance to small shipyards. This level of funding is
$5,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and
$10,000,000 above the President's request. Funding for this
program is intended to help small shipyards improve the
efficiency of their operations by providing funding for
equipment and other facility upgrades, including dredging of
waters located within the shipyard's geographical location for
the purpose of improving the shipyard facility operations. The
funding recommended by the Committee will help improve the
competitiveness of our Nation's small shipyards, as well as
workforce training and apprenticeships in communities dependent
upon maritime transportation.

SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Ship Disposal account provides resources to dispose of
obsolete merchant-type vessels of 150,000 gross tons or more in
the National Defense Reserve Fleet [NDRF]. MARAD contracts with
domestic shipbreaking companies to dismantle these vessels in
accordance with guidelines established by the Environmental
Protection Agency.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,000,000
for MARAD's Ship Disposal program. This level of funding is
$15,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and
equal to the budget request. This level of funding is
sufficient to meet the terms and conditions of the Suisun Bay
Reserve Fleet settlement. The Committee recommendation includes
$8,000,000 for activities related to the decommissioning of NS
Savannah. The total number of obsolete ships not yet under
contract and awaiting disposal is down to 13. This is a
historic low for the program.

MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM [TITLE XI]

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $8,135,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000

\1\The estimate does not reflect the proposed rescission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Maritime Guaranteed Loan program was established
pursuant to title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as
amended. The program provides for a full faith and credit
guarantee by the U.S. Government of debt obligations issued by:
(1) U.S. or foreign ship-owners for the purposes of financing
or refinancing either U.S.-flag vessels or eligible export
vessels constructed, reconstructed, or reconditioned in U.S.
shipyards; and (2) U.S. shipyards, for the purpose of financing
advanced shipbuilding technology of privately owned general
shipyard facilities located in the United States. Under the
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, appropriations to cover the
estimated costs of a project must be obtained prior to the
issuance of any approvals for title XI financing.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides an appropriation of $5,000,000 for
the maritime guaranteed loan title XI program, of which
$3,000,000 shall be used for administrative expenses of the
maritime loan guarantee program. This level of funding is
$2,000,000 more than the President's budget request and
$3,135,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The
loan guarantee amount of $2,000,000 in addition to unobligated
balances currently available, is sufficient to meet the cost of
all current active applications before the Department. The
Committee directs the agency to process all applications
expeditiously and continue to proactively monitor all
guaranteed loans that may be at risk of default. The Committee
recognizes the importance that the title XI program provides
for the advancement of shipbuilding, aiding the U.S.-flag
fleet, and sustainment of jobs for this critical sector of our
national defense.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Section 170 authorizes MARAD to furnish utilities and to
service and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy
involving Government property under the control of MARAD.
Rental payments received pursuant to this provision shall be
credited to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration
[PHMSA] was established in the Department of Transportation on
November 30, 2004, pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research
and Special Programs Improvement Act (Public Law 108-246).
PHMSA is responsible for the Department's pipeline safety
program as well as oversight of hazardous materials
transportation safety operations. The agency is dedicated to
safety, including the elimination of transportation-related
deaths and injuries associated with hazardous materials and
pipeline transportation, and to promoting transportation
solutions that enhance communities and protect the environment.

OPERATIONAL EXPENSES

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $21,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 23,688,000
Committee recommendation................................ 23,207,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds program support costs for PHMSA,
including policy development, civil rights, management,
administration, and agency-wide expenses.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $23,207,000 for this account, of
which $1,500,000 shall be transferred to the Office of Pipeline
Safety for Information Grants to Communities. The Committee's
recommendation is $481,000 less than the budget request and
$2,207,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $55,619,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 68,249,000
Committee recommendation................................ 57,619,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PHMSA oversees the safety of more than 6.1 million tons of
hazardous materials shipments daily in the United States, using
risk management principles and security threat assessments to
fully assess and reduce the risks inherent in hazardous
materials transportation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $57,619,000
for hazardous materials safety, of which $7,570,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2019. The amount provided
is $10,630,000 less than the administration's budget request
and $2,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee's recommendation does not provide new FTE.
Comprehensive Oil Spill Response Plans.--An oil spill
response plan is intended to help the carrier identify and
deploy a response organization to contain and remediate an oil
release. The plans require carriers to identify a qualified
individual with full authority to implement removal actions;
ensure by contract or other means the availability of private
personnel and equipment to remove a worst case discharge; and
describe training, equipment testing, drills and exercises.
PHMSA issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking on
expanding the applicability of comprehensive oil spill response
plans to rail carriers in July 2014. The Committee notes with
disappointment that to date, despite additional resources
provided by the Committee and direction in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of fiscal year 2016, PHMSA has not initiated
a rulemaking. The Committee directs PHMSA to initiate a
rulemaking to expand the applicability of comprehensive oil
spill response plans to rail carriers no later than June 30,
2016, and to issue a final rule no later than December 18,
2016.

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $146,623,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 174,943,000
Committee recommendation................................ 149,959,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Pipeline Safety [OPS] is designed to promote
the safe, reliable, and sound transportation of natural gas and
hazardous liquids through the Nation's 2.6 million miles of
privately owned and operated pipelines.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Pipeline Safety Office has the important responsibility
of ensuring the safety and integrity of the pipelines that run
through every community in our Nation. Efforts by Congress and
the OPS to invest in promising safety technologies, increase
civil penalties, and educate communities about the potential
risks of pipelines have resulted in a reduction in serious
pipeline incidents. It is essential that the agency continue to
make strides in protecting communities from pipeline failures
and incidents. To that end, the Committee recommends an
appropriation of $149,959,000 for the OPS, consistent with the
SAFE PIPES Act as approved by the Senate. The amount is
$3,336,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and
$24,984,000 less than the budget request. Of the funding
provided, $20,288,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund and $129,671,000 shall be derived from the
Pipeline Safety Fund. Of the funds recommended for research and
development up to $2,000,000 shall be used for the Pipeline
Safety Research Competitive Academic Agreement Program [CAAP]
to focus on near-term solutions to improve the safety and
reliability of the Nation's pipeline transportation system.
Seismic Safety.--The Committee is concerned that
insufficient attention has been paid to the seismic safety of
pipelines, particularly those transporting natural gas and
petroleum, that cross fault lines. The Committee directs PHMSA
to provide a briefing to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations not later than 60 days after the day of
enactment of this act regarding the number of both interstate
and intrastate pipelines that cross faults that move at least 5
millimeters per year, existing Federal regulations governing
pipeline seismic safety, and the potential for installing
automatic shut-off valves that can be coordinated with a future
earthquake early warning system.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $28,318,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 28,318,000
Committee recommendation................................ 28,318,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $28,318,000 and an equal
obligation limitation for the emergency preparedness grant
program. The recommendation continues to provide PHMSA the
authority to use prior year carryover and recaptures for the
development of a Web-based hazardous materials response
training curriculum for emergency responders, including
response activities for crude oil, ethanol and other flammable
liquids by rail. The Committee is pleased that in March 2016
PHMSA released its initial Web-based, off-the-shelf training
material that can be used by emergency responders across the
country. The Committee encourages PHMSA to continue to enhance
its training curriculum for local emergency responders. Prior
years' carryover may also be used to train public sector
emergency response personnel in communities on or near rail
lines that transport a significant volume of high-risk energy
commodities or toxic inhalation hazards. The Committee
continues a provision increasing the administrative costs
available from 2 percent to 4 percent in order to address the
OIG's recommendations.

Office of Inspector General

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $87,472,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 90,152,000
Committee recommendation................................ 93,550,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of
Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective
organization, with a mission to:
--conduct and supervise audits and investigations relating to
the programs and operations of the Department;
--provide leadership and recommend policies designed to
promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the
administration of programs and operations;
--prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; and
--keep the Secretary and Congress currently informed
regarding problems and deficiencies.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $93,550,000 for
activities of the Office of the Inspector General, which is
$3,398,000 more than the President's budget request and
$6,078,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Audit Reports.--The Committee requests that the Inspector
General continue to forward copies of all audit reports to the
Committee immediately after they are issued, and to continue to
make the Committee aware immediately of any review that
recommends cancellation or modifications to any major
acquisition project or grant, or which recommends significant
budgetary savings. The OIG is also directed to withhold from
public distribution for a period of 15 days any final audit or
investigative report which was requested by the House or Senate
Committees on Appropriations.
Buy American Compliance.--Congressionally mandated audits
of the Department of Defense's purchases of manufactured goods,
Naval Personnel Can Improve Compliance With the Berry Amendment
and the Buy American Act, and Air Force Personnel Can Improve
Compliance With the Berry Amendment and the Buy American Act,
revealed a high level of non-compliance with statutory ``Buy
American'' obligations. In the last 5 years, the FAA has
reported purchases of over $3,000,000,000 of manufactured
goods. Given the impact that manufacturing has on our economy,
the Committee directs the Inspector General of the Department
of Transportation to conduct an audit of FAA purchases of
manufactured goods to ensure compliance with chapter 83, title
41 of the United States Code for the purchase of domestically
manufactured goods.
Unfair Business Practices.--The bill maintains language
which authorizes the OIG to investigate allegations of fraud
and unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of
competition by air carriers and ticket agents.

General Provisions--Department of Transportation

Section 180 allows funds for maintenance and operation of
aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or
allowances, as authorized by law.
Section 181 limits appropriations for services authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 3109 not to exceed the rate for an executive level
IV.
Section 182 prohibits funds in this act for salaries and
expenses of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees
in the Department of Transportation.
Section 183 prohibits recipients of funds made available in
the act from releasing personal information, including Social
Security numbers, medical and disability information, and
photographs, from a driver's license or motor vehicle record
without the express consent of the person to whom such
information pertains; and prohibits the Secretary of
Transportation from withholding funds provided in this act from
any grantee in noncompliance with this provision.
Section 184 allows funds received by the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal
Railroad Administration from States, counties, municipalities,
other public authorities, and private sources for expenses
incurred for training may be credited to each agency's
respective accounts.
Section 185 prohibits the use of funds in this act to make
a grant or announce the intention to make a grant unless the
Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations at least 3 full business days
before making the grant or the announcement.
Section 186 allows rebates, refunds, incentive payments,
minor fees, and other funds received by the Department of
Transportation from travel management center, charge card
programs, subleasing of building space and miscellaneous
sources to be credited to appropriations of the Department of
Transportation.
Section 187 requires amounts from improper payments to a
third-party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the
Department of Transportation to be available to cover expenses
incurred in recovery of such payments.
Section 188 establishes requirements for reprogramming
actions by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
Section 189 prohibits funds appropriated in this act to the
modal administrations from being obligated for the Office of
the Secretary for costs related to assessments or reimbursable
agreements unless the obligations are for services that provide
a direct benefit to the applicable modal administration.
Section 190 authorizes the Secretary to carry out a program
that establishes uniform standards for developing and
supporting agency transit pass and transit benefits authorized
under section 7905 of title 5, United States Code.
Section 191 prohibits the use of funds for any geographic,
economic, or other hiring preference pilot program, regulation,
or policy unless certain requirements are met related to
availability of local labor, displacement of existing
employees, and delays in transportation plans.

TITLE II

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Management and Administration

The Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] was
established by the Housing and Urban Development Act (Public
Law 89-174), effective November 9, 1965. This Department is the
principal Federal agency responsible for programs concerned
with the Nation's housing needs, fair housing opportunities,
and improving and developing communities.
In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and
interests of the Nation's communities and of the people who
live and work in them, HUD administers: mortgage and loan
insurance programs that help families become homeowners and
facilitate the construction of rental housing; rental and
homeownership subsidy programs for low-income families who
otherwise could not afford decent housing; programs to combat
discrimination in housing and affirmatively further fair
housing opportunities; programs aimed at ensuring an adequate
supply of mortgage credit; and programs that aid neighborhood
rehabilitation, community development, and the preservation of
our urban centers from blight and decay.
HUD also administers programs that protect homebuyers, and
fosters programs and research that stimulate and guide the
housing industry to provide not only housing, but better
communities and living environments.
As HUD works to fulfill its mission, the Committee urges
the Secretary to enhance its efforts to provide decent,
affordable housing and to promote economic development for
rural Americans. When designing programs and making funding
decisions, the Secretary shall take into consideration the
unique conditions, challenges, and scale of rural areas.
The Committee notes that poverty is far too prevalent in
the United States. HUD should continue to work with Congress
and other partners to implement policies that reduce poverty
and the suffering associated with it. The Committee also
encourages HUD to increase interagency collaboration to ensure
Federal resources are strategically deployed in order to
achieve the most effective outcomes, while also reducing
overlap and duplication.
Relationship Between HUD and the Committee on
Appropriations.--The primary relationship between the Committee
and HUD exists via the Departmental budget office. This
relationship is an absolute necessity in structuring the annual
appropriations act. It facilitates an effective sharing of a
wide range of budgetary and cost information. The Committee
retains the right to call upon all offices and agencies within
the Department, but the primary connection between the two
entities exists through the budget office. The Committee
cautions HUD that section 405 of the Appropriations Act governs
the creation of new offices and policies. Additionally, the
Committee expects that all offices within HUD will work with
the budget office to provide timely and accurate information to
the Committee.
Appropriations Attorneys.--During consideration of the
fiscal year 2003 appropriations legislation, it became apparent
to the Committee that both the Committee and the Department
would be better served if the attorneys responsible for
appropriations matters were housed in the Office of the Chief
Financial Officer [OCFO]. The fiscal year 2003 act provided
funds and FTE to the OCFO to accommodate four attorneys
transferred from the Office of General Counsel [OGC]. Since
that time, the Committee has routinely received prompt,
accurate, and reliable information from the OCFO on various
appropriations law matters. For fiscal year 2017, the Committee
continues to fund appropriations attorneys in the OCFO and
directs HUD to refer all appropriations law issues to such
attorneys within the OCFO.
Reprogramming and Congressional Notification.--The
Committee reiterates that the Department must secure the
approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
for the reprogramming of funds between programs, projects, and
activities within each account. Unless otherwise identified in
the bill or report, the most detailed allocation of funds
presented in the budget justifications is approved, with any
deviation from such approved allocation subject to the normal
reprogramming requirements. Except as specifically provided
otherwise, it is the intent of the Committee that all carryover
funds in the various accounts, including recaptures and de-
obligations, are subject to the normal reprogramming
requirements outlined under section 405. No change may be made
to any program, project, or activity if it is construed to be
new policy or a change in policy, without prior approval of the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The Committee
also directs HUD to include a separate delineation of any
reprogramming of funds requiring approval in the operating plan
required by section 405 of this act. Finally, the Committee
shall be notified regarding reorganizations of offices,
programs or activities prior to the implementation of such
reorganizations. The Department is directed to submit, in
consultation with the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, current and accurate organizational charts for
each Office within the Department as part of the fiscal year
2018 congressional justifications. The Committee further
directs the Department to submit any staff realignments or
restructuring to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations 30 days prior to their implementation.
Grant Awards and Congressional Notification.--HUD is
reminded that appropriated funds are critical investments that
support communities across the Nation. HUD's grant programs
give State and local governments, public housing agencies,
nonprofit organizations, tribal entities, and other key housing
development and service providers the resources to build and
preserve quality affordable housing, spur local economies, and
make communities more stable. The Committee is concerned that
the Department continues to use archaic systems and processes
for grant notifications, causing delays, inefficiencies, and
administrative burdens on staff. Therefore, the Committee urges
HUD to consult with the Department of Transportation and other
Federal agencies on their Congressional notification process.
Congressionally Mandated Reports.--The Department is
reminded that directives and reports mandated in the House and
Senate appropriations acts and accompanying reports are not
optional unless revised or eliminated by the Statement of
Managers accompanying the act. The Committee believes that such
reports provide a better understanding of various issues and
the Committee uses such reports to help inform funding
decisions. Therefore, the Department is advised that the
submission of directed reports is mandatory and not at the
discretion of the Department. The Committee directs the
Department to submit all overdue reports and to advise the
Committee if it is unable to meet a reporting requirement well
in advance of the deadline.
Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to
Congress.--The Committee believes the Department can undertake
additional actions to increase accountability and transparency,
which will improve oversight and ensure Federal resources are
not wasted or abused. The Committee reminds HUD that for fiscal
year 2015, the Office of Inspector General [OIG] identified
nearly $2,000,000,000 of HUD resources that could be put to
better use. The Committee encourages HUD to respond to both the
Inspector General and the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations on actions already taken, and planned future
action, to address such findings, within 30 days of issuance of
each OIG semiannual report.
Lead-Hazard Control and Remediation.--The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] estimate that 535,000
American children under 6 years of age are affected by lead
poisoning. This preventable condition can result in children
having reduced IQs and developing behavioral problems and
learning disabilities. According to HUD, 70 percent of lead
poisoning cases in the United States are the result of exposure
to lead-based paint hazards in the home. This exposure usually
stems from the presence of lead-based paint in homes built
prior to 1978.
Over the last decade, the Committee has provided more than
$1,000,000,000 for initiatives that address lead-based paint
hazards in our Nation's housing stock. These resources have
helped to improve the condition of 78,032 homes and the lives
and health outcomes of 278,000 people. These funds were
primarily used to address lead-based paint hazards in homes
that were owned or occupied by low and very-low income families
with children.
However, the continued presence of lead-based paint hazards
in HUD-assisted housing has only been fully revealed in recent
news reports. These reports raise concerns that HUD has
insufficient oversight to ensure that public housing agencies
and property owners comply with regulations regarding
inspections for and remediation of lead-based paint hazards.
Furthermore, the Committee believes that HUD has failed to
appropriately respond to the CDC's decision in 2012 to
strengthen its blood lead level standard for children under 6
years old. HUD's blood lead level standard, which prescribes
the level at which an environmental intervention must be
performed in a unit, has not been changed since 1999. As a
result, HUD's outdated standard permits children to live in
homes that place them at risk of permanent neurological damage.
To address these concerns, the bill and accompanying report
include a deadline for the implementation of a new regulation
that strengthens HUD's blood lead level standard, and a series
of reforms and investments to address lead-based paint hazards
in HUD-assisted housing and low-income housing in the private
sector. The Committee includes reforms to current policies, an
expansion of HUD's oversight and enforcement capacity, and
additional funding for Public Housing Agencies [PHAs] and low-
income homeowners to address lead-based paint hazards in the
home.

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $13,800,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 14,479,000
Committee recommendation................................ 30,608,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Executive Offices account provides the salaries and
expenses funding to support the Department's senior leadership
and other key functions, including the immediate offices of the
Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Congressional and
Intergovernmental Relations, Public Affairs, Adjudicatory
Services, the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives,
the Departmental Enforcement Center, and the Office of Small
and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,608,000
for this account, which is $16,808,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and $16,129,000 more than the budget
request. Of the total amount provided, no less than $16,148,000
shall be for the Departmental Enforcement Center. The Secretary
is directed to submit a spend plan to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations that outlines how budgetary
resources will be distributed among the eight offices funded
under this heading.
Departmental Enforcement Center.--The Committee is troubled
by the results of the Inspector General's February 2016
evaluation of the Departmental Enforcement Center [DEC]. The
evaluation determined that when utilized, the DEC can
effectively address issues related to poor performing and
noncompliant grantees. However, the evaluation also determined
that the DEC's current location within the OGC has limited its
ability to work with program offices, and as a result, has
seriously undermined the overall effectiveness of the DEC to
successfully implement risk-based monitoring and enforcement of
grantees. In response, the Committee directs the DEC to be
removed from the OGC's organizational structure and report
directly to the Deputy Secretary, consistent with its original
intent and creation in 1997. The Committee further notes that
the Department concedes that the Memoranda of Understanding
[MOUs] between the DEC and program offices are overly
restrictive and will review them with a goal of modification or
elimination. The Committee directs the Department to report to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60
days after enactment of this act on the result of the reviews.
Circumvention of the Nomination Process.--The Committee
remains troubled by the administration's willful circumvention
of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution which in Article
II, section 2, clause 2 states, ``and he shall nominate, and by
and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint
Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the
supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States,
whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and
which shall be established by Law.'' Specifically, the
Committee notes the appointments last year of the Principal
Deputy Assistant Secretaries for the Offices of Community
Planning and Development, Housing, and Public and Indian
Housing.
While this position has existed at other Federal agencies,
it is new to the Department, and comes at a time when the
Assistant Secretary position in these offices has been vacant
for an extended period of time. The position of Assistant
Secretary of Housing/Federal Housing Administration
Commissioner has been vacant since October 24, 2014; the
position of Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing
has been vacant since June 30, 2014; and the position of
Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development has
been vacant the longest, since May 18, 2012. The Committee is
incredulous that the administration has elected to maintain the
vacancy of these three mission critical positions and points to
the administration's decision to redirect a nominee, whose
nomination was presented at the end of the 113th Congress, to a
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary position in lieu of re-
nominating the individual during the 114th Congress as a
reflection of the clear disregard of the Appointments Clause.
The Committee strongly encourages HUD and the
administration to rethink the appointment of Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretaries in the offices of Public and Indian
Housing, Community Planning and Development, and Housing in the
absence of incumbent Assistant Secretaries or putting forth
nominations for those positions. While the Committee does not
expressly forbid this practice, the Committee has reduced
amounts included in the Committee's recommendation by amounts
equal to the salary and benefits of a Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary for offices where the position of Assistant
Secretary is not filled or for which a nomination for that
position is not currently pending before the Senate Committee
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs or has been reported by
that Committee to the Senate.

Administrative Support Offices

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $559,100,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 520,062,000
Committee recommendation................................ 503,852,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Support Offices [ASO] account is the
backbone of HUD's operations, and consists of several offices
that aim to work seamlessly to provide the leadership and
support services to ensure the Department performs its core
mission and is compliant with all legal, operational, and
financial guidelines. This account funds the salaries and
expenses of the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of
the Chief Financial Officer, the Office of the Chief
Procurement Officer, the Office of Departmental Equal
Employment Opportunity, the Office of Field Policy and
Management, the Office of Strategic Planning and Management,
the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer, the Office of
Administration, and the Office of the Chief Information
Officer.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $503,852,000
for this account, which is $55,248,000 less than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and $16,210,000 less than the budget
request.
The Committee directs HUD's Office of the Chief Financial
Officer and the Office of the Human Capital Officer to submit
quarterly reports to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations on hiring and separations by program office.
This report shall include position titles, location, associated
FTE, and include the Office of the Inspector General and
Government National Mortgage Association.
Funds are made available as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer............. $41,641,000
Office of Administration.............................. 202,823,000
Office of the Chief Financial Officer................. 53,451,000
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer............... 19,130,000
Office of Field Policy and Management................. 52,568,000
Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity... 3,891,000
Office of the General Counsel......................... 79,053,000
Office of Strategic Planning and Management........... 5,147,000
Office of the Chief Information Officer............... 46,148,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office of the General Counsel [OGC].--The Committee
recommendation includes $79,053,000 for this office, which is
$16,148,000 less than the budget request. This decrease is
associated with the transfer of the Departmental Enforcement
Center out of the OGC organizational structure.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer [OCFO].--The
Committee commends the work of the Appropriations Law Division
in the OCFO and encourages the Department to maximize its use
of this valuable resource. The Committee reminds the Department
of its intent that all appropriations law issues be referred to
and addressed by such division. HUD shall not alter the
organizational structure of OCFO as in effect on January 1,
2015, without prior written approval of the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations.

Program Offices Salaries and Expenses

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $205,500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 220,932,000
Committee recommendation................................ 220,500,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding to
support staff in headquarters and in 46 field offices in the
Office of Public and Indian Housing [PIH]. PIH is charged with
ensuring the availability of safe, decent, and affordable
housing, creating opportunities for residents' self-sufficiency
and economic independence, and assuring the fiscal integrity of
all public housing agencies. The Office ensures that safe,
decent and affordable housing is available to Native American
families, creates economic opportunities for tribes and Indian
housing residents, assists tribes in the formulation of plans
and strategies for community development, and assures fiscal
integrity in the operation of its programs. The Office also
administers programs authorized in the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self Determination Act of 1996 [NAHASDA], which
provides housing assistance to Native Americans and Native
Hawaiians. PIH also manages the Housing Choice Voucher program,
in which tenant-based vouchers increase affordable housing
choices for low-income families. Tenant-based vouchers enable
families to lease safe, decent, and affordable privately owned
rental housing.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $220,500,000
for this account, which is $432,000 less than the budget
request and $15,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The Committee recommendation supports existing
personnel, and reflects the establishment of a Working Capital
Fund in fiscal year 2016 for shared service costs
The Committee directs HUD to prioritize the hiring of staff
to fill critical positions in the following areas: staff for
the management and oversight of Moving-to-Work PHAs; financial
analysts for the Housing Choice Voucher program; and additional
staff for the Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative
Initiatives to create efficiencies in program operations.
The Committee directs HUD to inform the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment of
this act regarding how it is implementing the Committee's
hiring direction.
Small Public Housing Agencies.--The Committee recognizes
the growing demand placed on small public housing agencies
across the Nation. Given this recognition, the Committee
believes that small agencies may face disproportionate
regulatory burdens and the Department should simplify
monitoring and compliance requirements. The Committee continues
to urge HUD to eliminate excessive paperwork requirements and
develop opportunities to achieve new efficiencies in management
and operations for small public housing agencies.
Central Office Cost Center Fees.--In 2014, the Office of
Inspector General [OIG] released an audit of public housing
operating and capital fund central office cost center [COCC]
fees. The audit raised concerns about these fees and HUD's
oversight of them. The OIG recommended that the Department:
eliminate the asset management fee, revise the asset management
policy to ``re-federalize'' the fees paid into the COCC, and
create policies and procedures for the assessment and
monitoring of the fees. HUD disputed the recommendations and
has been working with the OIG to resolve these issues. As a
result of these discussions and HUD's demonstration of the need
that PHAs have for the asset management fee, OIG agreed not to
pursue their recommendation to eliminate asset management fees.
In addition, HUD will initiate rulemaking to re-federalize fees
paid into the COCC with a goal of implementing a final rule by
no later than December 2017. The Committee has decided to take
additional action and directs the Department to adhere to the
``Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit Requirements for Federal Awards,'' requirements of 2 CFR
200, and to notify the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations quarterly during fiscal year 2017 of any waivers
of 2 CFR 200 it requests from the Office of Management and
Budget. The Committee shares concerns expressed by HUD's
Inspector General that HUD has failed to fully evaluate its fee
for service model for public housing operating and capital
funds. Accordingly, and consistent with the June 2014 Office of
Inspector General report, HUD is directed to evaluate this
model to gauge whether it is actually increasing the overall
efficiency and effectiveness of administering the program and
that the fee structure is reasonable. The Department is further
directed to include any necessary program changes from this
evaluation as part of its fiscal year 2019 congressional
justifications.

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $104,800,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 110,259,000
Committee recommendation................................ 110,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding for
Community Planning and Development [CPD] staff in headquarters
and in 43 field offices. CPD's mission is to support successful
urban, suburban and rural communities by promoting integrated
approaches to community and economic development. CPD programs
also assist in the expansion of opportunities for low- and
moderate-income individuals and families in moving towards home
ownership. The Assistant Secretary for CPD administers formula
and competitive grant programs, as well as guaranteed loan
programs, that help communities plan and finance their growth
and development. These programs also help communities increase
their capacity to govern and provide shelter and services for
homeless persons and other persons with special needs,
including person with HIV/AIDS.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $110,000,000
for the staffing within this office, which is $259,000 less
than the budget request and $5,200,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level. The recommended level of funding will
support additional FTE focused on grant oversight and
monitoring to help address backlog of grants and audit findings
as well as shared service costs to be funded through the
working capital fund established in fiscal year 2016. The
Committee's recommendation does not include the Department's
request for additional staff for the Rental Assistance
Demonstration.
The Committee directs HUD to prioritize the hiring of staff
to support the closeout of open audits and backlog of open
grants, particularly as it relates to disaster recovery grants,
before hiring in other areas, unless such staff are identified
as backfilling mission-critical positions.
The Committee directs HUD to inform the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment of
this act regarding how it is implementing the Committee's
hiring direction.
Promise Zones.--Since 2014, the Department has
competitively made Promise Zone designations. These
designations partner the Federal government with local
communities to address multiple community revitalization
challenges in a collaborative way and have demonstrated a
commitment to results. To realize the full potential of these
designations, the Committee encourages the Department to
support these Promise Zone designations, and their Promise Zone
Partnership Agreement commitments for their full duration.

HOUSING

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $375,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 393,148,000
Committee recommendation................................ 393,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding to
support staff in headquarters and in 52 field locations in the
Office of Housing. The Office of Housing is responsible for
implementing programs to assist projects for occupancy by very
low- and moderate-income households, to provide capital grants
to nonprofit sponsors for the development of housing for the
elderly and disabled, and to conduct several regulatory
functions. The Office also administers Federal Housing
Administration [FHA] programs. FHA administers HUD's mortgage
and loan insurance programs, which facilitate the financing of
new construction, rehabilitation or the purchase of existing
dwelling units. The Office also provides services to maintain
and preserve homeownership, especially for underserved
populations. This assistance allows lenders to make lower cost
financing available to more borrowers for home and home
improvement loans, and apartment, hospital, and nursing home
loans. FHA provides a vital link in addressing America's
homeownership and affordable housing needs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $393,000,000
for staffing in the Office of Housing, which is $148,000 less
than the budget request and $18,000,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level and reflects the establishment of a
working capital fund in fiscal year 2016 for shared service
costs.

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $23,100,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 24,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,500,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding to
support staff in headquarters and in 16 field locations in the
Office of Policy Development and Research [PD&R;]. PD&R; supports
the Department's efforts to help create cohesive, economically
healthy communities. PD&R; is responsible for maintaining
current information on housing needs, market conditions, and
existing programs, as well as conducting research on priority
housing and community development issues. The office provides
reliable and objective data and analysis to help inform policy
decisions.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,500,000
for this account, which is equal to the budget request and
$1,400,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
PD&R; collects and distributes data on HUD programs, the
people HUD serves, and housing needs across the country, in
addition to providing technical assistance in these areas. The
information it makes available and the analysis it provides to
the Department are essential to moving HUD to outcomes based
performance measures. The Committee also relies on the data and
research provided by PD&R; to inform its work. The recommended
amount will ensure that PD&R; can continue to play this
important role.

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $72,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 74,235,000
Committee recommendation................................ 74,235,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding to
support staff in headquarters and in all regional offices in
the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity [FHEO]. FHEO
is responsible for investigating, resolving, and prosecuting
complaints of housing discrimination, as well as conducting
education and outreach activities to increase awareness of the
requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The Office also develops
and interprets fair housing policy, processes complaints,
performs compliance reviews, and provides oversight and
technical assistance to local housing authorities and community
development agencies regarding section 3 of the Housing and
Urban Development Act of 1968.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,235,000,
which is equal to the budget request and $2,235,000 more than
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 7,826,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,075,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides salary and benefits funding to
support the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
[OLHCHH] headquarters staff. OLHCHH administers and manages the
lead-based paint and healthy homes activities of the
Department, and is directly responsible for the administration
of the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction program. The office
also develops lead-based paint regulations, guidelines, and
policies applicable to HUD programs, designs lead-based paint
and healthy homes training programs, administers lead-hazard
control and healthy homes grant programs, and implements the
lead and healthy homes research program.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,075,000 for
this account, which is $249,000 more than the budget request
and $1,075,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee is concerned that the Office of Lead Hazard
Control and Healthy Homes is not providing the Offices of
Housing and Public and Indian Housing with the necessary
oversight and assistance to effectively implement lead-related
regulations. While these Offices are responsible for the
oversight of their grantees, the Lead Office is responsible for
ensuring compliance with the Lead Safe Housing and Lead-Based
Paint Disclosure Rules through its Enforcement Division. The
Committee's recommendation does not fund the request for
additional FTEs for the Programs, and Policy and Standards
Divisions, and instead directs these funds, plus the additional
funding above the request, be used to increase the FTE in the
Lead Programs Enforcement Division from 5 to 10. This increase
in resources will expand HUD's capacity to conduct enforcement
actions in Section 8 and Section 9 properties, as well as
provide additional technical assistance and training.

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's Working
Capital Fund [WCF] was established by the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2016. The purpose of the WCF is to promote
economy, efficiency, and accountability. Amounts transferred to
the Fund are for Federal shared services used by offices and
agencies of the Department, and are derived from centralized
Salaries and Expenses accounts starting in 2016.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides the Secretary with
the authority to transfer amounts provided in this title for
salaries and expenses, except those for the Office of Inspector
General, to this account for the purpose of funding centralized
activities. The Department is required to centralize and fund
from this account any shared service agreements executed
between HUD and another Federal agency. For fiscal year 2017,
the Department is permitted to centralize and fund from this
account: financial management, procurement, travel, relocation,
human resources, printing, records management, space
renovation, furniture, and supply services. The Committee
expects that, prior to exercising discretion to centrally fund
an activity, the Secretary shall have established transparent
and reliable unit cost accounting for the offices and agencies
of the Department that use the activity and shall have
adequately trained staff within each affected office and agency
on resource planning and accounting processes associated with
the centralization of funds to this account.
Further, prior to centralizing either furniture or space
renovation, the Committee directs the Department to deliver a
comprehensive, multi-year real property improvement plan which
details all planned space realignments, capital improvements,
maintenance requirements, and other costs associated with
carrying out HUD's most recent strategic plan; including any
elements of the General Service Administration [GSA] study on
the Weaver Building that HUD plans to include as part of its
Reimbursable Work Agreement with GSA.
Prior to exercising its authority to transfer funds for
activities beyond what is required for shared service
agreements, the Committee expects HUD to establish a clear
execution plan for centralizing the additional activities and
to properly vet that plan with the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations prior to transferring such funds into the
WCF.
HUD shall include in its annual operating plan a detailed
outline of its plans for transferring budgetary resources to
the WCF in fiscal year 2017.
Financial management, procurement, travel, and relocation
costs for services provided to the Office of the Inspector
General are covered by the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer.

Public and Indian Housing

TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $19,628,525,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 20,854,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,431,696,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides funding for the Section 8 tenant-
based (voucher) program. Section 8 tenant-based housing
assistance is one of the principle appropriations for Federal
housing assistance, serving approximately 2.2 million families.
The program also funds incremental vouchers for tenants who
live in properties where the owner has decided to leave the
Section 8 program. The program also provides for the
replacement of units lost from the assisted housing inventory
through its tenant protection vouchers. Under these programs,
eligible low-income individuals and families pay 30 percent of
their adjusted income for rent, and the Federal Government is
responsible for the remainder of the rent, up to the fair
market rent or some other payment standard. This account also
provides funding for administrative fees for PHAs, mainstream
vouchers, and Housing and Urban Development Veterans Supportive
Housing [HUD-VASH] programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$20,431,696,000 for fiscal year 2017, including $4,000,000,000
as an advance appropriation to be made available on October 1,
2017. This amount is $422,304,000 less than the budget request
and $803,171,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee recommends $18,355,000,000 for the renewal
costs of Section 8 vouchers, which is $92,000,000 less than the
budget request and $673,549,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level.
The Section 8 rental assistance program is a critical tool
that enables more than 2 million low-income individuals and
families to access safe, stable, and affordable housing in the
private market. In recognition of the Section 8 program's
central role in ensuring housing for vulnerable Americans, the
Committee recommendation and existing reserves will provide
sufficient resources to ensure that no current voucher holders
are put at risk of losing their housing. It also supports the
first time renewal of incremental vouchers that were funded in
prior years, including HUD-VASH vouchers. The Committee will
continue to monitor leasing data to make sure residents are
protected.
Set-Aside for Special Circumstances.--The Committee has
provided a set-aside of $75,000,000 to allow the Secretary to
adjust allocations to PHAs under certain circumstances.
Qualifying factors include: (1) a significant increase, as
determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs of tenant-based
rental assistance resulting from unforeseen circumstances and
voucher utilization or the impact from portability under
section 8(r) of the act; (2) vouchers that were not in use
during the previous 12-month period in order to be available to
meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13) of the act; (3)
adjustments or costs associated with HUD-VASH vouchers; and (4)
possible termination of families as a result of insufficient
funding. A PHA should not receive an adjustment to its
allocation from the funding provided under this section if the
Secretary determines that such PHA, through negligence or
intentional actions, would exceed its authorized level of
vouchers.
HUD-VASH.--Since 2008, the Committee has provided more than
$500,000,000 in targeted funding to address veterans'
homelessness. Communities across the country have been able to
use these resources to make tremendous strides in addressing
veterans' homelessness. According to the Department of Veterans
Administration, a number of diverse communities across the
country have been able to announce an end to veterans
homelessness, including: Lynn, Massachusetts; Mobile, Alabama;
Montgomery County, Maryland; Gulfport and Biloxi, Mississippi;
Houston, Texas; Las Vegas, Nevada; and New Orleans, Louisiana;
as well as the State of Connecticut and the Commonwealth of
Virginia. These successes are the result of hard work, and
effective collaboration, and are aspirational for the rest of
the country. However, since 2010, veterans' homelessness has
only declined by 36 percent nationally. For this reason, the
Committee again rejects the budget proposal to prematurely end
funding for new VASH vouchers and includes $50,000,000 for this
purpose.
The Committee also encourages the Department to use
existing authority to recapture HUD-VASH voucher assistance
from PHAs that voluntarily declare that they no longer have a
need for that assistance, and reallocate it to PHAs with an
identified need. The Committee directs HUD to expedite this
process; ensuring that communities that have successfully ended
veterans' homelessness enable other communities to assist this
population. The Committee encourages the Department to
prioritize, as part of this reallocation, PHAs that project-
base a portion of their HUD-VASH vouchers in high-cost areas.
The Committee also recognizes the importance of the on-
going pilot to expand the HUD-VASH program to American Indian
veterans living in tribal areas. Therefore, the Committee
recommendation includes $7,000,000 for rental assistance and
associated administrative costs for Tribal HUD-VASH to serve
Native American veterans that are homeless or at-risk of
homelessness living on or near a reservation or other Indian
areas. The Committee anticipates that most of this funding will
be needed to renew previously provided assistance. To the
extent funds remain after previously-awarded assistance has
been renewed, the remaining funds may be used to award new
assistance based solely on need and administrative capacity.
The Committee notes that examples of a lack of administrative
capacity include entities with: open monitoring and audit
findings from the Department or HUD's Inspector General; an
inability to maintain accurate reporting of financial records;
a lack of willingness to work with the Office of Native
American Programs regional offices, and; excessive unexpended
Indian Housing Block Grant balances and current enforcement
action regarding lack of progress on balances. Given the
importance of reducing homelessness for veterans in Indian
country, the Committee directs the Department to update the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180 days
of enactment of this act on the progress of this pilot.
Administrative Fees.--The Committee recommends
$1,768,696,000 for administrative fees, which is $308,304,000
less than the budget request and $118,696,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
Lead-Based Paint.--Lead exposure and poisoning can have a
significant impact on the development of children under the age
of 6. Yet, HUD is unable to verify what actions the more than
700,000 private landlords and property owners who participate
in the program are taking to identify and address lead-based
paint hazards in the more than 2 million housing units across
the country. The Committee is extremely concerned that HUD
lacks the necessary oversight and quality assurance of lead and
routine physical inspections to determine whether lead-based
paint hazards are present in these homes, particularly in units
where there are children under the age of 6. The Committee is
further concerned that HUD is unable to identify which units or
quantify how much of the housing choice voucher stock meet the
standards currently set-forth in HUD's physical inspection and
lead-based paint hazard regulations. This information is
essential to understanding the resource and health challenges
faced by HUD, PHAs, and housing choice voucher residents.
The Committee believes that the Department has the
statutory authority to collect and analyze data on lead-based
paint hazards in housing choice voucher units, and apply better
quality assurance measures on routine physical inspections.
While current HUD housing quality standards require that the
physical condition of housing choice voucher units be free of
health hazards, including lead-based paint, HUD's regulatory
standards lack consistency and scientific rigor. The Committee
notes that HUD's Housing Quality Standard [HQS] regulations
limit lead inspections in housing choice voucher units to a
visual review of chipped or deteriorated paint. Meanwhile,
under the Uniform Physical Condition Standard [UPCS]
regulations, public housing units are subject to more rigorous
inspection standards, such as risk assessments, which require
scientific testing of paint and dust samples found in the home.
The Committee directs HUD to establish and implement a process
that improves data collection and analysis of actions PHAs are
taking to comply with lead-based paint regulations in housing
choice voucher units by March 31, 2017, and report semi-
annually to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
on this progress. At a minimum, this report should include the
steps HUD has taken to ensure PHAs and landlords are in
statutory and regulatory compliance, as well as the number and
location of units that are not in compliance with current
inspections and lead-based paint regulations. The Committee
also directs the Department to identify and report on the
incidences and prevalence of lead-based paint hazards in
housing choice voucher units. The Committee recognizes that
States with the oldest housing stock will have more homes with
lead-based paint, and notes that the mere presence of lead-
based paint, where properly contained, should not preclude such
units from participating in the housing choice voucher program.
In order to improve communication with PHAs on lead-safe
housing, the Committee directs the Department to issue
clarifying guidance explaining the importance of lead-safe
housing and the changes the Department is undertaking to align
standards with CDC and improve its processes. The Committee
recognizes that some PHAs are already effectively applying
lead-safe standards, and directs HUD to identify and
disseminate best practices on making, and keeping, units lead
safe. In addition to disseminating best practices, the
Department is directed to provide training on lead-safe housing
issues targeted to PHA maintenance and property management
staff. Finally, the Committee strongly encourages PHAs to work
closely with tenants to improve their awareness of lead-based
paint hazards in the home.
Tenant Protection Vouchers.--The Committee recommendation
includes $110,000,000 for tenant protection vouchers. These
vouchers are provided to public housing residents whose
buildings have health or safety issues, or whose projects are
being demolished. However, the largest share of these vouchers
is provided to tenants living in properties with expiring HUD
assistance that may face rent increases if their owners opt out
of HUD programs. In these instances, the vouchers ensure
continued affordability of tenants' housing.
Section 811 Mainstream Vouchers.--The Committee recommends
$110,000,000 to continue the rental assistance and
administrative costs of this program.
Family Unification Program [FUP].--Young adults associated
with child welfare systems are more likely to experience
homelessness as adults or as they transition to adulthood. The
Committee recognizes that stable, affordable housing with
appropriate services can help prevent children from being
unnecessarily removed from their families and help youth
exiting foster care transition to adulthood. The Committee is
concerned that FUP vouchers are underutilized as a housing
strategy to assist at-risk youth and that PHAs and local public
child welfare agencies have had limited success in developing
effective partnerships. According to a May 2014 report from
HUD's Office of Policy Development & Research, youth only
comprise about 14 percent of the total program participants.
Therefore, the Committee includes $20,000,000 for new FUP
vouchers. The Committee directs HUD to prioritize the award of
these new vouchers to PHAs that will target them to youth and
PHAs that have partnered with their local public child welfare
agency to ensure youth referrals for these vouchers. The
Committee recognizes the current timeline of 18-months for
youth vouchers is inadequate and administratively
impracticable. In response, the Committee includes a provision
permitting FUP vouchers to be used by youth who have left, or
will shortly leave, foster care, to be used for up to 36 months
or longer if the youth is participating in a family self-
sufficiency program. The Committee also recognizes the need to
expand youth eligibility for FUP vouchers and includes a
provision increasing the age range of eligible youth to those
who are 18 to 24, and who have left foster care at age 14 or
older, or will leave foster care within 90 days and are
homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. The Committee also
includes language permitting the Secretary to recapture voucher
assistance from PHAs that no longer have a need for that
assistance, and reallocate to it to PHAs with an identified
need.
The Committee is also concerned about how and when families
and youth are being referred to receive FUP assistance. The
Committee directs HUD to work with the Department of Health and
Human Services' Administration on Children and Families [ACF]
to develop guidance and training materials necessary to improve
connections between local agencies, increase collaboration,
improve programs, goals, and supportive housing models that
align at the local level. Further, HUD is directed to identify
specific statutory or regulatory barriers either within the FUP
program or child welfare service programs that limit
individuals' access to services and case management that can
help improve outcomes for at-risk youth. The Committee directs
HUD to report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations 180 days after enactment of this act on the
status and results of these efforts.
Family Self-Sufficiency.--In fiscal year 2015, the
Committee provided flexibility to HUD to improve connections
between vouchers serving youth exiting foster care and the
Family Self-Sufficiency program. The Committee remains
interested in the implementation of this housing and services
model, and looks forward to continued updates from the
Department.
Housing Mobility Demonstration.--The Committee
recommendation includes $11,000,000 to implement a housing
mobility demonstration. This demonstration is designed to help
housing choice voucher residents move to lower-poverty areas
and expand their access to jobs, better schools, and economic
opportunity. A growing body of research highlights how moving
to higher opportunity areas can have significant and positive
long-term earnings and college attainment outcomes for
children, and thereby make inroads at addressing generational
poverty. However, many low-income residents face significant
barriers to achieve or access this opportunity. Low-income
families, including voucher holders, tend to be concentrated in
high-poverty neighborhoods where schools may be under
resourced, transportation is limited, and well-paying jobs may
be scarce. However, there is very little evidence on ways
housing and service providers can effectively counsel families
on their options to move to low-poverty areas, or limit the
barriers that prevent low-income families from moving to low-
poverty areas.
The recommended funding level will allow PHAs to test new
strategies that enable families to successfully move to, and
remain in, lower-poverty areas. The Committee expects HUD to
use this demonstration to identify regulatory and
administrative barriers to housing mobility and cost-effective
strategies to facilitate and promote mobility. These funds may
be used to deliver mobility services to families, including
pre- and post-move counseling, rent deposits, as well as to
offset the administrative costs of operating a mobility
program.

HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS)

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee has not included a rescission from the
Housing Certificate Fund in fiscal year 2017, consistent with
the President's request. The Committee has included language
that will allow unobligated balances from specific accounts to
be used to renew or amend project-based rental assistance
contracts.

PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,900,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,865,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,925,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides funding for modernization and capital
needs of PHAs (except Tribally Designated Housing Entities),
including management improvements, resident relocation, and
homeownership activities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,925,000,000
for the Public Housing Capital Fund, which is $60,000,000 more
than the budget request and $25,000,000 more than the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level.
Of the amount made available under this account,
$35,000,000 is for supportive services for residents of public
housing under the Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency
[ROSS] program, and $15,000,000 is for the Jobs-Plus
demonstration. The Committee also recommends up to $10,000,000
to support the ongoing financial and physical assessment
activities performed by the Real Estate Assessment Center
[REAC] and $1,000,000 for the cost of administrative and
judicial receiverships. The Committee does not include
resources for the ConnectHome initiative, which provides a
platform for collaboration among local governments, public
housing agencies, Internet service providers, philanthropic
foundations, nonprofit organizations and other relevant
stakeholders to work together to produce local solutions for
narrowing the digital divide in communities across the Nation
served by HUD. However, the Committee encourages the Department
to partner with these entities to help identify ways residents
living in public housing can connect to broadband
infrastructure, technical assistance, digital literacy
training, and electronic devices that provide access to, and
allow adoption of, high-speed Internet.
Flexibility To Meet Pressing Needs.--In an effort to
achieve an appropriate balance between flexibility and
accountability, the Committee has included a provision
permitting housing authorities to establish and maintain
replacement reserves. Establishing and maintaining replacement
or capital reserves is common practice in real estate, and in
fact, they are required for projects in HUD multifamily
programs. However, the existing obligation deadlines for public
housing capital funds prevent the establishment of such
reserves. This limits the ability of PHAs to save for planned
capital projects necessary to maintain housing in good
condition.
The Committee expects the Department to move quickly to set
up the rules and requirements for capital reserves so that PHAs
can utilize this new tool to address the significant backlog of
capital needs and better plan for future capital requirements.
This should include how HUD will ensure that funds are being
saved for and spent on needed capital projects.
Additionally, in 1998, Congress included provisions in the
Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act [QHWRA] to provide
PHAs with the tools required to access capital markets to
address substantial capital needs. QHWRA added section 30 to
the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, authorizing PHAs ``to mortgage or
otherwise grant a security interest in any public housing
project or other property of the public housing agency.'' As a
result of section 30, HUD created the Public Housing Mortgage
Program [PHMP]. The PHMP allows PHAs to place a mortgage or
other encumbrance on public housing properties where the
subject property is owned by the PHA. The Committee understands
however that the PHMP is not widely utilized due to HUD
guidance that prohibits a first lien position of dwelling
units. The Committee understands that this stipulation impedes
PHAs' ability to utilize the program. The Committee is
concerned that HUD's guidance with respect to section 30 may
actually be preventing the intended outcomes by limiting PHAs'
ability to access capital markets. The Committee directs the
Department to report within 90 days of enactment of this act to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding the
utilization of PHMP, specifying existing program impediments,
the Department's plan to address those impediments, and if the
PHMP can be a useful tool to address public housing capital
needs.
The Committee further notes that public housing is the only
project-based rental assistance program that HUD administers
that provides capital and operating funds through separate
funding streams. The current structure presents restrictions
that are difficult to implement and regulate, and underscores
the isolation of public housing properties from mainstream real
estate financing and management practices. A merger of these
two programs has the potential to simplify the public housing
program and reduce the administrative burden on PHAs that own
and manage these properties. The Committee directs the
Department to submit to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations within 180 days of enactment of this act an
evaluation of the benefits and potential concerns of merging
the operating and capital funds into a single public housing
account.
Safety and Security in Public Housing.--The Committee
directs at least $5,000,000 of the $21,500,000 recommended for
emergency capital needs for safety and security measures
necessary to address crime and drug-related activity in public
housing. The Committee has included this specific set-aside
because there are PHAs facing safety and security issues that
rely on these funds to protect their tenants. The Committee
notes that the demand for these funds continues to grow while
the amount that HUD is awarding to PHAs is decreasing. The
Committee believes that the level of funding recommended will
support both repairs from disasters and safety and security
improvements. Therefore, the Committee directs the Department
to fund eligible safety and security projects with a portion of
these funds as quickly as possible. The Committee also includes
language this year clarifying that unused funds from the
emergency set-aside shall be used to address safety and
security needs of PHAs and the residents who live in these
properties.
Quality Assurance of Physical Inspections.--The Committee
is deeply troubled by reports of deplorable living conditions
found in some HUD-subsidized properties across the country. The
scope of this issue spans geographic regions, highlights
systemic problems, and calls into question the effectiveness of
HUD oversight, and the Real Estate Assessment Center's [REAC]
inspections of HUD-assisted housing. At the Committee's March
10, 2016 hearing on HUD's budget request for fiscal year 2017,
the Department acknowledged the need to improve REAC inspection
protocols and expressed its commitment to improving its
processes. These efforts include: proposing changes to civil
monetary penalties; reducing the time it takes to issue tenant
protection vouchers to tenant living in unsuitable living
conditions; and the creation of an internal working group that
will review and provide recommendations on how the inspection
process can be improved.
The Committee encourages the Department to work with the
House and Senate authorizing committees on enforcement actions,
including civil monetary penalties, that HUD can take to ensure
PHAs and landlords maintain the physical quality of HUD-
assisted units. However, the Committee notes that those actions
do not improve the quality of the inspection protocols.
Similarly, while the Committee is supportive of efforts to
quickly issue tenant-protection vouchers, the issuance of these
vouchers is a tacit acknowledgement that the Department has
failed to ensure units are maintained as decent, safe and
sanitary. Additionally, failure to maintain the physical
condition of HUD-assisted properties results in a loss of
critical affordable housing and tenant protection vouchers are
of questionable value to families that encounter a lack of
affordable housing in their communities.
The Committee has been apprised of the action items
developed by HUD's inspection working group and is underwhelmed
by the results. The Committee is disappointed that the
Department has not taken this opportunity to develop a broader
Departmental strategy that includes, for example, a review of
whether a reverse auction is the best procurement practice for
this line of business or address improvements to the oversight
of inspections. The Committee is particularly disappointed that
despite acknowledging that issues impacting the health of
residents, including mold, do not trigger a sufficient
subtraction of points to the inspection score, and the need to
adjust the scoring system, those actions have not been
identified by the working group as issues to address.
The Committee understands that HUD is in the midst of
hiring additional staff within REAC to increase quality
assurance of physical inspections; continuing work on
implementing a single inspection protocol for public housing
and voucher units, including the review of voucher standards;
and developing notices to address inspection changes. Rather
than direct additional requirements and changes at this time,
the Committee expects the Department to move swiftly to
implement previously identified deficiencies in physical
condition inspection protocols. The Committee further directs
the Department to solicit comments from stakeholders, including
tenants, to identify ways the Department can improve its
inspection protocols and oversight. The Committee will continue
to closely monitor the Department's efforts and progress and
directs the Department to submit to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of enactment of
this act a report identifying how HUD is improving the
inspection process and related protocols, including quality
assurance of inspections, identified actions yet to be
implemented, the status of actions undertaken, and a timeline
for completion of all actions.
Lead-Based Paint.--In 2010, Abt. Associates reported on
capital needs in public housing and found that approximately
62,000 public housing units required lead-based paint
abatement. Yet, HUD is unable to verify what actions the more
than 3,100 public housing agencies are taking to identify and
address lead-based paint hazards in the more than 1 million
public housing units across the country. The Committee is
extremely concerned that HUD lacks the necessary oversight and
quality assurance of lead and routine physical inspections to
determine whether lead-based paint hazards are present in these
homes, particularly in units where there are children under the
age of 6. The Committee is further concerned that HUD is unable
to identify which units or quantify how much of the public
housing stock meet the standards currently set-forth in HUD's
physical inspection and lead-based paint hazard regulations.
This information is essential to understanding the resource and
health challenges faced by HUD, PHAs, and public housing
residents.
The Committee believes that the Department has the
statutory authority to collect and analyze data on lead-based
paint hazards in public housing units, and apply better quality
assurance measures on routine physical inspections. While
current HUD housing quality standards require that the physical
condition of housing choice voucher units be free of health
hazards, including lead-based paint, HUD inadequately performs
quality assurance and oversight measures to enforce this
requirement. The Committee notes that HUD's Lead-Safe Housing
Rule requires PHAs to conduct a lead inspection and risk
assessment in all public housing units that pre-date 1978, and
where a child under the age of 6 currently or is expected to
reside. These units are subject to rigorous inspection
standards that require scientific testing of paint and dust
samples found in the home, and where necessary, abating or
performing interim controls to make the unit livable and safe
for these children. Under the Uniform Physical Condition
Standard [UPCS] regulations, PHAs must maintain verification
that this work has been performed, and at the time of routine
physical inspection, provide the inspector with proof that a
Lead-Based Paint Inspection was conducted, and where necessary,
that a Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Form has been signed by the
PHA and the resident. However, PHAs are not required to store
this documentation at the property, and inspectors are only
verifying the presence of documentation--there is no regulatory
requirement to verify the content or findings of lead-based
paint inspections or, where necessary, steps PHAs have taken to
address any lead-based paint hazards. The Committee is
concerned that UPCS does not require inspectors to verify that
a public housing unit has been evaluated for, and to the extent
necessary, made safe of lead-based paint hazards in accordance
with lead-based paint regulations. The Committee is further
dismayed that HUD does not analyze the lead-based paint section
from the inspection checklist to determine a PHA's compliance
with lead-based paint regulations and, where necessary,
identify and provide the necessary oversight to ensure they
become compliant. The Committee directs HUD to establish and
implement a process that improves data collection and analysis
of actions PHAs are taking to comply with lead-based paint
regulations in public housing units by March 31, 2017, and
report semi-annually to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations on this progress. At a minimum, this report
should include the steps HUD has taken to ensure PHAs are in
statutory and regulatory compliance, as well as the number and
location of units that are not in compliance with current
inspections and lead-based paint regulations. The Committee
also directs the Department to identify and report on the
incidences and prevalence of lead-based paint hazards in public
housing units. The Committee also directs the REAC to provide
monthly updates to the public housing program offices, in the
field and headquarters, on UPCS inspections conducted in public
housing that do not meet the lead-based paint documentation
requirements outlined in HUD's regulation.
As HUD amends its blood lead level standards to align with
the CDC's standards, HUD anticipates more than 1,500 public
housing units, where children under the age of 6 reside, will
require an environmental intervention. The Committee
recommendation includes $25,000,000 to help PHAs address this
new regulatory requirement. This funding shall be competitively
awarded to PHAs to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards
in public housing units, which may include lead inspections,
risk assessments, interim controls, and abatements.
In order to improve communication with PHAs on lead-safe
housing, the Committee directs the Department to issue
clarifying guidance explaining the importance of lead-safe
housing and the changes the Department is undertaking to align
standards with CDC and improve its processes. The Committee
recognizes that some PHAs are already effectively applying
lead-safe standards, and directs HUD to identify and
disseminate best practices on making, and keeping, units lead
safe. In addition to disseminating best practices, the
Department is directed to provide training on lead-safe housing
issues targeted to PHA maintenance and property management
staff. Finally, the Committee strongly encourages PHAs to work
closely with tenants to improve their awareness of lead-based
paint hazards in the home.

PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $4,500,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 4,569,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,675,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides funding for the payment of operating
subsidies to approximately 3,100 PHAs (except Tribally
Designated Housing Entities) with a total of approximately 1.2
million units under management in order to augment rent
payments by residents in order to provide sufficient revenues
to meet reasonable operating costs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,675,000,000
for the public housing operating fund, which is $106,000,000
more than the budget request and $175,000,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee has included provisions providing PHAs with
the ability to establish capital reserves. The Committee notes
that many PHAs have taken steps to achieve operational savings
by improving energy efficiency or otherwise reducing expenses,
and has included a provision that establishes a utility
conservation pilot that incentivizes a reduction in public
housing utility consumption and costs, and provides PHAs with
the ability to reinvest such savings in their properties and
operations.
The Committee also recognizes that PHAs face administrative
and regulatory burdens and it reiterates support for regulatory
and administrative relief that result in cost savings, while
still maintaining effective and meaningful oversight.
Over-income Residents in Public Housing.--The Committee
believes that public housing assistance should go to those that
truly need it. A July 2015 HUD OIG report found that more than
25,000 public housing families have incomes above the income
limits, which raises concern that current processes do not
ensure that public housing funds are meeting their intended
purpose. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to
update its rules related to over-income public housing
residents to ensure there is a process in place to identify
over-income residents and that they are transitioned out of
public housing, where appropriate.

CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 200,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 80,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative provides competitive
grants to transform impoverished neighborhoods into
functioning, sustainable, mixed-income neighborhoods with co-
location of appropriate services, schools, public assets,
transportation options, and access to jobs or job training.
Choice Neighborhoods grants fund the preservation,
rehabilitation, and transformation of public and HUD-assisted
housing, as well as their neighborhoods. Grantees include PHAs,
tribes, local governments, and nonprofit organizations. For-
profit developers may also apply in partnership with another
eligible grantee. Grant funds can be used for resident and
community services, community development and affordable
housing activities in surrounding communities. Grantees
undertake comprehensive local planning with input from
residents and the community.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $80,000,000
for the Choice Neighborhoods initiative. This amount is
$45,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and
$120,000,000 less than the budget request. Of the total amount
provided, no more than $5,000,000 may be used for planning,
including planning and action, grants. Choice Neighborhoods
seeks to build on the HOPE VI program by expanding the types of
eligible grantees and allowing funding to be used on HUD-owned
or assisted housing, as well as the surrounding community.
However, the Committee notes that the work to replace
distressed public housing is far from complete. Therefore, the
Committee has included language that stipulates that not less
than $48,000,000 of the funding provided shall be awarded to
projects where PHAs are the lead applicant. The goal of Choice
Neighborhoods is to replace distressed housing as a way to
improve communities and the lives of residents. Therefore, HUD
should not limit applicants to a narrowly defined set of
neighborhoods since it may prevent the replacement of eligible
and worthy public or assisted housing projects that are outside
such designated neighborhoods from competing for funding.
The Committee also notes that successful community planning
brings together multiple partners and funding sources that aid
in the implementation of that plan. The Committee includes
language this year directing that implementation grants may
only be awarded to applicants who have previously been awarded
planning grants. The Committee believes this will incentivize
communities to engage in robust planning efforts before taking
on transformation initiatives, while also ensuring the
Department awards funds to those proposals that are most likely
to result in successful implementation.
Inherent in the Choice Neighborhoods initiative is the
understanding that community transformation requires more than
replacing housing. The creation of vibrant, sustainable
communities also requires greater access to transportation,
jobs and services that will increase opportunities for
community residents. However, HUD funding cannot support all of
these activities. The Committee has been encouraged by the
ability of Choice Neighborhood grantees to leverage significant
resources with their grant awards. In addition, the Committee
urges HUD to identify successful partnership strategies that
can not only be utilized by future Choice Neighborhood
grantees, but can also serve as models for traditional public
housing and HUD-assisted housing program providers that want to
improve services for their residents.

FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $75,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 75,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 75,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Family Self-Sufficiency [FSS] program provides funding
to help Housing Choice Voucher, project-based Section 8, and
Public Housing residents achieve self-sufficiency and economic
independence. The FSS program is designed to provide service
coordination through community partnerships that link residents
with employment assistance, job training, child care,
transportation, financial literacy, and other supportive
services. The funding will be allocated through one competition
to eligible PHAs to support service coordinators who will serve
both public housing and vouchers residents.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $75,000,000
for the FSS program in fiscal year 2017, an amount equal to the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the budget request.
The Committee strongly supports the FSS program, which
helps provide public housing and Section 8 residents with the
tools to improve their lives and achieve self-sufficiency. In
fiscal year 2014, the Committee combined Section 8 voucher and
public housing FSS programs so that public housing agencies
could manage one unified program. Beginning in fiscal year
2015, the Committee included language to expand the program so
that it could serve residents living in project-based Section 8
housing. This authority allows property owners to create escrow
accounts and fund service coordinators with residual receipts.
As a result of this language, HUD is piloting FSS at select
project-based Section 8 properties. The Committee expects that
through this pilot, HUD will identify best-practices and
limitations to implementation, and take those lessons learned
into consideration, before issuing a notice or guidance to take
the program to scale.
As HUD continues to work to streamline and expand the
program, the Committee also expects HUD to identify best
practices in the field that are successfully improving outcomes
for residents. The Committee encourages HUD to consider best
practices for how to increase participation, improve alignment
between eligible uses of funding and milestones, and
incorporate financial education into the program design.

INDIAN BLOCK GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $710,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 780,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 714,000,000

Note: The amounts for fiscal year 2016 enacted and the budget request
include amounts funded or requested in the Community Development Fund
for the Indian Community Development Block Grant program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds the Indian Housing Block Grant Program,
as authorized under title I of the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 [NAHASDA]. This
program provides a funding allocation on a formula basis to
Indian tribes and their tribally designated housing entities to
help address the housing needs within their communities. Under
this block grant, Indian tribes use performance measures and
benchmarks that are consistent with the national goals of the
program, but can base these measures on the needs and
priorities established in their own Indian housing plan.
This account also funds the Indian Community Development
Block Grant Program, as authorized under title I of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. These funds
are awarded on a competitive basis to Indian tribes for the
funding of tribal community development needs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

To increase the transparency around funding for Native
Americans, the Committee recommendation provides for both the
Indian Housing Block Grant and Indian Community Development
Block Grant programs under a single heading.
The Committee recommends a total of $648,500,000 for the
Indian Housing Block Grant [IHBG] and Title VI Loan Guarantee
programs, of which $646,500,000 is for IHBG formula grants and
$2,000,000 is for credit subsidy to support a Title VI
guaranteed loan level not to exceed $17,857,142. The
recommended level of funding is $4,000,000 more than the amount
provided in fiscal year 2016 and $51,500,000 below the budget
request.
The recommendation also includes $60,000,000 for the Indian
Community Development Block Grant [ICDBG] program. The
recommended level of funding is equal to the amount provided in
fiscal year 2016 and $20,000,000 below the budget request.
Recognizing the tremendous needs in Indian Country and the
limited resources available to address these challenges, the
Committee includes a new provision this year limiting the
amount of funding a tribe may receive from the IHBG program to
not more than 10 percent. The Committee directs HUD to collect
data as part of tribes' Indian Housing Plan submissions on new
program activity that is generated due to this provision.
IHBG is a vital resource for tribal governments to address
the dire housing conditions in Indian Country, and access to
affordable housing remains in a critical state for many tribes
across the country. Native Americans are twice as likely to
live in poverty compared to the rest of the Nation. As a
result, the housing challenges on tribal lands are daunting.
According to the U.S. Census American Community Survey for
2006-2010, 8.1 percent of homes on American Indian reservations
and off-reservation trust land are overcrowded, compared to 3.1
percent of households nationwide. The number of households on
reservation lands with severe housing costs that spend more
than 50 percent of their income on housing has risen 46 percent
over the past decade.
The Committee believes the housing goals for American
Indians and Alaska Natives established in the NAHASDA,
including section 802, remain a priority. The housing programs
authorized in NAHASDA serve communities who are
disproportionately low income, more likely to experience
homelessness or overcrowded living conditions and unable to
utilize traditional lending sources. The programs have aided
thousands of individuals and families in the pursuit of safe,
affordable housing and the Committee encourages HUD to continue
providing appropriate assistance and resources based on
continued demonstrable need.
Coordinated Environmental Reviews for Tribal Housing and
Related Infrastructure.--In fiscal year 2015, the Committee
directed HUD to collaborate with the Council on Environmental
Quality and affected Federal agencies, including the Department
of the Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Health and
Human Services, the Federal Highway Administration, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, to develop a coordinated
environmental review process to simplify tribal housing
development and its related infrastructure needs. The Committee
expects HUD to continue to update the Committee on the status
and progress of these ongoing efforts.
Technical Assistance.--Limited capacity hinders the ability
of many tribes to effectively address their housing needs. The
Committee recommendation includes $5,500,000 for technical
assistance needs in Indian country to support both the IHBG and
ICDBG programs. The Committee directs that these technical
assistance funds be administered by PIH and not be merged with
the broader Community Compass initiative administered by the
Office of Policy Development and Research. The Committee
expects HUD to use the technical assistance funding provided to
aid tribes with capacity challenges, especially tribes
receiving small grant awards. The funding should be used for
training, contract expertise, and other services necessary to
improve data collection, increase leveraging, and address other
needs identified by tribes. The Committee also expects that
these technical assistance funds will be provided to both
national and regional organizations with experience in
providing technical assistance that reflects the unique needs
and culture of Native Americans.
Oversight Plan.--Within 30 days of enactment of this act,
the Committee directs HUD to submit a fiscal year 2017
oversight plan for the funds under this heading to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on
Program account guaranteed loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016............ $7,500,000 $1,190,476,190
Budget estimate, 2017........... 5,500,000 1,341,463,415
Committee recommendation........ 6,500,000 1,585,365,854
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This program provides access to private financing for
Indian families, Indian tribes, and their tribally designated
housing entities that otherwise could not acquire housing
financing because of the unique status of Indian trust land.
HUD continues to be the largest single source of financing for
housing in tribal communities. This program makes it possible
to promote sustainable reservation communities by providing
access to financing for higher income Native Americans to
achieve homeownership within their Native communities. As
required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this account
includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan guarantees
authorized under this program.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,500,000 in
program subsidies to support a loan level of $1,585,365,854.
This subsidy amount is $1,000,000 less than the fiscal year
2016 enacted subsidy level and $1,000,000 more than the budget
request. Included in the Committee's recommendation is
$1,000,000 to assist tribes and tribally designated housing
entities to construct rental housing for law enforcement,
healthcare, educational, and other skilled workers. The
development of this rental stock is critical to enable tribes
to attract and retain professionals in these fields who are
often missing in Indian country due to the lack of existing
rental housing and the distances between tribal lands and
available housing. The Committee is concerned that the
Department has failed to submit a report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations, as previously directed, on
how HUD has utilized the funding provided for administrative
contract expenses including management processes and systems.
The Committee is equally troubled that in addition to failing
to submit the required information, the Department has also
failed to use such funds to address critical systemic
management and oversight shortcomings despite having over $2.6
million in unobligated balances for this purpose. While the
Committee believes this program is important to helping meet
housing needs in Indian country, the lack of action by the
Department compels the Committee to direct the Office of
Inspector General to undertake a review of the management and
oversight of the section 184 loan program, including related
information technology systems, and to report its finding to
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 120
days of enactment of this act.

NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program to provide
grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
for housing and housing-related assistance, in order to
develop, maintain, and operate affordable housing for eligible
low-income Native Hawaiian families.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,000,000 for
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program, which is
$5,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and
$4,500,000 more than the budget request.
The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program [NHHBG]
provides funding for affordable housing activities on Hawaiian
home lands to eligible Native Hawaiian families. This program
is necessary given the general living conditions and poverty
rates for Native Hawaiians. According to the 2011-2013 American
Community Survey, approximately 19 percent of Native Hawaiian
households were overcrowded compared to 3.3 percent of all
households in the United States, and about 18.4 percent of
Native Hawaiians in Hawaii live in poverty. Meanwhile, the
median value of an owner-occupied home in Hawaii was $495,400,
compared to $173,200, nationwide making access to affordable
housing extremely challenging for residents of the isolated,
ocean-locked State.
Hawaiian home lands are dispersed throughout the Hawaiian
Islands and are often in less desirable areas with steep
terrain that is difficult to access and develop. The challenges
involved with development of this raw land add to the already
high cost of construction in the State. Project development is
a lengthy process that involves complex environmental reviews
with strict water resource requirements, procurement of
construction contracts, and installation of entire public works
systems. These challenges have impeded the Department of
Hawaiian Homeland's ability to advance the traditional model of
single housing family community developments. The Committee is
concerned that this traditional housing model does not address
the severe housing needs of the 34,100 low-income Native
Hawaiian households that are eligible for assistance under the
NHHBG program. The Committee directs HUD to ensure that the
funds provided are administered to maximize the provision of
affordable housing through the construction of high density,
multi-family affordable housing and rental units, as well as
housing counseling services and the rehabilitation of housing
on Native Hawaiian home lands that do not meet safe and
sanitary housing building standards.

Community Planning and Development

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $335,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 335,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 335,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS [HOPWA]
program provides States and localities with resources and
incentives to devise long-term, comprehensive strategies for
meeting the housing and supportive service needs of persons
living with HIV/AIDS and their families.
Since 1990, by statute, 90 percent of formula-appropriated
funds are distributed to qualifying States and metropolitan
areas on the basis of the number of AIDS cases and incidence of
AIDS reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
by March 31 of the year preceding the fiscal year. The
remaining 10 percent of funds are awarded through a national
competition, with priority given to the renewal of funding for
expiring agreements consistent with appropriations act
requirements.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $335,000,000
for the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS [HOPWA]
program. This level of funding is equal to the President's
budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The
Committee continues to include language requiring HUD to
allocate these funds in a manner that preserves existing HOPWA
programs, to the extent that those programs are determined to
be meeting the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS.
HOPWA Formula Modernization.--The Committee recommendation
once again includes a change to the HOPWA formula requested in
the President's budget and part of the administration's
comprehensive National HIV/AIDS Strategy. Currently, 55 percent
of the statutorily required cumulative AIDS cases used to
determine the formula program represent deceased individuals.
The Committee recommendation seeks to distribute funding more
equitably to reflect the HIV epidemic's impact among
communities with highest burden of HIV cases while addressing
the increasingly disproportionate impact of HIV on communities
of poverty and color.
The formula modernization requires that 75 percent of the
formula funds be distributed to cities with population greater
than 500,000 and with more than 2,000 persons living with HIV,
and the remaining 25 percent distributed to States and
metropolitan statistical areas based on fair market rents (to
account for high housing costs in certain areas) and area
poverty indexes (to account for high-poverty areas lacking
services). The Committee is aware of concerns in certain
communities that would receive substantial reduction in funding
as a result of the formula modernization, and has included
language to prevent any grantee from losing more than 5 percent
or gaining more than 10 percent of the average share of the
total formula allocation of the previous fiscal year. The
Committee directs HUD to prioritize any competitive funding
available, after renewing all competitive expiring contracts,
to grantees that lose funding due to the formula modernization.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 2,800,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,000,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974, as amended, the Department is authorized to award
block grants to units of general local government and States
for the funding of local community development programs. A wide
range of physical, economic, and social development activities
are eligible with spending priorities determined at the local
level, but the law enumerates general objectives which the
block grants are designed to fulfill, including adequate
housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic
opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate
income. Grant recipients are required to use at least 70
percent of their block grant funds for activities that benefit
low- and moderate-income persons.
Funds are distributed to eligible recipients for community
development purposes utilizing the higher of two objective
formulas, one of which gives somewhat greater weight to the age
of housing stock. Of the funds appropriated, 70 percent are
distributed to entitlement communities and 30 percent are
distributed to nonentitlement communities after deducting
designated amounts for insular areas.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee has provided $3,000,000,000 for Community
Development Block Grants [CDBG]. The recommended amount is
$200,000,000 more than the budget request and equal to the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level. CDBG funding provides States
and entitlement communities with resources that allow them to
undertake a wide range of community development activities,
including public infrastructure improvements, housing
rehabilitation and construction, job creation and retention,
and public services that primarily benefit low and moderate
income persons. The Committee urges CDBG grantees to consider
funding eligible activities and projects that increase access
to transit and intercity passenger rail options for persons of
low and moderate income.
The flexibility associated with CDBG enables State and
local governments to tailor solutions to effectively meet the
unique needs of their communities. The Committee notes the
importance of States and local grantees meeting the program's
three national objectives, as they utilize the program's
resources to address a wide range of community needs. As HUD
works with communities to determine eligible activities that
meet the national objective of benefiting low- and-moderate-
income persons, the Committee encourages the Department to
extend flexibility for rural communities under 1,000 residents
to use alternate sources of data to establish Low-Moderate
Income Survey Data [LMISD] when American Community Survey [ACS]
data is considered by the Community Development Block Grant
applicant to be unreliable.
To ensure the program remains flexible, but also
accountable and transparent, the Committee recommendation
continues provisions in bill language that prohibit any
community from selling its CDBG award to another community and
that any funding provided to a for-profit entity for an
economic development project funded under this act undergo
appropriate underwriting. The Committee has included these
provisions to address concerns raised about how program dollars
have been used and mitigate risks associated with it.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on
Program account guaranteed loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016................ ................ $300,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017............... ................ $300,000,000
Committee recommendation............ ................ $300,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974, as amended, authorizes the Secretary to issue Federal
loan guarantees of private market loans used by entitlement and
nonentitlement communities to cover the costs of acquiring real
property, rehabilitation of publicly owned real property,
housing rehabilitation, and other economic development
activities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides a loan level
guarantee of $300,000,000 which is equal to the fiscal year
2016 enacted level and the budget request. The Committee
requires HUD to collect fees to offset credit subsidy costs
such that the program operates at a zero credit subsidy cost.
This program enables CDBG recipients to use their CDBG
dollars to leverage financing for economic development
projects, community facilities, and housing rehabilitation
programs. Communities are allowed to borrow up to five times
their most recent CDBG allocation.
The Committee notes that in November 2015, HUD issued the
necessary rules to implement a fee-based structure for this
program. The Committee expects HUD to ensure that a financing
structure is in place by the beginning of the fiscal year so
that this important program remains available to communities.
In addition, HUD must provide communities with information and
any technical assistance needed to successfully utilize the
program.

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $950,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................ 950,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 950,000,000

\1\Includes $10,000,000 for the Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership
Opportunity Program
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Title II of the National Affordable Housing Act, as
amended, authorizes the HOME Investment Partnerships Program.
This program provides assistance to States and local
governments for the purpose of expanding the supply and
affordability of housing to low-income and very low-income
people. Eligible activities include tenant-based rental
assistance, acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable rental
and ownership housing, and housing construction. To participate
in the HOME program, State and local governments must develop a
comprehensive housing affordability strategy. There is a 25
percent matching requirement for participating jurisdictions,
which can be reduced or eliminated if they are experiencing
fiscal distress.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $950,000,000
for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. This amount is
equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The amount is
equal to the budget request, but the budget also proposes to
fund a $10,000,000 Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Program
[SHOP] program out of this account, which the Committee has
rejected. The recommendation does not include the requested
statutory changes to the HOME program. The Committee encourages
the Department to work with the authorizing committee on these
statutory changes to the program.
Affordable Housing Needs.--The Committee notes the
substantial gains made by HOME in increasing the supply and
affordability of housing for low-income families. According to
the March 2016 HOME National Production Report, since 1992
States and localities have used $26 billion in HOME funds to
leverage an additional $117 billion in public and private
resources to build or preserve 1.2 million homes and provide
rental assistance to 313,558 families. HOME has been
particularly successful in helping extremely low-income
families (at or below 30 percent of area median income) who
have received 40 percent of assistance for affordable rental
housing during the past 5 years. The Committee stresses the
importance of HUD working with communities that are seeking
Federal resources to directly assist low-to-moderate income
homeowners with improving and renovating their homes to
maintain property values and create sustainable, livable,
attractive, and safe neighborhoods. HOME is also a critical
part of meeting the supportive housing needs of the low-to-
moderate income individuals and families, including veterans,
persons with disabilities and seniors. In addition, it is the
only Federal housing program exclusively focused on providing
States with the flexible financing needed to address our most
pressing housing needs.

SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $55,700,000
Budget estimate, 2017...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 54,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity
Program is comprised of the Self-Help Homeownership Program
[SHOP], which assists low-income homebuyers willing to
contribute ``sweat equity'' toward the construction of their
houses. These funds increase nonprofit organizations' ability
to leverage funds from other sources. This account also
includes funding for the Capacity Building for Community
Development and Affordable Housing Program, as well as
assistance to rural communities as authorized under sections
6301 through 6305 of Public Law 110-246, and funds the
rehabilitation and modifications of homes for Veterans that are
low-income and disabled as authorized by section 1079 of Public
Law 113-291. These programs help to develop the capacity of
nonprofit community development organizations to carry out
community development and affordable housing projects.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $54,000,000 for the Self-Help and
Assisted Homeownership Program, which is $1,700,000 less than
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level, and $54,000,000 more than
the request. The Committee rejects the administration's
proposal to shift a portion of the funding for these activities
to the HOME program, and make the section 4 program activities
an eligible activity of funds transferred from various programs
to the Office of Policy Development and Research. The Committee
supports leaving this heading as a standalone account and
opposes efforts to shift these funds into other accounts. The
Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for SHOP, as
authorized under section 11 of the Housing Opportunity
Extension Act of 1996; $35,000,000 for capacity building as
authorized by section 4 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993;
$5,000,000 to carry out capacity building activities in rural
communities; and, $4,000,000 million for a program to rehab and
modify housing for Veterans that are low-income and disabled.
The Committee notes that funding for technical assistance is
being provided under the Office of Policy Development and
Research and directs funds available for section 4 to be used
solely for capacity building activities.
The Rural Capacity Building Program is intended for truly
national organizations. For the purposes of the National Rural
Capacity Building Notification of Funding Availably [NOFA], the
Committee directs HUD to define an eligible national
organization as a nonprofit entity that has on-going experience
in rural housing, including experience working with rural
housing organizations, local governments, and Indian tribes, as
evidenced by past and continuing work in one or more States in
eight or more of HUD's Federal regions.

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $2,250,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 2,664,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,330,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Homeless Assistance Grants Program provides funding to
break the cycle of homelessness and to move homeless persons
and families to permanent housing. This is done by providing
rental assistance, emergency shelter, transitional and
permanent housing, prevention, rapid re-housing, and supportive
services to homeless persons and families or those at risk of
homelessness. The emergency solutions grant program is a
formula grant program, while the Continuum of Care and Rural
Housing Stability Programs are competitive grants. Homeless
assistance grants provide Federal support to the Nation's most
vulnerable populations. These grants assist localities in
addressing the housing and service needs of a wide variety of
homeless populations while developing coordinated Continuum of
Care [CoC] systems that ensure the support necessary to help
those who are homeless attain housing and move toward self-
sufficiency.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,330,000,000
for Homeless Assistance Grants in fiscal year 2017. This amount
is $334,000,000 less than the President's request, and
$80,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
As part of the Committee recommendation, at least
$2,013,000,000 will support the Continuum of Care Program,
including the renewal of existing projects, and the Rural
Housing Stability Assistance Program. Based on the renewal
burden, HUD may also support planning and other activities
authorized by the HEARTH Act. The recommendation also includes
at least $250,000,000 for the emergency solutions grants
program [ESG].
The Committee supports HUD's efforts to leverage existing
housing resources, such as Section 8 vouchers, to serve the
homeless. While the Committee notes that permanent supportive
housing is more efficient and effective at addressing
homelessness among adults than transitional housing, it is also
aware that in some communities transitional housing has been
found to be effective. To avoid service gaps at the local
level, the Committee encourages the Department to be receptive
to renewing such transitional housing projects. The Committee
also supports replacing existing, underperforming projects with
new permanent supportive housing projects. Therefore, if funds
remain available in this account after meeting renewal demands
and funding ESG, HUD may use it for new projects, provided that
such projects are targeted to areas with the greatest need, as
measured by homeless data.
Data on Youth Homelessness.--The Committee believes an
accurate count is critical to understanding the scale of youth
homelessness. While the Annual Homelessness Assessment Report
[AHAR] provides Congress and the public with meaningful
information on the progress in ending homelessness, other
Federal agencies have youth-specific data that can help
communities better understand the scope of youth homelessness
and housing instability in their area. The Committee continues
to direct HUD to incorporate additional Federal data on youth
homelessness into the AHAR.
Comprehensive Interventions to Prevent and End Youth
Homelessness.--The Committee recommendation includes
$40,000,000 to continue implementation of comprehensive
approaches to serving homeless youth
Clarifying Eligibility and Documentation Requirements for
Homeless Youth.--The Committee remains concerned that service
providers are turning homeless youth away due to a lack of
clarity on HUD's existing eligibility and documentation
requirements. While HUD has issued some guidance on how youth
qualify for assistance under the current definition, service
providers remain challenged with identifying and serving youth
who are unaccompanied or head of household, faced with domestic
violence, trafficking, or other unsafe circumstances--the most
vulnerable and hard-to-reach homeless youth--due to lack of
clarity in HUD's regulation and guidance. The Committee
continues to hear from service providers that documentation
requirements pose a barrier for individuals and families,
especially youth, to access HUD programs and services. The
Committee includes language that waives the requirement for
youth 24 and under to provide third-party documentation to
receive housing and supportive services within the Continuums
of Care. The Committee strongly believes documentation
requirements should not be a basis for denying access to
necessary services. The Committee believes the Department
shares the goal of effectively addressing youth homelessness
and ensuring no youth eligible go unserved where there is the
local capacity to house and/or provide services. Therefore, the
Committee encourages the Department to continue to clarify
program requirements through guidance, notice and webcasts as
appropriate.
Performance Partnership Pilot.--The Committee has continued
language permitting HUD to partner with other Federal agencies
in the Performance Partnership Pilot program, a cross-Federal
agency initiative serving disconnected youth through
innovative, cost-effective, and outcome-focused strategies. The
Committee believes there is a critical role HUD can play in
this pilot, especially as communities seek to address the
housing and self-sufficiency needs of disconnected youth.
HUD shall inform the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations no later than 45 days after enactment of this
act, how the Department will strategically align within the
Performance Partnership Pilot program. This shall also include:
(1) the amount and source of funding the Department will
allocate to the pilot; (2) the Department's role in grantee
criteria and selection processes, and; (3) the Department's
role in oversight and accountability for its contributions. Not
later than 15 days after pilots have been announced, the
Department shall brief the Committees on the scope of each
pilot project, including goals, objectives and intended
outcomes, and an outline of specific metrics that will be used
to evaluate and determine the effectiveness of the pilot
project and its outcomes.
Annual Homeless Assessment Report.--AHAR is a result of
Congressional directives beginning in 2001, that charged the
Department to collect data on homelessness, using the newly
implemented Homeless Management Information System [HMIS]. HMIS
data, information provided by Continuums of Care, and a point-
in-time count of sheltered and unsheltered persons from one
night in January of each year informs AHAR. The Committee is
encouraged that HUD is sharing homeless data widely, and that
Federal, State and local service providers use AHAR to
determine needs and develop strategies to address homelessness.
The Committee believes HMIS can be used as a platform for
information gathering in other Federal programs. Streamlining
data to reflect the various Federal data sources will allow the
Federal Government to better understand the scope and needs of
homeless populations, to then inform a strategic alignment of
Federal services. The Committee directs HUD to incorporate
additional Federal data on homelessness in the AHAR. This
information is important to ensure that communities develop and
implement policies that respond to local needs. To support
continued data collection and AHAR, the Committee has included
$7,000,000 to support AHAR data collection and analysis. The
Department shall submit the AHAR report by August 29, 2017. The
Committee further hopes that HUD's efforts to increase
participation in the HMIS effort will lead to improved
information about and understanding of the Nation's homeless.
Renewal Costs.--The Committee directs HUD to continue to
include 5-year projections of the costs of renewing existing
projects as part of the fiscal year 2018 budget justification.
This should include estimated costs of renewing permanent
supportive housing.

Housing Programs

RENTAL ASSISTANCE DEMONSTRATION

Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $50,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Rental Assistance Demonstration [RAD] was authorized in
fiscal year 2012 to preserve public and other multifamily
housing. Under existing authorities, PHAs and other owners of
rental properties assisted under the Public Housing, Moderate
Rehabilitation [Mod Rehab], Moderate Rehabilitation Single-Room
Occupancy [Mod Rehab SRO], Rent Supplement [Rent Supp] and
Rental Assistance Payment [RAP] programs are offered the option
to convert their properties to Section 8 contracts.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes provisions permitting
Section 202 PRAC properties to convert to Section 8 contracts.
The current contracts are limited to 1 year and impede
successfully addressing capital needs for these properties.
Conversion to multi-year Section 8 contracts will enable
properties to leverage private financing for capital
improvements, enabling these properties to remain a source of
critical affordable housing for low-income elderly residents.
The Committee recommendation also includes $4,000,000 for the
Rental Assistance Demonstration, which is $4,000,000 more than
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and $46,000,000 less than
the budget request. This funding is limited to providing
additional rental subsidy for Section 202 PRAC properties
converting to Section 8 contracts that will not be able to
successfully convert at the current subsidy amounts.
The Committee recommendation also includes the following
proposals to facilitate additional conversions of HUD-assisted
properties: (1) increases the current unit cap on Public
Housing conversions to 250,000; (2) eliminates the deadline of
September 30, 2018, for submission of RAD applications; (3)
enables Section 202 PRAC properties to convert to Section 8
contracts; (4) promotes the preservation of multifamily
properties in high-cost areas; (5) standardizes ownership and
control requirements for converted Public Housing properties in
situations where low-income housing tax credits are used or
where foreclosure, bankruptcy, or default occurs; and (6)
protects tenants' right to continue occupancy under second
component conversions.

PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $10,620,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 10,816,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,901,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Section 8 project-based rental assistance provides a rental
subsidy to a private landlord that is tied to a specific
housing unit, as opposed to a voucher, which allows a recipient
to seek a unit, subject primarily to certain rent caps. Amounts
in this account include funding for the renewal of and
amendments to expiring Section 8 project-based contracts,
including Section 8, moderate rehabilitation, and single room
occupancy [SRO] housing. This account also provides funds for
contract administrators.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Section 8 project-based rental assistance [PBRA]
program supports an estimated 17,400 contracts with private
owners of multifamily housing. Through this program, HUD and
private sector partners support the preservation of safe,
stable and sanitary housing for more than 1.2 million low-
income Americans. Without PBRA, many affordable housing
projects would convert to market rates with large rent
increases that current tenants would be unable to afford.
The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$10,901,000,000 for the annual renewal of project-based
contracts, of which up to $235,000,000 is for the cost of
contract administrators. The recommended level of funding is
$281,000,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2016
and is $85,000,000 more than the budget request. The
Committee's recommendation rejects the administration's
proposed change to the medical deduction calculation, which
results in the increased funding above the requested level.
Performance-Based Contract Administrators.--Performance-
based contract administrators [PBCAs] are typically PHAs or
State housing finance agencies. They are responsible for
conducting on-site management reviews of assisted properties;
adjusting contract rents; and reviewing, processing, and paying
monthly vouchers submitted by owners, among other tasks. The
Committee notes that PBCAs are integral to the Department's
efforts to be more effective and efficient in the oversight and
monitoring of this program, reduce improper payments, protect
tenants and ensure properties are well maintained. The
Committee believes that fair and open competition is the best
way to ensure that the taxpayer receives the greatest benefit
for the costs incurred. The Committee directs the Department to
solicit and award PBCA contracts under full and open
competition without geographic limitation in accordance with
the Competition in Contracting Act and the Federal Acquisition
Regulations. The Committee is concerned that proposals to
reduce the scope of work performed by PBCAs, diminish the
applicability of Federal law, or consolidate PBCAs into
regional awards versus State-by-State will have a detrimental
effect on the oversight of these HUD-assisted properties and
the individuals and families that rely on this critical source
of affordable housing.
Oversight of Property Owners.--The Committee places a
priority on providing access to safe, sanitary, and affordable
housing to those most in need. If owners fail to maintain their
properties in accordance with HUD standards, they should be
held accountable. The Committee is deeply troubled by recent
reports of properties across the country experiencing a level
of physical deficiencies so severe as to be indicative of
systemic failures within the Department's oversight and
inspection processes. Neither residents nor taxpayers are well
served when poor conditions are allowed to continue. It is
inexcusable that residents are ever placed into substandard
housing with serious violations, but it is doubly offensive
when the taxpayers are subsidizing these unfit units. While
there is a tension between holding property owners responsible
and ensuring tenants do not lose their housing, HUD has tools
at its disposal to hold owners accountable without putting
tenants at risk.
To ensure continued attention to this issue, the Committee
recommendation strengthens a general provision that requires
HUD to take specific steps to ensure that physical deficiencies
in properties are quickly addressed, and requires the Secretary
to take explicit actions if the owner fails to maintain them.
These actions include imposing civil money penalties, working
to secure a different owner for the property, or transferring
the Section 8 contract to another the property. The Committee
wants to preserve critical project-based Section 8 contracts,
and believes this goal can be achieved while holding property
owners accountable for their actions.
The Committee expects HUD to continue to move quickly to
identify problem properties and owners and find an appropriate
remedy. The Committee directs HUD to provide quarterly reports
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on
projects that receive multiple exigent health and safety
violations, physical inspection scores below 60, or have
received an unsatisfactory management and occupancy review
within the past 36 months. Such reports shall also include
information on when the next inspection of the property will
occur, and the Department's plans for resolution of the
deficiencies. HUD shall also identify the actions taken to
address safety concerns, including the frequency with which
civil money penalties are imposed, contracts are transferred to
another property, or ownership is transferred. The Committee
expects that with increased enforcement, and improved
inspection protocols, the number of troubled properties will be
reduced.

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $432,700,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 505,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 505,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds housing for the elderly under section
202 of the Housing Act of 1959. Under this program, the
Department provides capital grants to eligible entities for the
acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction of housing for
seniors, and provides project-based rental assistance contracts
[PRAC] to support operational costs for such units. Tenants
living in section 202 supportive housing units can access a
variety of community-based services to keep living
independently in the community and age in place.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The section 202 program provides nearly 400,000 federally
assisted, privately owned affordable housing units for the
elderly. The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$505,000,000 for the section 202 program. This level is
$72,300,000 more than the level provided in fiscal year 2016
and equal to the budget request. The Committee recommendation
includes $427,000,000 in new appropriations in addition to
carryover balances and residual receipts to fully fund all
annual project-rental assistance contract renewals and
amendments, and $75,000,000 for service coordinators and the
continuation of existing congregate service grants.

HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $150,600,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 154,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 154,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides funding for housing for the persons
with disabilities under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzales
National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. Traditionally, the
section 811 program provided capital grants to eligible
entities for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction
of housing for persons with disabilities, as well as rental
assistance to support operational costs. Since fiscal year
2012, HUD has transitioned to expanding capacity by providing
project rental assistance to State housing financing agencies
or other appropriate entities that act in partnership with
State health and human service agencies to provide supportive
services as authorized by the Frank Melville Supportive Housing
Investment Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-374).

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $154,000,000
for the section 811 program. This level is equal to the budget
request and is $3,400,000 more than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. This level of funding, in addition to residual
receipts, recaptures, and other unobligated balances, supports
all PRAC renewals and amendments. Should the total available
resources exceed the need for renewals, the Secretary shall
direct such resources to a new competition for project rental
assistance to State housing finance agencies.

HOUSING COUNSELING ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $47,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 47,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 47,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Housing Counseling Assistance Program provides
comprehensive housing counseling services to eligible
homeowners and tenants through grants to nonprofit
intermediaries, State government entities, and other local and
national agencies. Eligible counseling activities include pre-
and post-purchase education, personal financial management,
reverse mortgage product education, foreclosure prevention,
mitigation, and rental counseling.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $47,000,000
for the Housing Counseling Assistance program, which is equal
to the budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
These funds will help to provide individuals and families
across the country with sound advice to make better informed
housing decisions. Specifically, it will support competitive
counseling grants and training activities. Housing counseling
organizations provide a wide variety of counseling services,
including those to assist with preventing foreclosure and
homelessness. In addition, the administrative contract support
funding includes resources for financial audits and technical
assistance.
The Committee continues language requiring HUD to obligate
counseling grants within 180 days of enactment of this act, as
well as permitting HUD to publish multiyear NOFAs, contingent
on annual appropriations. This should result in administrative
savings for HUD and its grantees.

RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides amendment funding for housing
assisted under a variety of HUD housing programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,000,000
for HUD-assisted, State-aided, noninsured rental housing
projects, consistent with the budget request. This amount is
$10,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The
Committee recommendation includes a provision to allow the
conversion of these projects to Section 8, at no additional
cost. The Committee hopes that the conversion of these
projects, through the Rental Assistance Demonstration, will
lead to the eventual elimination of these outdated programs.

PAYMENT TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $10,500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 11,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,500,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $10,500,000 to support the
manufactured housing standards programs, of which the full
amount of $10,500,000 is expected to be derived from fees
collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust
Fund account. No direct appropriation is provided. The total
amount recommended is $1,000,000 less than the budget request
and equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee continues language allowing the Department to
collect fees from program participants for the dispute
resolution and installment programs mandated by the
Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000. These fees are to
be deposited into the Trust Fund and may be used to support the
manufactured housing standards programs, subject to the overall
cap placed on the account. The Committee expects the Department
to move forward with this authority.
The Committee has not provided additional funding for this
program, as an increase in funding would not reflect or
correspond with this decline in production.

Federal Housing Administration

MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on Limitation on Administrative
direct loans guaranteed loans contract expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016................................... $5,000,000 $400,000,000,000 $130,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017.................................. 5,000,000 400,000,000,000 160,000,000
Committee recommendation............................... 5,000,000 400,000,000,000 130,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on Limitation on
direct loans guaranteed loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016................ $5,000,000 $30,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017............... 5,000,000 30,000,000,000
Committee recommendation............ 5,000,000 30,000,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Housing Administration [FHA] fund covers the
mortgage and loan insurance activity of HUD mortgage/loan
insurance programs. These include the mutual mortgage insurance
[MMI] fund, cooperative management housing insurance [CMHI]
fund, general insurance [GI] fund, and the special risk
insurance [SRI] fund. For presentation and accounting control
purposes, these are divided into two sets of accounts based on
shared characteristics. The unsubsidized insurance programs of
the mutual mortgage insurance fund and the cooperative
management housing insurance fund constitute one set; and the
general risk insurance and special risk insurance funds make up
the other.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee has included the following amounts for the
Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program account: a limitation on
guaranteed loans of $400,000,000,000, a limitation on direct
loans of $5,000,000, and $130,000,000 for administrative
contract expenses.
For the GI/SRI account, the Committee recommends
$30,000,000,000 as a limitation on guaranteed loans and a
limitation on direct loans of $5,000,000.
The Committee includes a general provision in the bill
lifting the cap on the number of HECM loans that can be insured
during fiscal year 2017, consistent with prior years.
The Committee is aware of concerns that deficiencies in
establishing conveyable conditions for FHA insured foreclosed
properties are inhibiting the ability to provide proper
maintenance for these properties. To alleviate these concerns,
the Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to
examine the operating effectiveness and efficiency of the
Federal Housing Administration in reaching determinations of
conveyable conditions on foreclosed properties and report its
findings to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
no later than September 29, 2017.
The FHA is responsible for facilitating mortgages for
individuals and families for whom home ownership may not be
possible using private sector financing without FHA backing.
Typically, these groups include those who do not have the
resources to make a down payment in the amount required by
private financers and those with less sound credit history. In
order to review if FHA is still primarily serving credit-worthy
yet lower income individuals, the Committee directs the
Department to report within 180 days to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations on the number of loans that FHA
insured in the past two years, including the value of the home,
the income-level of the recipient, the location of the home,
and the average home price at the time in the area of the
country.
The Committee does not include authority for HUD to charge
a fee to provide additional funds for FHA's administrative
costs as requested in the budget request. However, the
Committee supports the goal of improving FHA's system
automation, risk management and quality control efforts and has
included resources within the Department's information
technology funds for this purpose.

Government National Mortgage Association

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on
personnel,
Limitation on compensation and
guaranteed loans administrative
expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016.............. $500,000,000,000 $23,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017............. 500,000,000,000 23,000,000
Committee recommendation.......... 500,000,000,000 23,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Government National Mortgage Association [Ginnie Mae],
through the mortgage-backed securities program, guarantees
privately issued securities backed by pools of Government-
guaranteed mortgages. Ginnie Mae is a wholly owned corporate
instrumentality of the United States within the Department. Its
powers are prescribed generally by title III of the National
Housing Act, as amended. Ginnie Mae is authorized by section
306(g) of the act to guarantee the timely payment of principal
and interest on securities that are based on and backed by a
trust, or pool, composed of mortgages that are guaranteed and
insured by the FHA, the Rural Housing Service, or the
Department of Veterans Affairs. Ginnie Mae's guarantee of
mortgage-backed securities is backed by the full faith and
credit of the United States. This account also funds all
salaries and benefits funding to support Ginnie Mae.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on new commitments on
mortgage-backed securities of $500,000,000,000. This level is
the same as the budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The bill allows Ginnie Mae to use $23,000,000 for
salaries and expenses. This is equal to the fiscal year 2016
enacted level and the budget request. The Committee directs the
Department to report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations within 120 days of enactment of this act on the
retention rates for staff in mission critical positions within
GNMA. This report should identify those positions, industry
average retention rates where possible, and, if the report
determines retention in mission critical positions is adversely
affecting the ability of GNMA to carry out its oversight role,
possible solutions to boost retention including but not limited
to pay bands.

Policy Development and Research

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $85,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017\1\................................ 185,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 90,000,000

\1\Includes $120,000,000 by transfer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $90,000,000
for research, technology, and community development activities
in fiscal year 2017. This level is $5,000,000 more than the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level and $95,000,000 less than the
budget request.
The Committee recommendation will continue to support
market surveys, such as the American Housing Survey, that are
integral to HUD's ability to understand its own programs and
also help enhance public and private entities' knowledge of
housing conditions in the United States. The Committee strongly
encourages the Department to continue funding local rent
surveys of areas affected by changing economic conditions and
natural disasters.
Fair Market Rents [FMRs] are used across HUD rental
assistance programs. However, in certain counties the current
methodology does not accurately reflect the current housing
market, and additional local area surveys are necessary. The
Committee further notes that proposals such as Small Area Fair
Market Rents do not fully address the undervaluing of Fair
Market Rents in many areas where rents have risen quickly. The
Committee recommends that HUD designate funding for additional
local surveys for communities where the data used by HUD does
not accurately reflect the market. The Committee encourages the
Department, to the extent practicable, to work with communities
to use local rent survey data made available in the preceding
year to inform the calculation of Fair Market Rents. The
Committee strongly encourages HUD to expedite the process for
consideration of FMRs and exception payment standards that are
requested from PHAs.
Of the activities proposed in the budget, the Committee
recommends $41,500,000 for market surveys, $5,700,000 for
research support and dissemination, $600,000 for data
acquisition, $1,000,000 for housing finance studies, $1,000,000
for research partnerships, $200,000 for housing technology. In
addition, the Committee includes up to $40,000,000 for
Department-wide technical assistance and critical research
beyond the core studies. Of this amount, at least $25,000,000
is for technical assistance [TA] across HUD programs.
The Committee encourages the Department to consider
providing technical assistance to distressed cities and
communities through a network of non-profit or private sector
organizations that have a proven track record of providing
assistance to multiple cities across various disciplines
including economic development, workforce development, fiscal
efficiency, and promoting best practices and inter-city
assistance.
Of the amount provided for critical research beyond the
core studies, the recommendation includes: $3,000,000 for
evaluation of the expansion of the Moving-to-Work
demonstration; $1,350,000 for phase 3 of a pre-purchase
counseling demonstration; $6,000,000 for continued evaluation
of rent reform; $200,000 for multidisciplinary research teams;
$300,000 for an expanded analysis of the family options study;
and $3,000,000 for an evaluation of the housing choice voucher
mobility demonstration. While the Committee recommendation
includes funding for phase 3 of the pre-purchase counseling
demonstration, the Committee will not fund future additions and
directs the Department to seek alternative sources of funding
for this demonstration should it wish to pursue additional
research beyond fiscal year 2017. HUD shall include details on
its allocation of these resources in its operating plan.

Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $65,300,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 70,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 65,300,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The fair housing activities appropriation includes funding
for both the Fair Housing Assistance Program [FHAP] and the
Fair Housing Initiatives Program [FHIP].
The Fair Housing Assistance Program helps State and local
agencies to implement title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of
1968, as amended, which prohibits discrimination in the sale,
rental, and financing of housing and in the provision of
brokerage services. The major objective of the program is to
assure prompt and effective processing of title VIII complaints
with appropriate remedies for complaints by State and local
fair housing agencies.
The Fair Housing Initiatives Program is authorized by
section 561 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1987, as amended, and by section 905 of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1992. This initiative is designed
to alleviate housing discrimination by increasing support to
public and private organizations for the purpose of eliminating
or preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair
housing opportunities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $65,300,000
for the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity [OFHEO].
This amount is $4,700,000 less than the budget request and
equal to the 2016 enacted level. Of the amounts provided,
$23,500,000 is for FHAP, $39,900,000 is for FHIP, and $300,000
is for the creation, promotion, and dissemination of translated
materials that support the assistance of persons with limited
English proficiency. The Committee also provides $1,600,000 for
the National Fair Housing Training Academy, and encourages the
Department to pursue ways to make the Academy self-sustaining.
The Committee is disappointed in the lack of detail in the
fiscal year 2017 congressional budget justification in
comparison to previous years and directs the Department to
provide specific details on any new initiatives in future
justifications.
Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing Act.--The
Committee is aware that HUD is in the process of updating the
1999 Joint Statement on Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the
Fair Housing Act. The Committee stresses the importance of HUD
coordinating with the Department of Justice to complete this
process in a timely manner. The Committee recognizes the
importance of clarifying the role of State or local government
in defining zoning ordinances, licensing and registration
requirements regarding group homes.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing [AFFH].--In 2016, HUD
will require 22 CDBG grantees to submit the first fair housing
assessments under the new AFFH rule. In fiscal year 2016,
Congress expressed its support for implementation of AFFH by
providing HUD with increased funding to hire additional staff
and to provide technical assistance to grantees for compliance
and implementation efforts associated with this rule. The
Committee is concerned that communities conducting the
assessment receive no certification from HUD that they have
effectively assessed or met their fair housing obligations
under the Fair Housing Act. HUD is directed to consider
modifying its AFFH process to provide written approval of
grantees' assessments of fair housing, while ensuring there is
no substantial delay in approving consolidated plans. HUD is
developing modified tools and templates for PHAs and
communities that choose to provide regional analysis and the
Committee encourages the Department to further develop
streamlined tools for small entitlement CDBG grantees.
Disparate Impact.--The Supreme Court recently upheld the
doctrine of disparate impact in Texas Department of Housing and
Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc.,
which serves as the basis of HUD's ``Implementation of the Fair
Housing Act's Discriminatory Effects Standard'' rulemaking. A
U.S. District Court has also ruled that HUD failed to
adequately consider insurance industry concerns in its rule and
remanded the rule to HUD for further consideration. The
Committee expects HUD to take action expeditiously in response
to the Court's remand.

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $110,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 110,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 135,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1992 established the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Reduction Act, under which HUD is authorized to make grants to
States, localities, and Native American tribes to conduct lead-
based paint hazard reduction and abatement activities in
private, low-income housing. Lead poisoning is a significant
environmental health hazard, particularly for young children
and pregnant women, and can result in neurological damage,
learning disabilities, and impaired growth. The Healthy Homes
Initiative, authorized under sections 501 and 502 of the
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1
and 1701z-2), provides grants to remediate housing hazards that
have been scientifically shown to negatively impact occupant
health and safety.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $135,000,000
for lead-based paint hazard reduction and abatement activities
for fiscal year 2017. Of the amount provided, $20,000,000 is
for the Healthy Homes Initiative and $55,000,000 is for the
Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Program. This amount is
$25,000,000 more than the President's budget request and the
fiscal year 2016 enacted level. This increased funding level
will support lead-based paint hazard reductions in over 1,750
additional units, providing safer homes for over 6,200 low and
very-low income families or individuals with children under the
age of 6.
Blood Lead Level Rule.--In fiscal year 2014, the Committee
expressed concern regarding the exposure of children to lead-
based paint hazards and noted that a heightened standard for
blood lead levels had recently been adopted by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] in 2012. As a result of
this new standard, the CDC now estimates that 535,000 American
children under 6 years of age are affected by lead poisoning.
Exposure to lead can have severe, lasting consequences for
children under the age of 6 due their ongoing neurological
development. The resulting harms can include reduced IQ,
behavioral problems, and learning disabilities. HUD's blood
lead level standard, however, has not been updated since 1999,
allowing for children's blood lead levels to be three to four
times higher than the CDC standard before requiring an
environmental intervention. The Committee is extremely
concerned that children are living in conditions in assisted
housing that have been scientifically-proven to result in
lifelong neurological damage. The Committee directs HUD to
finalize regulatory action to update its standard for requiring
an environmental intervention and adopt the blood lead levels
currently advised by the CDC within 90 days after the enactment
of this act.
HUD estimates that this regulatory action will require an
additional 6,100 environmental interventions in public and HUD-
assisted housing units. This change could place additional cost
burdens on public housing agencies, which are already unable to
meet their deferred capital needs and do not have their
administrative funding needs met either. The Committee has
provided an additional $25,000,000 in the Public Housing
Capital Fund account to allow PHAs to meet this new regulatory
requirement.
Grantee Coordination.--Funds received by States and local
governments under the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration and
the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control grant programs may be
utilized to evaluate and address lead-based paint hazards in
Section 8 voucher units. The Office of Lead Hazard Control and
Healthy Homes currently gives preference to grantees that work
with public housing agencies to address lead-based paint
hazards in Section 8 voucher units. The Committee commends HUD
for emphasizing the need to address lead-based paint hazards in
Section 8 voucher units when awarding these grants and urges
HUD to continue to address these needs in HUD-assisted housing
stock in the private market.
Oversight and Enforcement of Lead-Based Paint
Regulations.--The Committee is concerned that HUD lacks an
appropriate level of oversight and enforcement of its lead-
based paint regulations. Respective program offices within HUD
are responsible for ensuring that grantees are in compliance
with lead-based paint regulations, while the Office of Lead
Hazard Control and Healthy Homes enforces lead-based paint
regulations and provides technical assistance to HUD offices
and grantees. The Committee directs GAO to review HUD's
policies, procedures, and processes for oversight to ensure
that public housing agencies comply with lead-based paint
regulations within 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this act. The report shall: (1) analyze existing Federal
programs for addressing lead-based paint hazards in dwellings
receiving Federal housing assistance; (2) determine whether
gaps exist in compliance and enforcement of HUD's lead-based
paint regulations; (3) identify existing partnerships with
public housing agencies (including State housing finance
agencies) and public health agencies in addressing lead-based
paint hazards and determine whether those partnerships can be
replicated and enhanced with better data collection, analysis,
and dissemination among stakeholders; and (4) examine the
appropriateness and efficacy of existing HUD protocols on
reducing or abating lead-based paint hazards and whether they
are aligned with accepted environmental health practices to
ensure the best and appropriate health outcomes and reduce
further exposure.

Information Technology Fund

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $250,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 286,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 273,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Information Technology Fund finances the information
technology [IT] systems that support departmental programs and
operations, including FHA Mortgage Insurance, housing
assistance and grant programs, as well as core financial and
general operations.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $273,000,000
for the Information Technology Fund for fiscal year 2017, which
is $13,000,000 less than the budget request and $23,000,000
more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee has been very supportive of HUD's efforts to
modernize its IT systems, which are critical to effectively
manage its programs. For years, HUD has been hampered by
outdated IT systems that are not integrated, which limit its
ability to oversee grantees. In addition, HUD's efforts to work
around system limitations to collect information for oversight
purposes often results in increased work for grantees who have
to input information into multiple systems. The Committee
recognizes HUD's effort to better integrate systems, but there
is still more work to be done, and IT system integration should
remain a top priority for the Department.
Next Generation Management System [NGMS].--The Committee
recommendation includes $10,000,000 for development,
modernization, and enhancement activities to deploy a
replacement for the Voucher Management System and the Public
Housing Information Center systems. The public housing and
housing choice voucher programs serve more than 3 million
households and accounts for more than $24,000,000,000 in annual
expenditures. NGMS is part of a systematic approach to improve
existing business processes in the areas of program and
financial management, and budget execution for PIH's housing
choice voucher and public housing programs. The system
enhancements that result from the initiative will be more
robust, comprehensive, secure, and reliable. Although the tools
can be effective, they are limited in their ability to be
enterprise IT solutions. This initiative will automate business
processes to improve the way HUD collects, analyzes and uses
information and will: reduce PHA reporting burdens; provide
improved support for PHA cash disbursements based on payee-
level data; establish greater transparency to external
stakeholders, including the OIG; and will end PIH's reliance on
an annual $1,300,000 contract with a third-party vendor to
process more than 7,000 applications, with continual cost
increases. The Department is directed to submit a spend plan
for approval for these funds to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations prior to obligating more than 10 percent of
these funds.
Federal Housing Administration [FHA] Modernization.--The
Committee recommendation includes $13,000,000 for development,
modernization, and enhancement activities of the IT systems of
the FHA. The IT systems currently supporting critical FHA
business processes consist of complex, aging IT systems with
COBOL-based mainframe applications. These legacy systems were
assembled as business needs surfaced over the last 30 years,
without the benefit of an architectural plan that could provide
the adaptability needed to meet regulatory and industry
standards over time. Today, FHA operations require data to move
between numerous touch points through hundreds of interfaces,
resulting in an environment that has become increasingly
complex, costly, and difficult to maintain. The Committee
recommendation supports the continued planning, design, and
execution for requirements focused on Counterparty Management,
Portfolio Analysis, Borrower/Collateral Risk Management/Fraud
Monitoring and Infrastructure/Application Modernization. This
investment will replace obsolete applications, reduce
infrastructure costs, reduce fragmentation of legacy systems,
and leverage shared data components in support of multiple
housing programs. The Department is directed to submit a spend
plan for approval for these funds to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations prior to obligating more than 10
percent of these funds.
Information Technology Consolidation and Streamlining.--The
Committee recognizes that development of more sophisticated IT
systems may come with higher costs associated with the
additional capabilities. At the same time, HUD must also
achieve savings by eliminating legacy systems and old servers.
The Committee continues to direct HUD to be more diligent in
identifying and achieving savings by retiring old systems and
shutting off redundant and inefficient servers. In addition,
the Committee urges HUD to continue to look for savings when it
renews contracts to reduce the ongoing costs of operating and
maintaining its IT systems. The Committee notes that the
Department has yet to submit plans articulating how the
Department is implementing GAO's IT-related recommendations,
and identifying savings it will achieve by retiring legacy
systems and shutting off old servers. The Committee directs the
Chief Operating Officer and the Chief Information Officer to
ensure reports are submitted in a timely manner and include all
required information.
Unsanctioned Information Technology Development.--The
Committee remains concerned about the development of IT systems
outside of the Information Technology Fund. While the Committee
understands that limited resources may prompt HUD offices to
develop solutions with their own resources, the Committee
expects that, at a minimum, OCIO will monitor and oversee the
development of any such solutions. The Committee directs the
OCIO to monitor the development of new system solutions by
every office in HUD to make sure they conform to HUD's
enterprise architecture, and will be compatible with systems
under development.
GAO Oversight.--Based on reports and briefings from GAO
over the past few years, the Committee recognizes the progress
HUD has made in its IT modernization planning efforts, and the
focus must now be on its implementation and execution of plans
and projects. The Committee emphasizes the importance of
pursuing a strategic approach as HUD continues to improve its
IT management. To this end, in order to monitor the
Department's progress, the Committee instructed GAO in 2012 to
conduct several reviews. In 2013, GAO completed a review of the
Department's IT project management practices. The Committee
reaffirms its direction to GAO to also evaluate HUD's
institutionalization of governance and cost estimating
practices. In particular, the Committee remains interested in
any cost savings or operational efficiencies that have resulted
(or may result) from the Department's improvement efforts. The
Committee appreciates the work that GAO has done in this area
and believes it has benefited the Committee and the Department.
The Committee encourages HUD to take advantage of GAO expertise
as it makes further improvements to its IT structure and
governance.

Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $126,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 129,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 129,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation will finance all salaries and related
expenses associated with the operation of the Office of
Inspector General [OIG].

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $129,000,000
for the Office of Inspector General. The amount of funding is
equal to the budget request and $3,000,000 above the fiscal
year 2016 enacted level. The Committee directs the Inspector
General to report to the House and Senate Committees within 120
days of enactment of this act on the management and oversight,
including related information technology systems, of the
Section 184 Loan Guarantee program.
Audit Reports.--The Committee requests that the Inspector
General forward copies of all audit reports to the Committee
immediately after they are issued, and to continue to make the
Committee aware immediately of any review which recommends
significant budgetary savings.
First-in First-out Methods.--The Committee is aware that
the Inspector General has been working with the Department to
resolve concerns with the use of cumulative and first-in first-
out [FIFO] methods to disburse and commit HOME funds in the
Integrated Disbursement and Information System. The Committee
is concerned that similar issues may be present in other
programs. To address these concerns, the Committee directs the
Inspector General to submit a report on which other, if any,
programs administered by the Department use similar methods for
the commitment, obligation and disbursement of funds to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of
enactment of this act.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommends administrative provisions. A brief
description follows.
Sec. 201. This section promotes the refinancing of certain
housing bonds.
Sec. 202. This section clarifies a limitation on the use of
funds under the Fair Housing Act.
Sec. 203. This section clarifies the allocation of HOPWA
funding for fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
Sec. 204. This section requires HUD to award funds on a
competitive basis unless otherwise provided.
Sec. 205. This section allows funds to be used to reimburse
GSEs and other Federal entities for various administrative
expenses.
Sec. 206. This section limits HUD's spending to amounts set
out in the budget justification.
Sec. 207. This section clarifies expenditure authority for
entities subject to the Government Corporation Control Act.
Sec. 208. This section requires quarterly reports on all
uncommitted, unobligated and excess funds associated with HUD
programs.
Sec. 209. This section requires that the administration's
budget and the Department's budget justifications for fiscal
year 2018 be submitted in the identical account and sub-account
structure provided in this Act.
Sec. 210. This section exempts Los Angeles County, Alaska,
Iowa, and Mississippi from the requirement of having a PHA
resident on the board of directors for fiscal year 2017.
Instead, the public housing agencies in these States are
required to establish advisory boards that include public
housing tenants and section 8 recipients.
Sec. 211. This section exempts GNMA from certain
requirements of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990.
Sec. 212. This section allows HUD to authorize the transfer
of existing project-based subsidies and liabilities from
obsolete housing to housing that better meets the needs of the
assisted tenants.
Sec. 213. This section reforms certain section 8 rent
calculations as related to athletic scholarships.
Sec. 214. This section provides allocation requirements for
Native Alaskans under the Indian Housing Block Grant program.
Sec. 215. This section eliminates a cap on Home Equity
Conversion Mortgages for fiscal year 2017.
Sec. 216. This section requires HUD to maintain section 8
assistance on HUD-held or owned multifamily housing.
Sec. 217. This section clarifies the use of the section 108
loan guaranteed program for nonentitlement communities.
Sec. 218. This section allows PHAs with less than 400 units
to be exempt from management requirements in the operating fund
rule.
Sec. 219. This section restricts the Secretary from
imposing any requirement or guideline relating to asset
management that restricts or limits the use of capital funds
for central office costs, up to the limit established in QWHRA.
Sec. 220. This section requires that no employee of the
Department shall be designated as an allotment holder unless
the CFO determines that such employee has received certain
training.
Sec. 221. The section requires the Secretary to publish all
notices of funding availability that are competitively awarded
on the Internet.
Sec. 222. This section limits attorney fees and requires
the Department to submit a spend plan to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations.
Sec. 223. This section allows the Secretary to transfer up
to 10 percent of funds or $4,000,000, whichever is less,
appropriated under the headings ``Administrative Support
Offices'' or ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'' to any
other office funded under such headings.
Sec. 224. This section allows the Disaster Housing
Assistance Programs to be considered HUD programs for the
purpose of income verification and matching.
Sec. 225. This section requires HUD to take certain actions
against owners receiving rental subsidies that do not maintain
safe properties.
Sec. 226. This section places limits on PHA compensation.
Sec. 227. This section extends the HOPE VI program until
September 30, 2017.
Sec. 228. This section requires the Secretary to provide
the Committee with advance notification before discretionary
awards are made.
Sec. 229. This section prohibits funds to be used to
require or enforce the Physical Needs Assessment.
Sec. 230. This section prohibits funds being used to
implement the Homeowners Armed With Knowledge program.
Sec. 231. This section prohibits funds for HUD financing of
mortgages for properties that have been subject to eminent
domain.
Sec. 232. This section prohibits funds from being used to
terminate the status of a unit of local government as a
metropolitan city, as defined under section 102 of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, with respect to grants
under section 106 of such act.
Sec. 233. This section allows funding for research,
evaluation, and statistical purposes that is unexpended at the
time of completion of the contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement to be reobligated for additional research.
Sec. 234. This section prohibits funds to be used for
financial awards for employees subject to administrative
discipline.
Sec. 235. This section authorizes the Secretary on a
limited basis to use funds available under the ``Homeless
Assistance Grants'' heading to participate in the multiagency
Performance Partnership Pilots program.
Sec. 236. This section allows program income to be used as
an eligible match for 2015, 2016 and 2017 Continuum of Care
funds.
Sec. 237. This section permits HUD to consolidate funds
used to manage disaster recovery grants.
Sec. 238. This section modifies the Lead-Based Paint
Poisoning Prevention Act to remove the ``zero-bedroom
dwellings'' exclusion and amends the Residential Lead-Based
Paint Reduction Act to include ``zero bedroom dwellings.''
Sec. 239. This section allows PHAs to establish replacement
reserves to address capital needs.
Sec. 240. This section makes changes to the family
unification program.
Sec. 241. This section incentivizes measures to reduce
energy and water consumption in public housing.
Sec. 242. This section repeals section 211 of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act,
2008.
Sec. 243. This section allows HUD to provide mobility
counseling to housing choice voucher participants.
Sec. 244. This section modifies the Rental Assistance
Demonstration included in Public Law 112-55.
Sec. 245. This section permits HUD to implement section
78001 of title LXXVIII of Public Law 114-94 through notice
while undertaking the rulemaking process.
Sec. 246. This section permits HUD to renew a grant
originally awarded as part of Public Law 110-252.
Sec. 247. This section permits HUD to provide 1 year
transition grants under the continuum of care program.

TITLE III

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Access Board

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $8,023,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 8,190,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,190,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Access Board (formerly known as the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board) was established by
section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The Access Board
is responsible for developing guidelines under the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the Architectural Barriers Act, and the
Telecommunications Act. These guidelines ensure that buildings
and facilities, transportation vehicles, and telecommunications
equipment covered by these laws are readily accessible to and
usable by people with disabilities. The Board is also
responsible for developing standards under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act for accessible electronic and information
technology used by Federal agencies, and for medical diagnostic
equipment under section 510 of the Rehabilitation Act. The
Access Board also enforces the Architectural Barriers Act,
ensuring accessibility to a wide range of Federal agencies,
including national parks, post offices, social security
offices, and prisons. In addition, the Board provides training
and technical assistance on the guidelines and standards it
develops to Government agencies, public and private
organizations, individuals and businesses on the removal of
accessibility barriers.
In 2002, the Access Board was given additional
responsibilities under the Help America Vote Act. The Board
serves on the Board of Advisors and the Technical Guidelines
Development Committee, which helps the Election Assistance
Commission develop voluntary guidelines and guidance for voting
systems, including accessibility for people with disabilities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $8,190,000 for the operations of
the Access Board. This level of funding is $167,000 more than
the 2016 enacted level and equal to the President's fiscal year
2017 request.

Federal Maritime Commission

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $25,660,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 27,490,000
Committee recommendation................................ 27,490,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Maritime Commission [FMC] is an independent
regulatory agency which administers the Shipping Act of 1984
(Public Law 98-237), as amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform
Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-258); section 19 of the Merchant
Marine Act of 1920 (41 Stat. 998); the Foreign Shipping
Practices Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-418); and Public Law 89-
777.
FMC's mission is to foster a fair, efficient, and reliable
international ocean transportation system and to protect the
public from unfair and deceptive practices. To accomplish this
mission, FMC regulates the international waterborne commerce of
the United States. In addition, FMC has responsibility for
licensing and bonding ocean transportation intermediaries and
assuring that vessel owners or operators establish financial
responsibility to pay judgments for death or injury to
passengers, or nonperformance of a cruise, on voyages from U.S.
ports.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $27,490,000 for the salaries and
expenses of the FMC for fiscal year 2017. This amount is equal
to the President's fiscal year 2017 budget request and
$1,830,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level.
The Committee commends FMC's efforts to promote access to
foreign markets for American exports, and efficient supply
chains for the importation of goods for domestic production and
consumption. These pursuits support economic growth and job
creation. The Committee also supports FMC's continued efforts
to protect consumers from potentially unlawful, unfair, or
deceptive ocean transportation practices related to the
movement of household goods or personal property in
international oceanborne trade.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $24,499,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 23,274,000
Committee recommendation................................ 23,274,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Inspector General for Amtrak was created by
the Inspector General Act Amendment of 1988. The act recognized
Amtrak as a ``designated Federal entity'' and required the
railroad to establish an independent and objective unit to
conduct and supervise audits and investigations relating to the
programs and operations of Amtrak; recommend policies designed
to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Amtrak,
and prevent and detect fraud and abuse; and to provide a means
for keeping the Amtrak leadership and the Congress fully
informed about problems in Amtrak operations and the
corporation's progress in making corrective action.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $23,274,000 for the Amtrak Office
of Inspector General [OIG]. This funding level is equal to the
budget request and $1,225,000 less than the fiscal year 2016
enacted level. The Committee retains language that requires the
Amtrak OIG to submit a budget request in similar format and
substance to those submitted by other executive agencies in the
Federal Government.

National Transportation Safety Board

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $105,170,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 106,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 106,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Initially established along with the Department of
Transportation, the National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB]
commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent
Federal agency. The Board is charged by Congress with
investigating every civil aviation accident in the United
States as well as significant accidents in the other modes of
transportation--railroad, highway, marine, and pipeline--and
issuing safety recommendations aimed at preventing future
accidents. Although it has always operated independently, NTSB
relied on DOT for funding and administrative support until the
Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-633)
severed all ties between the two organizations starting in
1975.
In addition to its investigatory duties, NTSB is
responsible for maintaining the Government's database of civil
aviation accidents and also conducts special studies of
transportation safety issues of national significance.
Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international
treaties, NTSB supplies investigators to serve as U.S.
accredited representatives for aviation accidents overseas
involving U.S.-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or
major components of U.S. manufacture. NTSB also serves as the
``court of appeals'' for any airman, mechanic, or mariner
whenever certificate action is taken by the Federal Aviation
Administration or the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant, or when
civil penalties are assessed by FAA.
Alaska Aircrash Investigators.--In September 2015, the
National Transportation Safety Board entered into an agreement
with Lucky 8 Television, LLC under which the NTSB agreed to
assist in the production of a ``documentary style'' reality
show which shadows NTSB investigators conducting accident and
incident investigations in Alaska. The producers were granted
unparalleled access to current and ongoing investigations,
including access to information that had not been available to
the public or the families of victims. The resultant series, a
six episode production, entitled Alaska Aircrash Investigations
began airing on the Smithsonian Channel on March 13, 2016. The
television series has drawn criticism from aviation safety
professionals for its lack of balance; spotlighting aviation
tragedies using video simulations of aircraft striking
mountains without any treatment of the concerted efforts of
aviation safety professionals to prevent accidents and
incidents and mitigate risks. It has drawn criticism from the
families of victims, one of whom contends that the publicity
material released by the producers disclosed information which
had not yet been revealed to the family. It has drawn criticism
from Alaska air carriers who question why the NTSB agreed to
participate in a six episode reality show focused on a single
State when it could have insisted that the producers shadow
NTSB investigators across the country. Moreover, the NTSB
admits that the first episode of the program overstated the
aircraft accident rate in Alaska during the summer months by
100 percent. On March 8, 2016, a member of the Committee posed
a series of questions to the NTSB regarding the participation
of the project and whether there was a use of appropriated
funds to support the project. The NTSB has failed to respond to
this inquiry. The Committee, therefore, directs the NTSB to
respond to these questions expeditiously. The Committee does
not question the important and valuable investigative work that
the NTSB performs but questions whether its participation in
reality shows, even those which are purported to be in the
``documentary style'' advances its mission to advance
transportation safety and protect the interests of the families
of accident victims. Moreover, the Committee is concerned that
the NTSB agreed to participate in a six episode reality show
focused on the NTSB's work in a single state to the exclusion
of all others; a decision which could convey a false impression
to viewers that air transportation in that State is inherently
dangerous.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $106,000,000 for the National
Transportation Safety Board, which is equal to the budget
request and $830,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. The Committee has also continued to include language
that allows NTSB to make payments on its lease for the NTSB
training facility with funding provided in the bill.

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $175,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 140,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 135,000,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by
the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the
Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, Public
Law 95-557, October 31, 1978). Neighborhood Reinvestment
Corporation now operates under the trade name, ``NeighborWorks
America.'' NeighborWorks America helps local communities
establish efficient and effective partnerships between
residents and representatives of the public and private
sectors. These partnership-based organizations are independent,
tax-exempt, nonprofit entities and are frequently known as
Neighborhood Housing Services or mutual housing associations.
Collectively, these organizations are known as the
NeighborWorks network. Nationally, 235 NeighborWorks
organizations serve nearly 3,000 urban, suburban, and rural
communities in 49 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto
Rico.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $135,000,000
for NeighborWorks for fiscal year 2017. This amount is
$5,000,000 below the budget request and $40,000,000 less than
the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee has included
funding solely to support NeighborWorks core programs, and
continues to support the set-aside of $5,000,000 for the
multifamily rental housing initiative, which has been
successful in developing innovative approaches to producing
mixed-income affordable housing throughout the Nation.
National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling Program
(NFMC).--The Committee has not included any funding for this
program. The Committee has been clear that NFMC, which was
initially provided ``one-time funding'' in fiscal year 2008,
was not intended to be a permanent program. National
foreclosure rates continue to lower and have now dropped below
2007 levels. By not providing additional funding for NFMC,
NeighborWorks will be able to utilize the $4,000,000 provided
in fiscal year 2015 to begin to wind-down and close out
operations.
Mortgage Rescue Scams.--Since 2009, NeighborWorks has been
working to raise awareness of mortgage rescue scams and help
vulnerable homeowners access legitimate forms of assistance.
This campaign targets at-risk communities and populations
through public service announcements, public media, and the
Internet. NeighborWorks is working with other partners, such as
the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission to stop
rescue scams. The Committee expects NeighborWorks to continue
working with its partners to address this important issue.
Rural Areas.--The Committee continues to support
NeighborWorks' efforts to build capacity in rural areas. The
Committee urges the Corporation to continue these efforts.

Surface Transportation Board

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crediting
Appropriation offsetting
collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016................ $32,375,000 $1,250,000
Budget estimate, 2017............... 42,401,000 1,250,000
Committee recommendation............ 37,000,000 1,250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Surface Transportation Board [STB] was created on
January 1, 1996, by the Interstate Commerce Commission
Termination Act of 1995 [ICCTA] (Public Law 104-88). The Board
is a five-member, bipartisan, decisionally independent
adjudicatory body and is responsible for the regulation of the
rail and pipeline industries and certain nonlicensing
regulations of motor carriers and water carriers.
STB's rail oversight activities include rate
reasonableness, car service and interchange, mergers, line
acquisitions, line constructions, and abandonments. STB's
jurisdiction also includes certain oversight of the intercity
bus industry, pipeline carriers, intercity passenger train
service, rate regulation involving noncontiguous domestic water
transportation, household goods carriers, and collectively
determined motor carrier rates.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$37,000,000. This funding level is $5,401,000 below the budget
request and $4,625,000 more than the fiscal year 2016 enacted
level. Included in the recommendation is $1,250,000 in fees,
which will offset the appropriated funding. The Committee
recommendation includes $2,046,000 to make long overdue
improvements to the agency's information technology system that
are necessary to inform the public of Board decisions and
activities that impact the movement of people and goods across
the country.
The STB Reauthorization Act of 2015, Public Law 114-110,
increased the number of Board Members from three to five, and
made the STB an independent agency separate from the Department
of Transportation. The recommendation provides funding to
support the salaries and expenses of the new Board Members and
their associated staff and to make accommodations in the STB
office space.
On-Time Performance and Preference.--The Committee is
concerned by the STB's notice of proposed rulemaking regarding
passenger rail on-time performance [OTP] and policy statement
regarding passenger rail preference over freight
transportation. Both of these proposals break from legislative
intent, as most passengers do not ride intercity trains from
endpoint to endpoint and Federal law and industry practice have
for decades given intercity passenger trains preference over
freight transportation in using a rail line, junction, or
crossing. The Committee urges the STB to measure OTP at all
intermediate stations along a route, and not solely endpoint
stations recognizing that some schedules may need adjustment to
reflect the all station performance metric.

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,530,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 3,600,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,600,000

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness is an
independent agency created by the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act of 1987 to coordinate and direct the multiple
efforts of Federal agencies and other designated groups. The
Council was authorized to review Federal programs that assist
homeless persons and to take necessary actions to reduce
duplication. The Council can recommend improvements in programs
and activities conducted by Federal, State, and local
government, as well as local volunteer organizations. The
Council consists of the heads of 19 Federal agencies, including
the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Health and
Human Services, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Commerce,
Defense, Education, Labor, and Transportation; and other
entities as deemed appropriate.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,600,000 for
the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness [USICH].
This amount is equal to the budget request and $70,000 more
than the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The bill includes
language to amend the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
and extend USICH's sunset date until October 1, 2018, in
addition to adjusting the Executive Director's salary from
level V to level IV.
USICH supports Federal collaboration and implementation of
the Federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness. The
Council's work on such issues as establishing common
definitions of homelessness across programs and consolidating
Federal data is helping to breakdown silos and increase Federal
collaboration. Its work was recognized by GAO in its February
2012 report on ways to reduce duplication, overlap, and
fragmentation in the Federal Government. The Committee is aware
that individuals who are homeless or in unstable housing
situations are often living with multiple chronic conditions.
The link between homelessness and long-term physical and
behavioral health conditions is well documented. The Committee
has recognized the cost-savings that can be achieved by using
evidence-based practices, and has been supportive of such
efforts, including through the HUD-VASH program and other
permanent supportive housing through HUD's homeless assistance
grants program. However, the Committee believes that more can
be done to emphasize evidence-based practices in serving other
populations. The Committee directs the USICH to continue to
work to improve coordination between HUD, HHS and other Federal
agencies, and to help communities use the Homeless Management
Information System and other data to target affordable housing
and homeless resources to high-need, high-cost families and
individuals. The Committee further encourages HUD to work with
HHS and other Federal agencies to identify homeless individuals
who have high utilization rates for emergency and other public
services, and share strategies for combining affordable housing
with health and social support services to improve both housing
and health outcomes for these individuals.
Performance Metrics and Cross-Agency Coordination.--USICH
leads the coordination of the Federal response to ending
homelessness among 19 Federal agencies, as well as State,
local, nonprofit and philanthropic organizations. However, the
Committee is concerned that other stakeholders do not fully
appreciate the value of the important work that agency has been
able to accomplish over time due to the Council's lack of clear
output and outcome based performance metrics. The Committee
directs the agency to undertake the development of measurable
performance goals and metrics that define how USICH
accomplishes its mission for inclusion in its fiscal year 2018
Congressional budget justification.
The Committee also directs USICH to develop performance
metrics to measure the progress that USICH and its partners
have made to address and end homelessness in the 2017
performance and accountability report, as well as provide an
update on efforts to improve cross-agency collaboration and
coordination on integrating child welfare systems with housing
and services provided through HUD and the Department of Health
and Human Services in response to youth homelessness; the
coordination between continuums of care and the Department of
Labor employment programs, the Department of Education and HUD,
and the Department of Agriculture with other Federal agencies.
The Committee believes these targeted, data-driven analyses
will better educate Congress and the public at-large on the
clear outcomes of USICH's work to promote cost-effective
policies, and evidence-based practices in urban and rural
communities alike. The Committee further directs the agency to
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
within 120 days of enactment of this act on the status of these
efforts.
Veterans Homelessness.--The Committee is concerned that
some servicemembers, upon being discharged, may not fully be
aware of their housing and supportive service options as
veterans, and as a result, are vulnerable to homelessness. The
Committee directs USICH to work with the Department of Defense
and the Department of Veterans Affairs to evaluate and report
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 120
days of enactment of this act on how the veteran transition
process can be improved to better ensure that a servicemember's
risk of homelessness upon being discharged is minimized to the
extent possible, if not eliminated.
Homeless Youth.--One of the goals of the Federal Strategic
Plan is to prevent and end homelessness among youth by 2020.
The plan identifies four core targeted outcomes for youth
experiencing homelessness--stable housing, permanent
connections, education and employment, and social/emotional
well-being. These outcomes appropriately identify the multiple
needs of youth experiencing homelessness and underscore the
importance of comprehensive solutions. To be successful, it is
critical to coordinate Federal services and programs at the
local, regional, and State levels to ensure these outcomes are
met. As such, the Committee recognizes that it can be difficult
for local communities, as well as housing and service
providers, to navigate different Federal program laws and
regulatory requirements. USICH is directed to work with its
Federal member agencies to ensure that all homeless-related
Federal grant funding solicitations are coordinated and made
publically available, a user-friendly document that helps local
communities identify and understand the scope of all Federal
programs for which homeless youth are eligible. This document
shall include detailed descriptions of eligibility criteria,
application instructions, and application deadlines and be
updated as necessary.

TITLE IV

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

Section 401 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-
Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings
funded in this act.
Section 402 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal
year and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so
provided herein.
Section 403 limits expenditures for consulting services
through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a
matter of public record and available for public inspection.
Section 404 prohibits the use of funds for employee
training unless such training bears directly upon the
performance of official duties.
Section 405 authorizes the reprogramming of funds within a
budget account and specifies the reprogramming procedures for
agencies funded by this act. The Committee rejects the
administration's request to transfer budget authority between
accounts.
Section 406 ensures that 50 percent of unobligated balances
may remain available for certain purposes.
Section 407 prohibits the use of funds for eminent domain
unless such taking is employed for public use.
Section 408 prohibits funds in this act to be transferred
without express authority.
Section 409 protects employment rights of Federal employees
who return to their civilian jobs after assignment with the
Armed Forces.
Section 410 prohibits the use of funds for activities not
in compliance with the Buy American Act.
Section 411 prohibits funding for any person or entity
convicted of violating the Buy American Act.
Section 412 prohibits funds for first-class airline
accommodation in contravention of section 301-10.122 and 301-
10.123 of title 41 CFR.
Section 413 prohibits funds from being used for the
approval of a new foreign air carrier permit or exemption
application if that approval would contravene United States law
or article 17 bis of the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport
Agreement and specifies that nothing in this section shall
prohibit, restrict, or preclude the Secretary of DOT from
granting a permit or exemption where such authorization is
consistent with the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport
Treaty and the U.S. law.
Section 414 restricts the number of employees that agencies
funded in this act may send to international conferences.
Section 415 prohibits the Surface Transportation Board from
charging filing fees for rate or practice complaints that are
greater than the fees authorized for district court civil
suits.
Section 416 prohibits funds to agencies unless they are in
compliance with the Presidential Memorandum--Federal Fleet
Performance, dated May 24, 2011.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.''
The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the
spirit of full disclosure.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal
year 2017:

Title I--Department of Transportation

National Infrastructure Investments
Federal Aviation Administration
Maritime Administration
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
Office of Pipeline Safety

Title II--Department of Housing and Urban Development

Rental Assistance Programs
Indian Housing Block Grants
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund
Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant
Housing Opportunity for Persons with AIDS
Community Development Fund
Community Development Loan Guarantee
Home Investment Partnerships Program
Choice Neighborhoods Initiatives
Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program
Homeless Assistance
Housing for the Elderly
Housing for Persons with Disabilities
FHA General and Special Risk Program Account:
GNMA Mortgage Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program
Account:
Policy Development and Research
Fair Housing Activities, Fair Housing Program
Lead Hazard Reduction Program
Salaries and Expenses

Title III--Related Agencies

Access Board
National Transportation Safety Board

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on April 21, 2016,
the Committee ordered favorably reported a bill (S. 2844)
making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation,
and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other purposes,
provided, that the bill be subject to amendment and that the
bill be consistent with its budget allocation, by a recorded
vote of 30-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Cochran
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Kirk
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Cassidy
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Reed
Mr. Tester
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin
Mr. Murphy

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the committee.''
In compliance with this rule, the following changes in
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

TITLE 15--COMMERCE AND TRADE

Chapter 53--Toxic Substances Control

Subchapter IV--Lead Exposure Reduction

Sec. 2681. Definitions

(1) Abatement

* * * * * * *

(17) Target housing
The term ``target housing'' means any housing constructed
prior to 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with
disabilities or any 0-bedroom dwelling (unless any child who is
less than 6 years of age resides or is expected to reside in
such [housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities) or
any 0-bedroom dwelling] housing). In the case of jurisdictions
which banned the sale or use of lead-based paint prior to 1978,
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, at the
Secretary's discretion, may designate an earlier date.
------

TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

Chapter 8--Low-Income Housing

Subchapter I--General Program and Assisted Housing

Sec. 1437f. Low-income housing assistance

(a) Authorization for assistance payments

* * * * * * *

(x) Family unification

(1) Increase in budget authority

* * * * * * *

(2) Use of funds
The amounts made available under this subsection shall be
used only in connection with tenant-based assistance under this
section on behalf of (A) any family (i) who is otherwise
eligible for such assistance, and (ii) who the public child
welfare agency for the jurisdiction has certified is a family
for whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in
the imminent placement of the family's child or children in
out-of-home care or the delayed discharge of a child or
children to the family from out-of-home care and [(B) for a
period not to exceed 18 months, otherwise eligible youths who
have attained at least 18 years of age and not more than 21
years of age and who have left foster care at age 16 or older]
(B)(i) for a period not to exceed 36 months, otherwise eligible
youths who have attained at least 18 years of age and not more
than 24 years of age and who, at age 16 or older, have left or
will leave foster care within 90 days, in accordance with a
transition plan described in section 475(5)(H) of the Social
Security Act, and is homeless or is at risk of becoming
homeless, or (ii) except that an applicant may extend the 36-
month period, if the applicant enrolls an eligible youth in a
program authorized under section 23, in accordance with the
length of the contract of participation for that eligible youth
under section 23(c)(3).

* * * * * * *

Sec. 1437g. Public housing Capital and Operating Funds

(a) Merger into Capital Fund

* * * * * * *

(g) Limitations on use of funds

[(1) Flexibility for Capital Fund amounts
Of]
(1) Flexibility in use of funds.--

(A) Flexibility for capital fund amounts.--
Of any amounts appropriated for fiscal year
2000 or any fiscal year thereafter that are
allocated for fiscal year 2000 or any fiscal
year thereafter from the Capital Fund for any
public housing agency, the agency may use not
more than 20 percent for activities that are
eligible under subsection (e) of this section
for assistance with amounts from the Operating
Fund, but only if the public housing agency
plan for the agency provides for such use.

(B) Flexibility for operating fund
amounts.--Of any amounts appropriated for
fiscal year 2017 or any fiscal year thereafter
that are allocated for fiscal year 2017 or any
fiscal year thereafter from the Operating Fund
for any public housing agency, the agency may
use not more than 20 percent for activities
that are eligible under subsection (d) for
assistance with amounts from the Capital Fund,
but only if the public housing plan under
section 5A for the agency provides for such
use.

* * * * * * *

(j) Penalty for slow expenditure of capital funds

(1) Obligation of amounts

* * * * * * *

(6) Right of recapture

Any obligation entered into by a public housing agency
shall be subject to the right of the Secretary to recapture the
obligated amounts for violation by the public housing agency of
the requirements of this subsection.

(7) Treatment of replacement reserve.--The requirements of
this subsection shall not apply to funds held in replacement
reserves established in subsection (n).

* * * * * * *

(m) Treatment of public housing

(1) [Repealed. Pub. L. 108-7, div. K, title II, Sec. 212(a),
Feb. 20, 2003, 117 Stat. 503].

* * * * * * *

(4) Effective date

This subsection shall apply to fiscal year 1999 and each
fiscal year thereafter.

(n) Establishment of Replacement Reserves.--

(1) In general.--Public housing agencies shall be
permitted to establish a replacement reserve to fund
any of the capital activities listed in subsection
(d)(1).

(2) Source and amount of funds for replacement
reserve.--At any time, a public housing agency may
deposit funds from such agency's Capital Fund into a
replacement reserve, subject to the following:

(A) At the discretion of the Secretary,
public housing agencies may transfer and hold
in a replacement reserve funds originating from
additional sources.

(B) No minimum transfer of funds to a
replacement reserve shall be required.

(C) At any time, a public housing agency
may not hold in a replacement reserve more than
the amount the public housing authority has
determined necessary to satisfy the anticipated
capital needs of properties in its portfolio
assisted under this section, as outlined in its
Capital Fund 5-Year Action Plan, or a
comparable plan, as determined by the
Secretary.

(D) The Secretary may establish, by
regulation, a maximum replacement reserve level
or levels that are below amounts determined
under subparagraph (C), which may be based upon
the size of the portfolio assisted under this
section or other factors.

(3) Transfer of operating funds.--In first
establishing a replacement reserve, the Secretary may
allow public housing agencies to transfer more than 20
percent of its operating funds into its replacement
reserve.

(4) Expenditure.--Funds in a replacement reserve
may be used for purposes authorized by subsection
(d)(1) and contained in its Capital Fund 5-Year Action
Plan.

(5) Management and report.--The Secretary shall
establish appropriate accounting and reporting
requirements to ensure that public housing agencies are
spending funds on eligible projects and that funds in
the replacement reserve are connected to capital needs.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 1437v. Demolition, site revitalization, replacement housing, and
tenant-based assistance grants for projects

(a) Purposes

* * * * * * *

(m) Funding

(1) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated for grants under
this section $574,000,000 for [fiscal year 2016.] fiscal year
2017.

* * * * * * *

(o) Sunset

No assistance may be provided under this section after
[September 30, 2016.] September 30, 2017.

* * * * * * *

Chapter 63--Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention

Subchapter III--Federal Demonstration And Research Program: Federal
Housing Administration Requirements

Sec. 4822. Requirements for housing receiving Federal assistance

(a) General requirements

* * * * * * *

(e) Exceptions

The provisions of this section shall not apply to--

(1) housing for the elderly or [handicapped] persons with
disabilities, or any 0-bedroom dwelling, except for any
dwelling in such housing in which any child who is [less than 7
years of age] under age 6 resides or is expected to reside; or

(2) any project for which an application for insurance is
submitted under section 1715v, 1715w, 1715z-6, or 1715z-7 of
title 12[; or].

[(3) any 0-bedroom dwelling.]

* * * * * * *

Chapter 63A--Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction

Sec. 4851b. Definitions

For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions
shall apply:
(1) Abatement

* * * * * * *

(27) Target housing
The term ``target housing'' means any housing constructed
prior to 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with
disabilities or any 0-bedroom dwelling (unless any child who is
less than 6 years of age resides or is expected to reside in
such [housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities) or
any 0-bedroom dwelling] housing). In the case of jurisdictions
which banned the sale or use of lead-based paint prior to 1978,
the Secretary, at the Secretary's discretion, may designate an
earlier date.

* * * * * * *

Chapter 119--Homeless Assistance

Subchapter II--United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

Sec. 11314. Director and Staff

(a) Director

The Council shall appoint an Executive Director, who shall
be compensated at a rate not to exceed the rate of basic pay
payable for [level V] level IV of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of title 5. The Council shall appoint an Executive
Director at the first meeting of the Council held under section
11312(c) of this title.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 11319. Termination

The Council shall cease to exist, and the requirements of
this subchapter shall terminate, on [October 1, 2017] October
1, 2018

* * * * * * *

Subchapter IV--Housing Assistance

Part C--Continuum of Care Program

Sec. 11386b. Allocation of amounts and incentives for specific eligible
activities

(a) Minimum allocation for permanent housing for homeless
individuals and families with disabilities

* * * * * * *

(e) Incentives for successful implementation of proven
strategies

If any geographic area demonstrates that it has fully
implemented any of the activities described in subsection (d)
for all homeless individuals and families or for all members of
subpopulations for whom such activities are targeted, that
geographic area shall receive the bonus or incentive provided
under subsection (d), but may use such bonus or incentive for
any eligible activity under either section 11383 of this title
or paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 11374(a) of this title for
homeless people generally or for the relevant subpopulation.

(f) Transition for Reallocated Grant.--

(1) From amounts under this subtitle made available
to carry out subtitle B and this subtitle, the
Secretary may award one-year transition grants to
recipients to transition from one Continuum of Care
program component to another.

(2) In order to be eligible to receive a transition
grant, the project must have the consent of the
Continuum of Care, and meet standards determined by the
Secretary.
------

TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION

SUBTITLE III--GENERAL AND INTERMODAL PROGRAMS

Chapter 53--Public Transportation

Sec. 5303. Metropolitan transportation planning

(a) Policy.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(r) Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Organization.--

(1) Definition of bi-state mpo region.--* * *

(2) Treatment.--* * *

(A) * * *

* * * * * * *

(C) an urbanized area, which is comprised
of a population of 145,000 and 25 square miles
of land area in the State of California and a
population of 65,000 and 12 square miles of
land area in the State of Nevada.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 5307. Urbanized area formula grants

(a) General Authority.--

(1) Grants.--* * *

* * * * * * *

[(2) Special rule.--The Secretary may make grants
under this section to finance the operating cost of
equipment and facilities for use in public
transportation, excluding rail fixed guideway, in an
urbanized area with a population of not fewer than
200,000 individuals, as determined by the Bureau of the
Census--

[(A) for public transportation systems that
operate 75 or fewer buses in fixed route
service or demand response service, excluding
ADA complementary paratransit service, during
peak service hours, in an amount not to exceed
75 percent of the share of the apportionment
which is attributable to such systems within
the urbanized area, as measured by vehicle
revenue hours; and

[(B) for public transportation systems that
operate a minimum of 76 buses and a maximum of
100 buses in fixed route service or demand
response service, excluding ADA complementary
paratransit service, during peak service hours,
in an amount not to exceed 50 percent of the
share of the apportionment which is
attributable to such systems within the
urbanized area, as measured by vehicle revenue
hours.

[(3) Exception to the special rule.--
Notwithstanding paragraph (2), if a public
transportation system described in such paragraph
executes a written agreement with 1 or more other
public transportation systems within the urbanized area
to allocate funds for the purposes described in the
paragraph by a method other than by measuring vehicle
revenue hours, each public transportation system that
is a party to the written agreement may follow the
terms of the written agreement without regard to
measured vehicle revenue hours referred to in the
paragraph.]

(2) Special rule.--The Secretary may make grants
under this section to finance the operating cost of
equipment and facilities for use in public
transportation, excluding rail fixed guideway, in an
urbanized area with a population of not fewer than
200,000 individuals, as determined by the Bureau of the
Census--

(A) for public transportation systems
that--

(i) operate 75 or fewer buses in
fixed route service or demand response
service, excluding ADA complementary
paratransit service, during peak
service hours, in an amount not to
exceed 75 percent of the share of the
apportionment which is attributable to
such systems within the urbanized area,
as measured by vehicle revenue hours;
or

(ii) operate a minimum of 76 buses
and a maximum of 100 buses in fixed
route service or demand response
service, excluding ADA complementary
paratransit service, during peak
service hours, in an amount not to
exceed 50 percent of the share of the
apportionment which is attributable to
such systems within the urbanized area,
as measured by vehicle revenue hours;
or

(B) subject to paragraph (3), for public
transportation systems that--

(i) operate 75 or fewer buses in
fixed route service or demand response
service, excluding ADA complementary
paratransit service, during peak
service hours, in an amount not to
exceed 75 percent of the share of the
apportionment allocated to such systems
within the urbanized area, as
determined by the local planning
process and included in the designated
recipient's final program of projects
prepared under subsection (b); or

(ii) operate a minimum of 76 buses
and a maximum of 100 buses in fixed
route service or demand response
service, excluding ADA complementary
paratransit service during peak service
hours, in an amount not to exceed 50
percent of the share of the
apportionment allocated to such systems
within the urbanized area, as
determined by the local planning
process and included in the designated
recipient's final program of projects
prepared under subsection (b).

(3) Limitation.--The amount available to a public
transportation system under subparagraph (B) of
paragraph (2) shall be not more than 10 percent greater
than the amount that would otherwise be available to
the system under subparagraph (A) of that paragraph.

* * * * * * *

SUBTITLE V--RAIL PROGRAMS

Part C--Passenger Transportation

Chapter 244--Rail Improvement Grants

Sec. 24408. Restoration and enhancement grants

(a) Applicant Defined.--* * *

(b) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary of Transportation
shall develop and implement a program for issuing operating
assistance grants to applicants, on a competitive basis, for
the purpose of initiating, restoring, [or enhancing] enhancing,
or supporting intercity rail passenger transportation.

(1) * * *

* * * * * * *

(3) * * *

(A) * * *

* * * * * * *

[(C) describes the funding of operating
costs and capital costs, to the extent
necessary, after the first 3 years of
operation; and]

* * * * * * *

(d) Priorities.--* * *

(1) * * *

* * * * * * *

[(5) that include a funding plan that demonstrates
the intercity rail passenger service will be
financially sustainable beyond the 3-year grant
period;]

* * * * * * *

[(e) Limiations.--* * *

[(1) Duration.--Federal operating assistance grants
authorized under this section for any individual
intercity rail passenger transportation route may not
provide funding for more than 3 years and may not be
renewed.

[(2) Limitation.--Not more than 6 of the operating
assistance grants awarded pursuant to subsection (b)
may be simultaneously active.

[(3) Maximum funding.--Grants described in
paragraph (1) may not exceed--

[(A) 80 percent of the projected net
operating costs for the first year of service;

[(B) 60 percent of the projected net
operating costs for the second year of service;
and

[(C) 40 percent of the projected net
operating costs for the third year of service.]

(e) Grants made under this section may not exceed 80
percent of the projected net operating costs.

* * * * * * *

SUBTITLE VII--AVIATION PROGRAMS

Part B--Airport Development and Noise

Chapter 471--Airport Development

Sec. 47109. United States Government's share of project costs

(a) General.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(1) In General.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(2) Limation.--[The Government's share of allowable
project costs determined under this subsection shall
not exceed the lesser of 93.75 percent or the highest
percentage Government share applicable to any project
in any State under subsection (b), except that at a
primary non-hub airport located in a State as set forth
in paragraph (1) of this subsection that is within 15
miles of another State as set forth in paragraph (1) of
this subsection, the Government's share shall be an
average of the Government share applicable to any
project in each of the States.] The Government's share
of allowable project costs determined under this
subsection shall not exceed the lesser of 93.75 percent
or the highest percentage Government share applicable
to any project in any State under subsection (b),
except that at a primary non-hub and non-primary
commercial service airport located in a State as set
forth in paragraph (1) of this subsection that is
within 15 miles of another State as set forth in
paragraph (1) of this subsection, the Government's
share shall be an average of the Government share
applicable to any project in each of the States.
------

INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991, PUBLIC LAW
102-240

TITLE I--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

Part A--Title 23 Programs

SEC. 332. INTEGRATION OF CIVIL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTO NATIONAL
AIRSPACE SYSTEM.

(1) North-South Corridor from Kansas City,
Missouri, to Shreveport, Louisiana.

* * * * * * *

(88) Interstate Route 205 in Oregon from its
intersection with Interstate Route 5 to the Columbia
River.

(89) United State Route 67 from Interstate 40 in
North Little Rock, Arkansas, to United States Route
412.

* * * * * * *

(e) Provisions Applicable to Corridors.--

(1) Long-range plan.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(5) Inclusion of certain route segments on
interstate system.--

(A) In general.--The portions of the routes
referred to in subsection (c)(1) subsection
(c)(3) (solely as it relates to the Kentucky
Corridor),, 1 in clauses (i), (ii), and (except
with respect to Georgetown County) (iii) of
subsection (c)(5)(B), in subsection (c)(9),
subsection (c)(13), in subsection (c)(18),
subsection (c)(20), subparagraphs (A) and
(B)(i) of subsection (c)(26), subsection
(c)(36), in subsection (c)(37), in subsection
(c)(40), and in subsection (c)(57), subsection
(c)(68)(B), subsection (c)(81), subsection
(c)(82), [and subsection (c)(83)] subsection
(c)(83), and subsection (c)(89) that are not a
part of the Interstate System are designated as
future parts of the Interstate System. Any
segment of such routes shall become a part of
the Interstate System at such time as the
Secretary determines that the segment--
------

CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012, PUBLIC
LAW 112-55

DIVISION C--TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES

TITLE II

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Rental Assistance Demonstration

To conduct a demonstration designed to preserve and improve
public housing and certain other multifamily housing through
the voluntary conversion of properties with assistance under
section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937,
(hereinafter, ``the Act''), or the moderate rehabilitation
program under section 8(e)(2) of the Act, to properties with
assistance under a project-based subsidy contract under section
8 of the Act, which shall be eligible for renewal under section
524 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and
Affordability Act of 1997, or assistance under section 8(o)(13)
of the Act, the Secretary may transfer amounts provided through
contracts under section 8(e)(2) of the Act or under the
headings ``Public Housing Capital Fund'' and ``Public Housing
Operating Fund'' to the headings ``Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance'' or ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'' (``First
Component'' herein): Provided, That the initial long-term
contract under which converted assistance is made available may
allow for rental adjustments only by an operating cost factor
established by the Secretary, and shall be subject to the
availability of appropriations for each year of such term:
Provided further, That project applications may be received
under this demonstration [until September 30, 2018] for fiscal
year 2012 and thereafter: Provided further, That any increase
in cost for ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' or ``Project-
Based Rental Assistance'' associated with such conversion in
excess of amounts made available under this heading shall be
equal to amounts transferred from ``Public Housing Capital
Fund'' and ``Public Housing Operating Fund'' or other account
from which it was transferred: Provided further, That not more
than [185,000] 250,000 units currently receiving assistance
under section 9 or section 8(e)(2) of the Act shall be
converted under the authority provided under this heading:
Provided further, That tenants of such properties with
assistance converted from assistance under section 9 shall, at
a minimum, maintain the same rights under such conversion as
those provided under sections 6 and 9 of the Act: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall select properties from
applications for conversion as part of this demonstration
through a competitive process: Provided further, That in
establishing criteria for such competition, the Secretary shall
seek to demonstrate the feasibility of this conversion model to
recapitalize and operate public housing properties (1) in
different markets and geographic areas, (2) within portfolios
managed by public housing agencies of varying sizes, and (3) by
leveraging other sources of funding to recapitalize properties:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall provide an
opportunity for public comment on draft eligibility and
selection criteria and procedures that will apply to the
selection of properties that will participate in the
demonstration: Provided further, That the Secretary shall
provide an opportunity for comment from residents of properties
to be proposed for participation in the demonstration to the
owners or public housing agencies responsible for such
properties: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive or
specify alternative requirements for (except for requirements
related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards,
and the environment) any provision of section 8(o)(13) or any
provision that governs the use of assistance from which a
property is converted under the demonstration or funds made
available under the headings of ``Public Housing Capital
Fund'', ``Public Housing Operating Fund'', and ``Project-Based
Rental Assistance'', under this Act or any prior Act or any Act
enacted during the period of conversion of assistance under the
demonstration for properties with assistance converted under
the demonstration, upon a finding by the Secretary that any
such waivers or alternative requirements are necessary for the
effective conversion of assistance under the demonstration:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall publish by notice in
the Federal Register any waivers or alternative requirements
pursuant to the previous proviso no later than 10 days before
the effective date of such notice: Provided further, That the
demonstration may proceed after the Secretary publishes notice
of its terms in the Federal Register: Provided further, That
notwithstanding sections 3 and 16 of the Act, the conversion of
assistance under the demonstration shall not be the basis for
re-screening or termination of assistance or eviction of any
tenant family in a property participating in the demonstration,
and such a family shall not be considered a new admission for
any purpose, including compliance with income targeting
requirements: Provided further, That in the case of a property
with assistance converted under the demonstration from
assistance under section 9 of the Act, section 18 of the Act
shall not apply to a property converting assistance under the
demonstration for all or substantially all of its units, the
Secretary shall require ownership or control of assisted units
by a public or nonprofit entity except as determined by the
Secretary to be necessary pursuant to foreclosure, bankruptcy,
or termination and transfer of assistance for material
violations or substantial default, in which case the priority
for ownership or control shall be provided to a capable public
or nonprofit entity, then a capable entity, as determined by
the Secretary, shall require long-term renewable use and
affordability restrictions for assisted units, and may allow
ownership to be transferred to a for-profit entity to
facilitate the use of tax credits only if the public housing
agency [preserves its interest] or a nonprofit entity preserves
an interest in the property in a manner approved by the
Secretary, and upon expiration of the initial contract and each
renewal contract, the Secretary shall offer and the owner of
the property shall accept renewal of the contract subject to
the terms and conditions applicable at the time of renewal and
the availability of appropriations each year of such renewal:
Provided further, That the Secretary may permit transfer of
assistance at or after conversion under the demonstration to
replacement units subject to the requirements in the previous
proviso: Provided further, That the Secretary may establish the
requirements for converted assistance under the demonstration
through contracts, use agreements, regulations, or other means:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall assess and publish
findings regarding the impact of the conversion of assistance
under the demonstration on the preservation and improvement of
public housing, the amount of private sector leveraging as a
result of such conversion, and the effect of such conversion on
tenants: [Provided further, That owners of properties assisted
under section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of
1965, section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act, or section
8(e)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, for which an
event after October 1, 2006 has caused or results in the
termination of rental assistance or affordability restrictions
and the issuance of tenant protection vouchers under section
8(o) of the Act, shall be eligible, subject to requirements
established by the Secretary, including but not limited to
tenant consultation procedures, for conversion of assistance
available for such vouchers to assistance under a long-term
project-based subsidy contract under section 8 of the Act,
which shall have a term of no less than 20 years, with rent
adjustments only by an operating cost factor established by the
Secretary, which shall be eligible for renewal under section
524 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and
Affordability Act of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note), or, subject
to agreement of the administering public housing agency, to
assistance under section 8(o)(13) of the Act, to which the
limitation under subsection (B) of section 8(o)(13) of the Act
shall not apply and for which the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development may waive or alter the provisions of
subparagraphs (C) and (D) of section 8(o)(13) of the Act]:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2012 and hereafter,
owners of properties assisted or previously assisted under
section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965,
section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act, or section
8(e)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, for which a
contract expires or terminates due to prepayment on or after
October 1, 2006 has caused or results in the termination of
rental assistance or affordability restrictions or both and the
issuance of tenant protection vouchers under section 8(o) or
section 8(t) of the Act, or with a project rental assistance
contract under section 202(c)(2) of Housing Act of 1959, shall
be eligible, subject to requirements established by the
Secretary, including but not limited to tenant consultation
procedures, for conversion of assistance available or provided
for such vouchers or assistance contracts, to assistance under
a long-term project-based subsidy contract under section 8 of
the Act, which shall have a term of no less than 20 years,
which shall have initial rents set at comparable market rents
for the market area, with subsequent rent adjustments only by
an operating cost factor established by the Secretary, and
which shall be eligible for renewal under section 524 of the
Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of
1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note), or, subject to agreement of the
administering public housing agency, to assistance under
section 8(o)(13) of the Act, to which the limitation under
subparagraph (B) of section 8(o)(13) of the Act shall not apply
and for which the Secretary may waive or alter the provisions
of subparagraphs (C) and (D) of section 8(o)(13) of the Act
(``Second Component'' herein): Provided further, That
conversions of assistance under the Second Component may not be
the basis for re-screening or termination of assistance or
eviction of any tenant family in a property participating in
the demonstration: Provided further, That amounts made
available under the heading ``Rental Housing Assistance''
during the period of conversion under the [previous proviso,
which may extend beyond fiscal year 2016 as necessary to allow
processing of all timely applications, shall be available for
project-based subsidy contracts entered into pursuant to the
previous proviso:] Second Component, except for conversion of
Section 202 project rental assistance contracts, shall be
available for project-based subsidy contracts entered into
pursuant to the Second Component: Provided further, That
amounts, including contract authority, recaptured from
contracts following a conversion under the [previous two
provisos] Second Component, except for conversion of section
202 project rental assistance contracts, are hereby rescinded
and an amount of additional new budget authority, equivalent to
the amount rescinded is hereby appropriated, to remain
available until expended for such conversions: Provided
further, That the Secretary may transfer amounts made available
under the heading ``Rental Housing Assistance'', amounts made
available for tenant protection vouchers under the heading
``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' and specifically associated
with any such conversions, and amounts made available under the
previous proviso as needed to the account under the ``Project-
Based Rental Assistance'' heading to facilitate conversion
under the [three previous provisos] Second Component, except
for conversion of section 202 project rental assistance
contracts, and any increase in cost for ``Project-Based Rental
Assistance'' associated with such conversion shall be equal to
amounts so transferred: Provided further, That the Secretary
may transfer amounts made available under the heading ``Housing
for the Elderly'' to the accounts under the headings ``Project-
Based Rental Assistance'' or ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance''
to facilitate any Section 202 project rental assistance
contract conversions under the Second Component, and any
increase in cost for ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'' or
``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'' associated with such
conversion shall be equal to amounts so transferred: Provided
further, That with respect to the [previous four provisos]
Second Component, as applicable, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall conduct a study of the long-term impact of
the fiscal year 2012 and 2013 conversion of tenant protection
vouchers to assistance under section 8(o)(13) of the Act on the
ratio of tenant-based vouchers to project-based vouchers.
------

FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012, PUBLIC LAW 112-95

TITLE III

SAFETY

Subtitle B--Unmanned Aircraft Systems

SEC. 332. INTEGRATION OF CIVIL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTO NATIONAL
AIRSPACE SYSTEM.

(a) Required Planning for Integration.--

* * * * * * *

(1) Establishment.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(5) Report to congress.--

(A) In general.--* * *

* * * * * * *

(B) Additional contents.--* * *

(i) * * *

(ii) to validate the sense and
avoid capability and operation of
unmanned aircraft systems.

(6) Inclusion of certain flight test facilities.--
The Administrator shall expand the program established
under paragraph (1) to permit projects under the
program to be carried out at any public entity
authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration as an
unmanned aircraft system flight test center before
January 1, 2009.

* * * * * * *

TITLE IX

FEDERAL AVIATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 911 RESEARCH PROGRAM ON ALTERNATIVE JET FUEL TECHNOLOGY FOR CIVIL
AIRCRAFT.

(a) In General.--

* * * * * * *

(b) Authority To Make Grants.--The Administrator shall
carry out the program through the use of grants or other
measures authorized under section 106(l)(6) of such title,
including reimbursable agreements with other Federal agencies.

(c) Collaboration and Reporting.--
(1) The Administrator, in coordination with NASA,
the Department of Energy, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and after consultation with other relevant
agencies shall develop a joint plan to carry out the
research under subsection (a) and report back to
Congress within 180 days.
(2) The Administrator, in coordination with the
Administrator of NASA, the Secretary of Energy, and the
Secretary of Agriculture, shall continue research and
development activities into the development and
deployment of jet fuels as outlined in subsection (a).
------

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016, PUBLIC LAW 114-113

DIVISION L--TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016

Title I--Department of Transportation

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sec. 133. [None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any other Act may be used to
implement, administer, or enforce sections 395.3(c) and
395.3(d) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, and such
section shall have no force or effect on submission of the
final report issued by the Secretary, as required by section
133 of division K of Public Law 113-235, unless the Secretary
and the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation
each review and determine that the final report--

[(1) meets the statutory requirements set forth in
such section; and

[(2) establishes that commercial motor vehicle
drivers who operated under the restart provisions in
effect between July 1, 2013, and the day before the
date of enactment of such Public Law demonstrated
statistically significant improvement in all outcomes
related to safety, operator fatigue, driver health and
longevity, and work schedules, in comparison to
commercial motor vehicle drivers who operated under the
restart provisions in effect on June 30, 2013.]

(a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any other Act may be used to
implement, administer, or enforce the requirement for two off-
duty periods from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. under subsection
395.3(c) or the restriction on use of more than one restart
during a 168-hour period under subsection 395.3(d) of title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations, and such provisions shall have no
force or effect as of the date of submission of the final
report issued by the Secretary of Transportation, as required
by section 133 of division K of Public Law 113-235, unless the
Secretary and the Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation each review and determine that the final
report--

(1) meets the statutory requirements set forth in
such section; and

(2) establishes that commercial motor vehicle
drivers who operated under the restart provisions in
operational effect between July 1, 2013, and the day
before the date of enactment of such Public Law
demonstrated statistically significant improvement in
all outcomes related to safety, operator fatigue,
driver health and longevity, and work schedules, in
comparison to commercial motor vehicle drivers who
operated under the restart provisions in operational
effect on June 30, 2013.

(b) If the Secretary and Inspector General do not each make
the determination required by subsection (a), the 34-hour
restart rule in operational effect on June 30, 2013, shall be
restored to full force and effect on the date the Secretary
submits the final report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, and funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any other Act shall be available to
implement, administer, or enforce such rule.

(c) If the 34-hour restart rule in operational effect on
June 30, 2013, is restored to full force and effect pursuant to
subsection (b), a driver who uses that restart rule may not
drive after being on duty more than 73 hours in any period of 7
consecutive days, where the 7-day measurement period moves
forward 1 day at midnight each day.

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(A), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Committee
allocation Amount in bill allocation Amount in bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with
the subcommittee allocation for 2017:
Subcommittee on Transportation and
Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies:
Mandatory........................... ................ ................ ................ ................
Discretionary....................... 56,474 56,474 120,471 \1\120,461
Security........................ 275 275 NA NA
Nonsecurity..................... 56,199 56,199 NA NA
Projections of outlays associated with
the recommendation:
2017................................ ................ ................ ................ \2\42,595
2018................................ ................ ................ ................ 36,727
2019................................ ................ ................ ................ 14,920
2020................................ ................ ................ ................ 6,452
2021 and future years............... ................ ................ ................ 8,063
Financial assistance to State and local NA 31,866 NA \2\32,239
governments for 2017...................

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

NOTE.--Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill as an emergency requirement and in accordance with
section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the BBEDCA of 1985, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will
provide a revised 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of
$1,000,000 in outlays.

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2017
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2016 Budget estimate Committee -----------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2016
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Salaries and expenses......................................... 108,750 114,396 116,396 +7,646 +2,000
Immediate Office of the Secretary......................... (2,734) ................ (2,758) (+24) (+2,758)
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary.................. (1,025) ................ (1,040) (+15) (+1,040)
Office of the General Counsel............................. (20,609) ................ (20,772) (+163) (+20,772)
Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy (9,941) ................ (11,108) (+1,167) (+11,108)
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs. (13,697) ................ (16,020) (+2,323) (+16,020)
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs (2,546) ................ (2,569) (+23) (+2,569)
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration...... (25,925) ................ (30,054) (+4,129) (+30,054)
Office of Public Affairs.................................. (2,029) ................ (2,142) (+113) (+2,142)
Office of the Executive Secretariat....................... (1,737) ................ (1,760) (+23) (+1,760)
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.... (1,434) ................ ................ (-1,434) ................
Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response.. (10,793) ................ (11,089) (+296) (+11,089)
Office of the Chief Information Officer................... (16,280) ................ (17,084) (+804) (+17,084)
Research and technology....................................... 13,000 18,007 13,044 +44 -4,963
National infrastructure investments........................... 500,000 ................ 525,000 +25,000 +525,000
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... ................ (1,250,000) ................ ................ (-1,250,000)
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (1,250,000) ................ ................ (-1,250,000)
National Surface Transportation and Innovative Finance Bureau. ................ 3,000 3,000 +3,000 ................
Financial management capital.................................. 5,000 4,000 4,000 -1,000 ................
Cyber security initiatives.................................... 8,000 15,000 15,000 +7,000 ................
DATA Act compliance........................................... ................ 4,000 ................ ................ -4,000
U.S. digital services......................................... ................ 1,000 ................ ................ -1,000
Office of Civil Rights........................................ 9,678 9,751 9,751 +73 ................
Transportation planning, research, and development............ 8,500 17,043 12,043 +3,543 -5,000
Working Capital Fund.......................................... (190,039) ................ (190,389) (+350) (+190,389)
Minority Business Resource Center Program..................... 933 941 941 +8 ................
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (18,367) ................ (18,367) ................ (+18,367)
Small and disadvantaged business utilizaton and outreach/ 3,084 4,646 4,646 +1,562 ................
minority Business Outreach...................................
Payments to air carriers (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)........ 175,000 150,000 150,000 -25,000 ................

Administrative Provisions

Working Capital Fund (Sec. 104) (reappropriation)............. ................ 12,000 ................ ................ -12,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Secretary.......................... 831,945 353,784 853,821 +21,876 +500,037
(Limitation on obligations)......................... ................ 1,250,000 ................ ................ -1,250,000
Total, budgetary resources........................ 831,945 1,603,784 853,821 +21,876 -749,963
=========================================================================================
Federal Aviation Administration

Operations.................................................... 9,909,724 9,994,352 10,048,352 +138,628 +54,000
Air traffic organization.................................. (7,505,293) (7,539,785) (7,593,785) (+88,492) (+54,000)
Aviation safety........................................... (1,258,411) (1,286,982) (1,286,982) (+28,571) ................
Commercial space transportation........................... (17,800) (19,826) (19,826) (+2,026) ................
Finance and management.................................... (760,500) (771,342) (771,342) (+10,842) ................
NextGen................................................... (60,089) (60,155) (60,155) (+66) ................
Security and hazardous materials safety................... (100,880) (107,161) (107,161) (+6,281) ................
Staff offices............................................. (206,751) (209,101) (209,101) (+2,350) ................
Facilities and equipment (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)........ 2,855,000 2,838,000 2,838,000 -17,000 ................
Research, engineering, and development (Airport & Airway Trust 166,000 167,500 176,002 +10,002 +8,502
Fund)........................................................
Grants-in-aid for airports (Airport and Airway Trust Fund) (3,600,000) (3,500,000) (3,750,000) (+150,000) (+250,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (3,350,000) (2,900,000) (3,350,000) ................ (+450,000)
Administration........................................ (107,100) (107,691) (107,691) (+591) ................
Airport cooperative research program.................. (15,000) (15,000) (15,000) ................ ................
Airport technology research........................... (31,000) (31,375) (31,375) (+375) ................
Small community air service development program....... (5,000) ................ (10,000) (+5,000) (+10,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Aviation Administration.............. 12,930,724 12,999,852 13,062,354 +131,630 +62,502

Limitations on obligations........................ (3,350,000) (2,900,000) (3,350,000) ................ (+450,000)
Total budgetary resources....................... (16,280,724) (15,899,852) (16,412,354) (+131,630) (+512,502)
=========================================================================================
Federal Highway Administration

Limitation on Administrative Expenses......................... (429,000) (435,795) (435,795) (+6,795) ................

Federal-aid highways (Highway Trust Fund):
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... (43,100,000) (44,005,100) (44,005,100) (+905,100) ................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (42,361,000) (43,266,100) (43,266,100) (+905,100) ................
(Exempt contract authority)............................... (739,000) (739,000) (739,000) ................ ................
21st Century Regions Grant Program (legislative proposal) ................ (5,500,000) ................ ................ (-5,500,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (5,500,000) ................ ................ (-5,500,000)
Future Freight Systems Grant Program (legislative proposal) ................ (2,000,000) ................ ................ (-2,000,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (2,000,000) ................ ................ (-2,000,000)
Rescission of contract authority (Highway Trust Fund)......... ................ -2,436,000 -2,211,000 -2,211,000 +225,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Highway Administration................... ................ -2,436,000 -2,211,000 -2,211,000 +225,000

Limitations on obligations.......................... (42,361,000) (50,766,100) (43,266,100) (+905,100) (-7,500,000)
Exempt contract authority........................... (739,000) (739,000) (739,000) ................ ................
Total budgetary resources......................... (43,100,000) (49,069,100) (41,794,100) (-1,305,900) (-7,275,000)
=========================================================================================
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Motor carrier safety operations and programs (Highway Trust (267,400) (277,200) (277,200) (+9,800) ................
Fund) (Liquidation of contract authorization)................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (267,400) (277,200) (277,200) (+9,800) ................
Safety investments (legislative proposal) (Liquidation of ................ (150,000) ................ ................ (-150,000)
contract authorization)......................................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (150,000) ................ ................ (-150,000)
Motor carrier safety grants (Highway Trust Fund) (Liquidation (313,000) (367,000) (367,000) (+54,000) ................
of contract authorization)...................................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (313,000) (367,000) (367,000) (+54,000) ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration...... ................ ................ ................ ................ ................

Limitations on obligations.......................... (580,400) (794,200) (644,200) (+63,800) (-150,000)
Total budgetary resources......................... (580,400) (794,200) (644,200) (+63,800) (-150,000)
=========================================================================================
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Operations and research (general fund)........................ 152,800 ................ 160,075 +7,275 +160,075
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... ................ (250,000) ................ ................ (-250,000)
(Limitation on obligations)........................... ................ (250,000) ................ ................ (-250,000)

Operations and Research (Highway Trust Fund):
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... (142,900) (145,900) (145,900) (+3,000) ................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (142,900) (145,900) (145,900) (+3,000) ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operations and Research....................... 295,700 395,900 305,975 +10,275 -89,925

Autonomous vehicle development (legislative proposal) ................ (200,000) ................ ................ (-200,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (200,000) ................ ................ (-200,000)

Highway Traffic Safety Grants (Highway Trust Fund)

(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... (573,332) (585,372) (585,372) (+12,040) ................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (573,332) (585,372) (585,372) (+12,040) ................
Highway safety programs (23 USC 402).................. (243,500) (252,300) (252,300) (+8,800) ................
National priority safety programs (23 USC 405)........ (274,700) (277,500) (277,500) (+2,800) ................
High visibility enforcement........................... (29,300) (29,500) (29,500) (+200) ................
Administrative expenses............................... (25,832) (26,072) (26,072) (+240) ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Highway Traffic Safety 152,800 ................ 160,075 +7,275 +160,075
Administration.....................................

Limitations on obligations...................... (716,232) (1,181,272) (731,272) (+15,040) (-450,000)
Total budgetary resources................... (869,032) (1,181,272) (891,347) (+22,315) (-289,925)
=========================================================================================
Federal Railroad Administration

Safety and operations......................................... 199,000 213,298 208,500 +9,500 -4,798
Railroad research and development............................. 39,100 53,500 40,100 +1,000 -13,400
Railroad safety grants........................................ 50,000 ................ ................ -50,000 ................
Rail service improvement program.............................. ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... ................ (3,700,000) ................ ................ (-3,700,000)
(Limitation on obligations)........................... ................ (3,700,000) ................ ................ (-3,700,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 288,100 266,798 248,600 -39,500 -18,198

National Railroad Passenger Corporation:
Operating grants to the National Railroad Passenger 288,500 ................ ................ -288,500 ................
Corporation..............................................
Capital and debt service grants to the National Railroad 1,101,500 ................ ................ -1,101,500 ................
Passenger Corporation....................................
Current rail passenger service............................ ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... ................ (2,300,000) ................ ................ (-2,300,000)
(Limitation on obligations)........................... ................ (2,300,000) ................ ................ (-2,300,000)
Northeast Corridor Grants................................. ................ ................ 345,000 +345,000 +345,000
National Network.......................................... ................ ................ 1,075,000 +1,075,000 +1,075,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 1,390,000 ................ 1,420,000 +30,000 +1,420,000

Consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvements.. ................ ................ 50,000 +50,000 +50,000
Federal State Partnership for State of Good Repair........ ................ ................ 20,000 +20,000 +20,000
Restoration and enhancement grants........................ ................ ................ 15,000 +15,000 +15,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ ................ ................ 85,000 +85,000 +85,000

Administrative Provisions

Transportation Technology Center financing (Sec. 151)......... ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
Rail unobligated balances (rescission) (Sec. 152)............. -1,960 ................ ................ +1,960 ................
RRIF application expenses (Sec. 152).......................... 1,960 ................ ................ -1,960 ................
Rail unobligated balances (rescission) (Sec. 153)............. -19,163 ................ ................ +19,163 ................
Northeast Corridor Capital grants (Sec. 153).................. 19,163 ................ ................ -19,163 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Railroad Administration.................. 1,678,100 266,798 1,753,600 +75,500 +1,486,802
(Limitation on obligations)......................... ................ 6,000,000 ................ ................ -6,000,000
Total, budgetary resources........................ 1,678,100 6,266,798 1,753,600 +75,500 -4,513,198

Federal Transit Administration

Administrative expenses....................................... 108,000 ................ 110,665 +2,665 +110,665
Transit formula grants (Hwy Trust Fund, Mass Transit Account ) (10,400,000) (10,800,000) (10,800,000) (+400,000) ................
(Liqiuidation of contract authorization).....................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... (9,347,605) (9,733,706) (9,733,706) (+386,101) ................
Supplementary transit formula grants (legislative proposal) ................ (5,860,000) ................ ................ (-5,860,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(Limitation on obligations)............................... ................ (5,860,000) ................ ................ (-5,860,000)
Rapid-Growth Transit Program (legislative proposal) ................ (525,000) ................ ................ (-525,000)
(Liquidation of contract authorization)......................
(limitation on obligations)............................. ................ (525,000) ................ ................ (-525,000)
Capital investment grants..................................... 2,177,000 ................ 2,338,063 +161,063 +2,338,063
(Liquidation of contract authorization)................... ................ (3,500,000) ................ ................ (-3,500,000)
(Limitation on obligations)........................... ................ (3,500,000) ................ ................ (-3,500,000)
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Capital and 150,000 150,000 150,000 ................ ................
Preventive Maintenance.......................................

Administrative Provisions

Rescission (Sec. 166)......................................... -25,398 ................ ................ +25,398 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Transit Administration................... 2,409,602 150,000 2,598,728 +189,126 +2,448,728

Limitations on obligations.......................... (9,347,605) (19,618,706) (9,733,706) (+386,101) (-9,885,000)
Total budgetary resources......................... (11,757,207) (19,768,706) (12,332,434) (+575,227) (-7,436,272)
=========================================================================================
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

Operations and maintenance (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund).... 28,400 36,028 36,028 +7,628 ................

Maritime Administration

Maritime Security Program..................................... 210,000 211,000 275,000 +65,000 +64,000
Operations and training....................................... 171,155 194,146 175,160 +4,005 -18,986
Assistance to small shipyards................................. 5,000 ................ 10,000 +5,000 +10,000
Ship disposal................................................. 5,000 20,000 20,000 +15,000 ................

Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account:
Administrative expenses................................... 3,135 3,000 3,000 -135 ................
Guaranteed loans subsidy.................................. 5,000 ................ 2,000 -3,000 +2,000
Rescission................................................ ................ -5,000 ................ ................ +5,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Maritime Administration.......................... 399,290 423,146 485,160 +85,870 +62,014

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Operational expenses:
General fund.............................................. 21,000 23,688 23,207 +2,207 -481
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 21,000 23,688 23,207 +2,207 -481

Hazardous materials safety:
General fund.............................................. 55,619 68,249 57,619 +2,000 -10,630
Special permit and approval Fees.......................... ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 55,619 68,249 57,619 +2,000 -10,630

Pipeline Safety:
Pipeline Safety Fund...................................... 124,500 153,443 129,671 +5,171 -23,772
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund............................ 22,123 19,500 20,288 -1,835 +788
Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund........................ ................ 2,000 ................ ................ -2,000
Pipeline safety information grants (by transfer).......... ................ (1,500) (1,500) (+1,500) ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 146,623 174,943 149,959 +3,336 -24,984
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 223,242 266,880 230,785 +7,543 -36,095
Administration.........................................

Pipeline safety user fees..................................... -124,500 -153,443 -129,671 -5,171 +23,772
Pipeline safety design review fee............................. ................ -2,000 ................ ................ +2,000

Emergency preparedness grants:
Limitation on emergency preparedness fund................. (28,318) (28,318) (28,318) ................ ................
(Emergency preparedness fund)......................... (188) ................ ................ (-188) ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 98,742 111,437 101,114 +2,372 -10,323
Administration.....................................
=========================================================================================
Office of Inspector General

Salaries and expenses......................................... 87,472 90,152 93,550 +6,078 +3,398
Surface Transportation Board.................................. 32,375 ................ ................ -32,375 ................
Offsetting collections.................................... -1,250 ................ ................ +1,250 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 31,125 ................ ................ -31,125 ................
=========================================================================================
Total, title I, Department of Transportation............ 18,648,200 11,995,197 16,933,430 -1,714,770 +4,938,233
Appropriations...................................... (18,695,971) (14,436,197) (19,144,430) (+448,459) (+4,708,233)
Rescissions......................................... (-46,521) (-5,000) ................ (+46,521) (+5,000)
Rescissions of contract authority................... ................ (-2,436,000) (-2,211,000) (-2,211,000) (+225,000)
(By transfer)........................................... ................ (1,500) (1,500) (+1,500) ................
Limitations on obligations.............................. (56,355,237) (82,510,278) (57,725,278) (+1,370,041) (-24,785,000)
Total budgetary resources............................... (75,003,437) (94,505,475) (74,658,708) (-344,729) (-19,846,767)
=========================================================================================
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Management and Administration

Executive Offices............................................. 13,800 14,479 30,608 +16,808 +16,129
Administration Support Offices................................ 559,100 520,062 503,852 -55,248 -16,210

Program Office Salaries and Expenses:
Public and Indian Housing................................. 205,500 220,932 220,500 +15,000 -432
Community Planning and Development........................ 104,800 110,259 110,000 +5,200 -259
Housing................................................... 375,000 393,148 393,000 +18,000 -148
Policy Development and Research........................... 23,100 24,500 24,500 +1,400 ................
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity........................ 72,000 74,235 74,235 +2,235 ................
Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes........... 7,000 7,826 8,075 +1,075 +249
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 787,400 830,900 830,310 +42,910 -590
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Management and Administration.................... 1,360,300 1,365,441 1,364,770 +4,470 -671
=========================================================================================
Public and Indian Housing

Tenant-based rental assistance:
Renewals.................................................. 17,681,451 18,447,000 18,355,000 +673,549 -92,000
Tenant protection vouchers................................ 130,000 110,000 110,000 -20,000 ................
Administrative fees....................................... 1,650,000 2,077,000 1,768,696 +118,696 -308,304
Incremental rental vouchers............................... ................ 88,000 ................ ................ -88,000
Incremental family unification vouchers................... ................ ................ 20,000 +20,000 +20,000
Sec. 811 mainstream voucher renewals...................... 107,074 110,000 110,000 +2,926 ................
Veterans affairs supportive housing....................... 60,000 7,000 57,000 -3,000 +50,000
Mobility demonstration.................................... ................ 15,000 11,000 +11,000 -4,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal (available this fiscal year)................... 19,628,525 20,854,000 20,431,696 +803,171 -422,304

Advance appropriations.................................... 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 ................ ................
Less appropriations from prior year advances.............. -4,000,000 -4,000,000 -4,000,000 ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Tenant-based rental assistance appropriated in 19,628,525 20,854,000 20,431,696 +803,171 -422,304
this bill..............................................
=========================================================================================
Public Housing Capital Fund................................... 1,900,000 1,865,000 1,925,000 +25,000 +60,000
Public Housing Operating Fund................................. 4,500,000 4,569,000 4,675,000 +175,000 +106,000
Choice neighborhoods.......................................... 125,000 200,000 80,000 -45,000 -120,000
Family self-sufficiency....................................... 75,000 75,000 75,000 ................ ................
Native American Housing Block Grants.......................... 650,000 700,000 ................ -650,000 -700,000
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (17,452) (17,857) ................ (-17,452) (-17,857)
Indian blockgrants:
Indian Housing Blocks grants.............................. ................ ................ 654,000 +654,000 +654,000
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... ................ ................ (17,857) (+17,857) (+17,857)
Indian CDBG............................................... ................ ................ 60,000 +60,000 +60,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ ................ ................ 714,000 +714,000 +714,000

Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant........................... ................ 500 5,000 +5,000 +4,500
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account............ 7,500 5,500 6,500 -1,000 +1,000
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (1,190,476) (1,341,463) (1,585,366) (+394,890) (+243,903)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Public and Indian Housing........................ 26,886,025 28,269,000 27,912,196 +1,026,171 -356,804
=========================================================================================
Community Planning and Development

Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS................... 335,000 335,000 335,000 ................ ................

Community Development Fund:
CDBG formula.............................................. 3,000,000 2,800,000 3,000,000 ................ +200,000
Indian CDBG............................................... 60,000 80,000 ................ -60,000 -80,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 3,060,000 2,880,000 3,000,000 -60,000 +120,000

Community development loan guarantees (Section 108):
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (300,000) (300,000) (300,000) ................ ................
HOME Investment Partnerships Program.......................... 950,000 950,000 950,000 ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ 950,000 950,000 950,000 ................ ................

Self-help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity Program...... 55,700 ................ 54,000 -1,700 +54,000
Homeless Assistance Grants.................................... 2,250,000 2,664,000 2,330,000 +80,000 -334,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Community Planning and Development............... 6,650,700 6,829,000 6,669,000 +18,300 -160,000
=========================================================================================
Housing Programs

Rental assistance demonstration............................... ................ 50,000 4,000 +4,000 -46,000

Project-based rental assistance:
Renewals.................................................. 10,405,000 10,581,000 10,666,000 +261,000 +85,000
Contract administrators................................... 215,000 235,000 235,000 +20,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal (available this fiscal year)................... 10,620,000 10,816,000 10,901,000 +281,000 +85,000

Advance appropriations.................................... 400,000 400,000 400,000 ................ ................
Less appropriations from prior year advances.............. -400,000 -400,000 -400,000 ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Project-based rental assistance appropriated in 10,620,000 10,816,000 10,901,000 +281,000 +85,000
this bill..............................................
=========================================================================================
Housing for the elderly....................................... 432,700 505,000 505,000 +72,300 ................
Housing for persons with disabilities......................... 150,600 154,000 154,000 +3,400 ................
Policy Development and Research (transfer out)............ ................ (-770) ................ ................ (+770)
Housing counseling assistance................................. 47,000 47,000 47,000 ................ ................
Rental housing assistance..................................... 30,000 20,000 20,000 -10,000 ................
Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund.......................... 10,500 11,500 10,500 ................ -1,000
Offsetting collections.................................... -10,500 -11,500 -10,500 ................ +1,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Housing programs................................. 11,280,300 11,592,000 11,631,000 +350,700 +39,000
=========================================================================================
Federal Housing Administration

Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account:
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (400,000,000) (400,000,000) (400,000,000) ................ ................
(Limitation on direct loans).............................. (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ................ ................
Offsetting receipts....................................... -7,003,000 -7,437,000 -7,437,000 -434,000 ................
Proposed offsetting receipts (HECM)....................... -97,000 -97,000 -97,000 ................ ................
Additional offsetting receipts (Sec. 238)................. ................ -30,000 ................ ................ +30,000
Administrative contract expenses.......................... 130,000 160,000 130,000 ................ -30,000

General and Special Risk Program Account:
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (30,000,000) (30,000,000) (30,000,000) ................ ................
(Limitation on direct loans).............................. (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ................ ................
Offsetting receipts....................................... -657,000 -464,000 -464,000 +193,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Housing Administration................... -7,627,000 -7,868,000 -7,868,000 -241,000 ................
=========================================================================================
Government National Mortgage Association

Guarantees of Mortgage-backed Securities Loan Guarantee
Program Account:
(Limitation on guaranteed loans).......................... (500,000,000) (500,000,000) (500,000,000) ................ ................
Administrative expenses................................... 23,000 23,000 23,000 ................ ................
Offsetting receipts....................................... -118,000 -101,000 -101,000 +17,000 ................
Offsetting receipts....................................... -747,000 -1,102,000 -1,102,000 -355,000 ................
Proposed offsetting receipts (HECM)....................... -21,000 -21,000 -21,000 ................ ................
Additional contract expenses.............................. 1,000 1,000 1,000 ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Gov't National Mortgage Association.............. -862,000 -1,200,000 -1,200,000 -338,000 ................
=========================================================================================
Policy Development and Research

Research and technology....................................... 85,000 65,000 90,000 +5,000 +25,000
(By transfer)............................................. ................ (120,000) ................ ................ (-120,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total (including transfer).............................. 85,000 185,000 90,000 +5,000 -95,000
=========================================================================================
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

Fair housing activities....................................... 65,300 70,000 65,300 ................ -4,700

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

Lead hazard reduction......................................... 110,000 110,000 135,000 +25,000 +25,000
Policy Development and Research (transfer out)............ ................ (-550) ................ ................ (+550)
Information Technology Fund................................... 250,000 286,000 273,000 +23,000 -13,000
Office of Inspector General................................... 126,000 129,000 129,000 +3,000 ................

General Provisions

Unobligated balances (Sec. 241) (rescission).................. -14,000 ................ ................ +14,000 ................
=========================================================================================
Total, title II, Department of Housing and Urban 38,310,625 39,647,441 39,201,266 +890,641 -446,175
Development............................................
Appropriations...................................... (42,578,125) (44,510,941) (44,033,766) (+1,455,641) (-477,175)
Rescissions......................................... (-14,000) ................ ................ (+14,000) ................
Advance appropriations.............................. (4,400,000) (4,400,000) (4,400,000) ................ ................
Offsetting receipts................................. (-8,643,000) (-9,252,000) (-9,222,000) (-579,000) (+30,000)
Offsetting collections.............................. (-10,500) (-11,500) (-10,500) ................ (+1,000)
(By transfer)........................................... ................ 120,000 ................ ................ -120,000
(Limitation on direct loans)............................ (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) ................ ................
(Limitation on guaranteed loans)........................ (931,507,928) (931,659,320) (931,903,223) (+395,295) (+243,903)
=========================================================================================
TITLE III--OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Access Board.................................................. 8,023 8,190 8,190 +167 ................
Federal Housing Finance Agency, Office of Inspector General ................ (-50,000) ................ ................ (+50,000)
(legislative proposal) (transfer out)........................
Office of Inspector General (legislative proposal) (by ................ (50,000) ................ ................ (-50,000)
transfer)....................................................
Federal Maritime Commission................................... 25,660 27,490 27,490 +1,830 ................
National Railroad Passenger Corporation Office of Inspector 24,499 23,274 23,274 -1,225 ................
General......................................................
National Transportation Safety Board.......................... 105,170 106,000 106,000 +830 ................
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation......................... 175,000 140,000 135,000 -40,000 -5,000
Surface Transportation Board.................................. ................ 42,401 37,000 +37,000 -5,401
Offsetting collections.................................... ................ -1,250 -1,250 -1,250 ................
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ ................ 41,151 35,750 +35,750 -5,401

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness............. 3,530 3,600 3,600 +70 ................
=========================================================================================
Total, title III, Other Independent Agencies............ 341,882 349,705 339,304 -2,578 -10,401
=========================================================================================
TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

Community Development Fund (disaster relief category) (Sec. 300,000 ................ ................ -300,000 ................
420).........................................................

Grand total............................................. 57,600,707 51,992,343 56,474,000 -1,126,707 +4,481,657
Appropriations...................................... (61,615,978) (59,298,093) (63,518,750) (+1,902,772) (+4,220,657)
Rescissions......................................... (-60,521) (-5,000) ................ (+60,521) (+5,000)
Rescissions of contract authority................... ................ (-2,436,000) (-2,211,000) (-2,211,000) (+225,000)
Advance appropriations.............................. (4,400,000) (4,400,000) (4,400,000) ................ ................
Disaster relief category............................ (300,000) ................ ................ (-300,000) ................
Offsetting receipts................................. (-8,643,000) (-9,252,000) (-9,222,000) (-579,000) (+30,000)
Offsetting collections.............................. (-11,750) (-12,750) (-11,750) ................ (+1,000)
(By transfer)........................................... ................ 171,500 1,500 +1,500 -170,000
(Limitation on obligations)............................. (56,355,237) (82,510,278) (57,725,278) (+1,370,041) (-24,785,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[all]

All Congresses 93-116 (1973-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)

Any Version of Legislation
AS - Amendment Ordered to be Printed
ASH - Additional Sponsors House
ATH - Agreed to House
ATS - Agreed to Senate
CDH - Committee Discharged House
CDS - Committee Discharged Senate
CPH - Considered and Passed House
CPS - Considered and Passed Senate
EAH - Engrossed Amendment House
EAS - Engrossed Amendment Senate
EH - Engrossed in House
ENR - Enrolled
ES - Engrossed in Senate
FPH - Failed Passage House
HDS - Held at Desk Senate
IH - Introduced in House
IPS - Indefinitely Postponed Senate
IS - Introduced in Senate
LTH - Laid on Table in House
LTS - Laid on Table in Senate
PAP - Printed as Passed
PCS - Placed on Calendar Senate
PP - Public Print
Private Law
Public Law
RCH - Reference Change House
RCS - Reference Change Senate
RDS - Received in Senate
RFH - Referred in House
RFS - Referred in Senate
RH - Reported in House
RIH - Referral Instructions House
RS - Reported to Senate
RTH - Referred to Committee House
RTS - Referred to Committee Senate
SC - Sponsor Change

All Congresses 97-116 (1981-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)

Any State or Territory
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Any State
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

All Congresses 96-116 (1979-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)

All Congresses 81-116 (1949-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)
92 (1971-1972)
91 (1969-1970)
90 (1967-1968)
89 (1965-1966)
88 (1963-1964)
87 (1961-1962)
86 (1959-1960)
85 (1957-1958)
84 (1955-1956)
83 (1953-1954)
82 (1951-1952)
81 (1949-1950)

Any Topic
Agriculture
Arms Control
Aviation
Commercial
Consular
Dispute Settlement and Arbitration
Drugs/Illegal Substances
Environment
Extradition
Extradition and Criminal Assistance
Fisheries and Wildlife
Human Rights
Intellectual Property/Copyrights
International Law
International Law and Organization
Investment
Labor
Maritime Boundaries and Claims
Mutual Legal Assistance
Shipping and Marine Pollution
Taxation
Telecommunications
Terrorism
Trademarks/Patents
United Nations