94–510 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 114–129 

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2016 

MAY 27, 2015.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[together with] 

MINORITY VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 2577] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 

2016. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Title I—Department of Transportation .................................................... 2 5 

Title II—Department of Housing and Urban Development ................... 71 70 

Title III—Related Agencies ....................................................................... 141 102 

Title IV—General Provisions .................................................................... 148 107 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2016, 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 apVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

propriations) and accompanying reports of the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

This definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 

(obligational) authority is provided, as well as to discretionary 

grants and discretionary grant allocations made through either bill 

or report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made 

pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration, shall be applied equally to each budget item that is listed under said account 

in the budget justifications submitted to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations as modified by subsequent appropriations acts and accompanying committee reports, conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

The Committee expects that the operating plans will address 

each number listed in the reports, and warns that efforts to operate 

programs at levels contrary to the levels recommended and directed 

in these reports would not be advised. 

OPERATING PLANS AND REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

The Committee includes a provision (Sec. 405) establishing the 

authority by which funding available to the agencies funded by this 

act may be reprogrammed for other purposes. The provision specifically requires the advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: • creates a new program; • eliminates a program, project, or activity (PPA); • increases funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds 

have been denied or restricted by the Congress; • redirects funds that were directed in such reports for a 

specific activity to a different purpose; • augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 

percent, whichever is less; • reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, 

whichever is less; or • creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different from 

the congressional budget justifications or the table at the end 

of the Committee report, whichever is more detailed. 

The Committee retains the requirement that each agency submit 

an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities provided in this Act. Specifically, each agency must provide a table for each appropriation with columns displaying the 

budget request; adjustments made by Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the fiscal year enacted level. The table 

shall delineate the appropriation both by object class and by PPA. 

The report also must identify items of special Congressional interest. In certain instances, the Committee may direct the agency to 

submit a revised operating plan for approval or may direct changes 

to the operating plan if the plan is not consistent with the directives of the conference report and statement of the managers. 

The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a thorVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

ough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a detailed 

justification of increases and reductions and the specific impact of 

proposed changes on the budget request for the following fiscal 

year. Any reprogramming request shall include any out-year budgetary impacts and a separate accounting of program or mission impacts on estimated carryover funds. Reprogramming procedures 

shall apply to funds provided in this bill, unobligated balances from 

previous appropriations Acts that are available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2016, and non-appropriated resources such 

as fee collections that are used to meet program requirements in 

fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs and 

activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should be 

submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or a situation that could not have been anticipated when formulating the 

budget request for the current fiscal year. Except in emergency situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later 

than June 26, 2016. Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency submits a reprogramming or transfer request 

to the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive identical 

responses from the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the 

Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before 

proceeding and, if reconciliation is not possible, to consider the request to reprogram funds unapproved. 

The Committee would also like to clarify that this section applies 

to Working Capital Funds and that no funds may be obligated from 

working capital fund accounts to augment programs, projects or activities for which appropriations have been specifically rejected by 

the Congress, or to increase funds or personnel for any PPA above 

the amounts appropriated by this Act. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS 

Budget justifications are the primary tool used by the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is aware 

that the format and presentation of budget materials is largely left 

to the agency within presentation objectives set forth by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB). In fact, OMB Circular A–11, 

part 1 specifically instructs agencies to consult with congressional 

committees beforehand. 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. In the fiscal year 2015 report (H. Rpt. 113–464) the Committee highlighted the lack of pertinent information and detail and 

provided very clear direction: 

the content has shrunk, especially in many salaries and 

expenses accounts. Every dollar, full-time equivalent/fulltime position, and activity should be represented and accounted for. Grant and technical assistance accounts need 

more detail on how the funds were spent, and are proposed 

to be spent. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

However, the response from the various agencies, especially some 

of the modal administrations in DOT, is woefully deficient. This is 

not a complicated directive—just provide substantive details on the 

request. 

The Committee continues the direction that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2017 budget request by agencies funded 

under this Act contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests at the 

level of detail contained in the funding table included at the end 

of this report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed 

discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the 

agency’s financial plan from prior year enactment, detailed data on 

all programs, and comprehensive information on any office or agency restructurings. At a minimum, each agency must also provide 

adequate justification for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and materials that compare programs, projects, and 

activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2017 to the fiscal year 

2016 enacted levels. 

The Committee is aware that the analytical materials required 

for review by the Committee are unique to each agency in this Act. 

Therefore, the Committee expects that 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 2017 budget request. 

SURFACE AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION 

In order to be aware of how funds are allocated and spent, the 

Committee continues the direction to the Department of Transportation to report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House 

of Representatives and the Senate within 45 days of enactment of 

any surface extension or reauthorization on how the Department 

will enact the provisions of such extension or reauthorization, the 

allocations by state, and the effects on all the accounts in the Highway Trust Fund. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(5) 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $105,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 113,657,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 105,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥8,657,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill provides $105,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of 

the offices comprising the Office of the Secretary of Transportation 

(OST). The Committee’s recommendation is the same as the 2015 

enacted level and $8,657,000 below the request. The Committee’s 

recommendation includes individual funding for each of these offices as has been done in prior years. The following table (dollars 

in thousands) compares the fiscal year 2015 enacted level to the fiscal year 2016 budget request and the Committee’s recommendation 

by office. The Committee strongly urges the Department to manage 

hiring and attrition in 2015 to meet these levels for 2016. Reductions are also encouraged in the areas of travel and contracts. 

2015 Enacted 2016 Request 2016 House Bill 

Office of the Secretary .......................................................................... $2,696 $2,734 $2,734 

Deputy Secretary ................................................................................... 1,011 1,025 1,025 

Executive Secretariat ............................................................................ 1,714 1,769 1,769 

Policy ..................................................................................................... 9,800 11,796 9,310 

Small Business ..................................................................................... 1,414 — — 

Intelligence and Security ...................................................................... 10,600 10,793 10,793 

Chief Information Officer ...................................................................... 15,500 16,880 15,937 

General Counsel .................................................................................... 19,900 20,609 20,066 

Government Affairs ............................................................................... 2,500 2,546 2,500 

Budget ................................................................................................... 12,500 13,867 12,808 

Administration ....................................................................................... 25,365 27,611 26,029 

Public Affairs ........................................................................................ 2,000 2,029 2,029 

Innovative Finance ................................................................................ – – – 2,000 – – – 

Total: Salaries and Expenses .................................................. 105,000 113,657 * 105,000 

* Differences due to rounding. 

Immediate Office of the Secretary.—The immediate Office of the 

Secretary has primary responsibility to provide overall planning, 

direction, and control of departmental affairs. 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary.—The Office of the Deputy Secretary has primary responsibility to assist the Secretary in 

the overall planning, direction, and control of departmental affairs. 

The Deputy Secretary serves as the chief operating officer of the 

Department of Transportation. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

Executive Secretariat.—The Executive Secretariat assists the Secretary and Deputy Secretary in carrying out their responsibilities 

by controlling and coordinating internal and external documents. 

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.—The 

budget request proposed merging the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization with the appropriation for Minority 

Business Outreach to create one office addressing the needs of 

these stakeholders. The Committee’s recommendation reflects this 

reorganization and funds are provided under the header ‘‘Small 

and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Outreach.’’ 

Office of the Chief Information Officer.—The Office of the Chief 

Information Officer serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary 

on information resources and information systems management. 

Increases over fiscal year 2015 are provided for additional contractual services requirements, but not requested new FTE. 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs.—The 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs is responsible for coordinating all Congressional, intergovernmental, 

and consumer activities of the Department. 

The bill continues a provision (Sec. 185) that requires the Department to notify the Committees on Appropriations no fewer 

than three business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, loan, loan guarantee, line of credit commitment or full 

funding grant agreement totaling $750,000 or more is announced 

by the Department or its modal administrations from: (1) the Federal Highway Administration; (2) the airport improvement program 

of the Federal Aviation Administration; (3) the Federal Railroad 

Administration; (4) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other than the formula grants; (5) the Maritime Administration; and (6) any grant funded with the National Infrastructure 

Investments account. Such notification shall include the date on 

which the official announcement of the grant is to be made and no 

such announcement shall involve funds that are not available for 

obligation. The habit adopted by this Administration of selecting 

only certain congressional offices to receive the benefit of a four day 

advance notice is disingenuous and contrary to the spirit of the provision, which was created to give all offices an equal notice for any 

award. 

Office of the General Counsel.—The Office of the General Counsel 

provides legal services to the Office of the Secretary and coordinates and reviews the legal work of the chief counsels’ offices of the 

operating administrations. The funding recommendation does not 

include new FTE. 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.—The 

Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is responsible for developing, reviewing, and presenting budget resource requirements 

for the Department to the Secretary, Congress, and the Office of 

Management and Budget. Increases over fiscal year 2015 are provided for two new positions (one FTE). 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.—The Office 

of the Assistant Secretary for Administration serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary on department-wide administrative 

matters and the responsibilities include leadership in acquisition 

reform and human capital. Increases over fiscal year 2015 are proVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

vided to avoid furloughs, fully fund rent expenses, and add two full 

year positions. 

Office of Public Affairs.—The Office of Public Affairs is responsible for the Department’s press releases, articles, briefing materials, publications, and audio-visual materials. 

Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response.—The 

Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response is responsible for intelligence, security policy, preparedness, training and exercises, national security, and operations. 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Innovative Finance.—The 

Committee’s recommendation does not include $2,000,000 as requested to create this new office. The Department is encouraged to 

continue evaluating public-private partnerships and financing at 

the modal level and meetings of the Credit Council. 

Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy.—The 

Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy serves as 

the Department’s chief policy officer, and is responsible for the coordination and development of departmental policy and legislative 

initiatives; international standards development and harmonization; aviation and other transportation-related trade negotiations; the performance of policy and economic analysis; and the 

execution of the Essential Air Service program. 

The Department’s fiscal year 2016 OST budget request contained 

a number of new offices, FTE, and programs—new safety offices, 

a new and expanded permitting office, and a new group of data and 

technology experts, just to name a few. In the view of this Committee, even in a non-sequester budget environment, these offices 

are nothing but bureaucratic redundancy. Nowhere in the budget 

justifications for the creation of these new offices did the Department describe what savings would be achieved by the creation of 

new offices. Instead, the Department offered that these new offices 

would exist to oversee and coordinate with existing offices, or formalize and expand on working groups already working well. The 

Committee seeks to streamline Department operations and eliminate waste and duplication in order to keep down the costs of government. The Committee directs OST specifically, and the Department as a whole generally, to look across the various offices to 

identify how to better coordinate cross-cutting issues within existing resources. Further, the Committee directs OST to give a serious 

look to how the Office of Policy, the Research and Technology office, and the Transportation Planning, Research and Development 

office can realign their existing resources to better meet critical 

and relevant issues and avoid redundancy and duplication. There 

are plenty of resources in terms of FTE and funds. The Department 

needs to better align those resources to address the Nation’s priorities. 

Equipage loan guarantee.—Section 221 of the FAA Modernization 

and Reform Act of 2012 proposed a loan guarantee program to 

equip aircraft with the avionics required to meet the mandate that 

all aircraft be equipped with ‘‘ADS–B Out’’ avionics by 2020. The 

Committee directs the Secretary of Transportation to work with 

stakeholders to evaluate how such a loan guarantee program can 

address the outstanding need for general aviation avionics upgrades required to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, the SecVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

retary is directed to provide a report to the Committee that outlines the policies, procedures, and organizational structure required 

to establish such a loan guarantee program no later than 180 days 

after enactment of this Act. 

Congressional budget justifications.—It’s a stunning revelation to 

consider how much effort and resources are spent at a staff level 

every year crafting budgets that are based on mythical encompassing authorizing legislation that may or may not get submitted 

to the Congress, and has little chance of getting enacted. A better 

use of resources would be to effectively and efficiently account for 

the funds provided and first submit a budget in line with existing 

accounts. 

The Department is directed to include in the budget justification 

funding levels for the prior year, current year, and budget year for 

all programs, activities, initiatives, and program elements. Each 

budget submitted by the Department must also include a detailed 

justification for the incremental funding increases and additional 

FTEs being requested above the enacted level, by program, activity, 

or program element. 

OST must include a discussion in its justification of changes from 

the current year to the request, plus a crosswalk of all accounts, 

existing and proposed, from one year to the next. To ensure that 

each adjustment is identified, the Committee directs OST in future 

congressional justifications to include detailed information in tabular format, which identifies specific changes in funding from the 

current year to the budget year for each office, including each office 

within OST, and every mode and office within the Department. 

Operating plan.—The Committee directs the Department to submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2016 signed by the Secretary 

for review by the Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of 

the bill’s enactment. The operating plan should include funding levels for the various offices, programs, and initiatives detailed down 

to the object class or program element covered in the budget justification and supporting documents, documents referenced in the 

House and Senate reports, and the statement of the managers (i.e. 

not simply the activities called out in bill language). Should the Department create, alter, discontinue, or otherwise change any program as described in the Department’s budget justification, those 

changes must be a part of the Department’s operating plan. 

Finally, the Department shall submit with the operating plan a 

summary of the DOT reporting requirements contained in the Act, 

the House and Senate reports, and the statement of the managers. 

The Committee requests a number of reports to gather information 

and conduct oversight. The summary should include Inspector General and Government Accountability Office reports as well. 

General provisions.—The Committee renews its direction to justify each general provision proposed either in its relevant modal 

congressional justification or in the OST congressional justification. 

If the budget proposes to drop or delete a general provision, the Department is directed to explain the change as well. Several modal 

budget volumes, including OST, failed to comply with this very 

simple and basic requirement. 

Bill language.—The bill continues language that permits up to 

$2,500,000 of fees to be credited to the Office of the Secretary for 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

salaries and expenses, limits reception and representation expenses 

to $60,000, and allows for a transfer of up to five percent between 

offices. 

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $13,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 14,582,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,386,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥1,614,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥3,196,000 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology coordinates, facilitates, and reviews 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; 

managing the Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System; 

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 recommendation provides $11,386,000 for re- search and technology activities, $3,196,000 below the budget request and $1,614,000 below fiscal year 2015. The recommendation 

does not include new FTE or funds to realign cost share percentages between offices and functions under this header. 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $500,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 1,250,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 100,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥400,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,150,000,000 

The National Infrastructure Investment program (also know as 

TIGER grants) was created in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to provide grants to state and local governments to improve the Nation’s transportation infrastructure. The 

infrastructure investment program awards funds on a competitive 

basis to grantees selected because of the significant impact they 

will have on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or region. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for National Infrastructure Investment grants, $400,000,000 below the 2015 level 

and $1,150,000,000 below the request. Funds are discretionary 

from the General Fund of the Treasury and available until September 30, 2018. 

The Committee provides funds for highway and bridge projects, 

transit projects, freight rail projects, and port infrastructure investVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

ments, including land ports of entry—the most critical areas to preserving, expanding, and improving our Nation’s transportation infrastructure. The bill retains language directing an equitable distribution of funds and stipulates that not less than 10 percent of 

the funds shall be for projects in rural areas. Further, not more 

than 20 percent of the funds may be awarded to projects in a single 

state. Up to 20 percent of the funds may be used for the subsidy 

and administrative costs of projects eligible for Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act assistance. Bill language 

is included to limit grants to a minimum of $2,000,000 and a maximum of $15,000,000 in urban areas, and a minimum of $1,000,000 

in rural areas. The Federal share for projects funded under this 

header is limited to 50 percent of the project cost in urban areas, 

and 80 percent in rural areas. The Secretary is directed to give priority to projects that require a Federal contribution to complete 

overall financing. All projects must comply with subchapter IV of 

chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code. Further, the Secretary 

may utilize up to $5,000,000 of the funds available to fund the 

oversight and administrative requirements in the various modes. 

The Department is directed to report to the Committees on Appropriations by June 30, 2016 outlining the evaluation criteria and 

selection process used for determining TIGER grant awards. Since 

2009, Congress has appropriated billions in taxpayer dollars to 

fund TIGER projects that are supposed to have a significant national or regional impact. After the first round of awards, GAO and 

the DOT OIG raised various concerns as to how the TIGER applications were selected for award. Since that time, these highly competitive projects have continued to garner significant interest as a 

way to address infrastructure needs throughout the country. Thus 

it is imperative that the projects are selected on a transparent, 

merit-based set of criteria. 

INTERAGENCY INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING IMPROVEMENT CENTER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $4,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥4,000,000 

The Interagency Infrastructure Permitting Improvement Center 

is requested to more formally expand the interagency working 

group created to cut infrastructure permitting and review 

timelines, and implement the Presidential Memorandum on Modernizing Infrastructure Permitting. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for the 

creation of a new office. The Department requested $4,000,000 and 

four new FTE. The Committee encourages the Department to continue with the existing dashboard working group to facilitate infrastructure permitting across agencies. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CAPITAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥4,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥4,000,000 

The Financial Management Capital program continues funding 

beyond the deployment of DOT’s multi-year project to upgrade 

DOT’s financial systems, processes and reporting capabilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for new reporting capabilities from the Department’s financial management systems, 

$4,000,000 below the budget request and the prior year. 

CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,000,000 

The Cyber Security Initiative is a new effort to close performance 

gaps in the Department’s cybersecurity. The initiative includes support for essential program enhancements, infrastructure improvements and contractual resources to enhance the security of the Department’s computer network and reduce the risk of security 

breaches. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $7,000,000 to support the Secretary’s cyber security initiative, which is $2,000,000 above 

the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $1,000,000 below the budget 

request. 

DATA ACT COMPLIANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $3,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥3,000,000 

The Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act) 

(P.L. 113 101) created another set of requirements for agencies to 

report financial data. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for 

DATA Act activities. The Department requested $3,000,000. The 

Committee encourages the Department to refine existing reporting 

and financial statement capabilities to meet DATA Act goals without expending significant amounts of resources. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

U.S. DIGITAL SERVICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $9,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥9,000,000 

The U.S digital services team is requested to provide private sector best practices in the disciplines of design, software engineering, 

and product management to DOT’s most important services in consultation with DOT’s Chief Information Officer. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for the 

creation of this new office. The Department requested $9,000,000 

and 41 term-limited FTE. 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $9,600,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 9,678,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,600,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥78,000 

The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the Secretary on civil rights and equal opportunity issues, and ensuring 

the full implementation of the civil rights laws and departmental 

civil rights policies in all official actions and programs. This office 

is responsible for enforcing laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination in federally operated and federally assisted transportation programs and enabling access to transportation providers. 

The Office of Civil Rights also handles all civil rights cases affecting Department of Transportation employees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $9,600,000 for the Office of Civil 

Rights, the same as the fiscal year 2015 funding level and $78,000 

below the budget request. 

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 10,019,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,976,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥24,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥4,043,000 

This appropriation finances research activities and studies related to the planning, analysis, and information development used 

in the formulation of national transportation policies and plans. It 

also finances the staff necessary to conduct these efforts. The overall program is carried out primarily through contracts with other 

federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private firms. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,976,000 for 

transportation planning, research, and development, which is 

$24,000 below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $4,043,000 

below the budget request. 

Of the funds provided, the recommendation includes a total of $4,958,000 for salaries and expenses. Further, the recommendation 

provides $888,000 for activities in the following areas: aviation 

data modernization, profit essentials software, the Mexico-U.S. civil 

aviation forum, air carrier fitness case management system, the 

National Export Initiative ($273,000), freight planning for national 

exports, the international transportation forum, open skies agreements, and the business aviation initiative. 

Open skies evaluation.—The Committee recommendation includes $50,000 for international regulatory cooperation and research, $50,000 for the airline alliance and joint venture competition research, and $30,000 for global carrier research. These funds 

will enable DOT to conduct economic analyses and review competition and regulatory standards to ensure that U.S. airlines and consumers realize the benefits of open skies agreements, especially as 

they relate to low-cost airlines and other emerging international 

competitors. 

The Committee is aware of concerns raised by some U.S. airlines 

and their employees with regard to existing open skies agreements 

and the issue of whether subsidies have resulted in market distortions. The Committee understands that an interagency process has 

been established to allow stakeholders to provide information to 

help inform any potential U.S. Government response to such allegations, including requesting consultations, as provided for under 

existing open skies agreements. The Committee directs the Department to ensure full consideration of comments from stakeholders 

and report to the Committees on Appropriations on its review of 

stakeholder input, including any potential corrective actions within 

the framework of existing open skies agreements, within 90 days 

of enactment. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $181,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 181,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... +181,500,000 

The working capital fund was created to provide common administrative services to the operating administrations and outside entities that contract for the fund’s services. The working capital fund 

operates on a fee-for-service basis and receives no direct appropriations; it is fully self-sustaining and must achieve full cost recovery. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $181,500,000 on the 

Working Capital Fund (WCF), the same as provided in 2015. The 

Administration did not propose a WCF legislative limitation. The 

Committee continues to stipulate that the limitation is only for 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

services provided to the Department of Transportation, not other 

entities. Further, the Committee directs that, as much as possible, 

services shall be provided on a competitive basis. 

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

Appropriation Limitation on 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................................... $925,000 ($18,367,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................................... 933,000 – – – 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... 933,000 (18,367,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................................................... 8,000 (+18,367,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................................................... – – – – – – 

Through the Short Term Lending Program, the minority business resource center assists disadvantaged, minority, and womenowned businesses with obtaining short-term working capital for 

DOT and DOT-funded transportation-related contracts. The program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at two percentage points above the prime interest rate with DOT guaranteeing up 

to 75 percent of the loan. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $933,000 for the resource 

center, the same as the budget request and $8,000 more than the 

2015 amounts. Of the funds provided, $336,000 is to cover the subsidy costs of guaranteed loans and $597,000 is for administrative 

expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan program. The Committee 

recommends a limitation on guaranteed loans of $18,367,000, the 

same as the limitation in fiscal year 2015. 

SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION AND OUTREACH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $4,513,000 1

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 4,518,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,518,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +5,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

1The total of the fiscal year appropriations for Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization ($1,414,000) 

and Minority Business Outreach ($3,099,000). 

The fiscal year 2016 budget proposes to merge the salaries and 

expenses of the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization with the minority business outreach program to provide contractual support to small and disadvantaged businesses and provide information dissemination and technical and financial assistance to empower those businesses to compete for contracting opportunities with DOT and DOT-funded contracts or grants for transportation-related projects. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $4,518,000 for 

small and disadvantaged business utilization and outreach, which 

is $5,000 more than the 2015 level. 

The Committee encourages the Department to partner with hispanic serving institutions and historically black colleges and uniVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

versities for research and information dissemination with regards 

to minority owned businesses. 

SAFE TRANSPORT OF OIL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $5,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥5,000,000 

DOT is requesting funds to address safety concerns emerging 

from the transport of the nation’s domestic energy products. Funds 

could be used for intermodal coordination, research, or response. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for the 

creation of this new office. The Department requested $5,000,000. 

The Committee has made investments in specific modes and encourages the Department to continue working through the modes 

to address concerns surrounding the transportation of energy products. 

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $155,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 175,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 155,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥20,000,000 

The Essential Air Service program (EAS) was created by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a ten-year measure to continue air 

service to communities that had received air service prior to deregulation. The program currently provides subsidies to air carriers 

serving small communities that meet certain criteria. 

The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 1996 

authorized the collection of ‘‘overflight fees’’. Overflight fees are a 

type of user fee collected by the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) from aircraft that neither take off from, nor land in, the 

United States. The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 increased the authorized level of overflight fee collection, and increased the amount that the Department can apply to the EAS program. The budget request estimates that fee will provide 

$108,379,000 for the EAS program in fiscal year 2016. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

For fiscal year 2016, the Committee includes $155,000,000 in discretionary funding for the EAS program, which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $20,000,000 below the budget request. 

The following table shows the discretionary, mandatory, and 

total program levels for the EAS program: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

Appropriation Mandatory Total program 

FY 2015 Appropriation ................................................................................ $155,000,000 $108,199,000 $263,199,000 

FY 2016 Request ........................................................................................ 175,000,000 108,379,000 283,379,000 

Committee Recommendation ...................................................................... 155,000,000 108,379,000 263,379,000 

The Committee remains concerned about the growing costs associated with the EAS program. While limiting the program to current sites and eliminating the requirement that EAS carriers utilize 15-passenger aircraft have helped mitigate some of the cost 

growth, the Committee believes that the Department should continue to explore reforms to the program that will create greater 

competition among carriers and control overall costs. 

The Committee directs the Department to utilize all the overflight fees collected for this program to alleviate the discretionary 

funding requirement for the program. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF

TRANSPORTATION

Section 101. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from approving assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the operating administrations in this Act, unless such 

assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification. 

Section 102. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Secretary or his designee to work with States and State legislators 

to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. 

Section 103. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department to use the Working Capital Fund to provide transit 

benefits to Federal employees. 

Section 104. The Committee continues the provision regarding 

administrative requirements of DOT’s Credit Council. 

Section 105. The Committee includes a new provision, as requested, regarding the timing of Federal transit benefits payments 

from the Working Capital Fund. 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for the 

safety and development of civil aviation and for the evolution of a 

national system of airports. The Federal Government’s regulatory 

role in civil aviation began with the creation of an Aeronautics 

Branch within the Department of Commerce pursuant to the Air 

Commerce Act of 1926. This Act instructed the Secretary of Commerce to foster air commerce; designate and establish airways; establish, operate, and maintain aids to navigation; arrange for research and development to improve such aids; issue airworthiness 

certificates for aircraft and major aircraft components; and investigate civil aviation accidents. In the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, 

these activities were subsumed into a new, independent agency 

named the Civil Aeronautics Authority. 

After further administrative reorganizations, Congress streamlined regulatory oversight in 1957 with the creation of two separate 

agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency and the Civil Aeronautics 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

Board. When the Department of Transportation began its operations on April 1, 1967, the Federal Aviation Agency was renamed 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and became one of several modal administrations within the department. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out with enactment of the Airline 

Deregulation Act of 1978, and ceased to exist at the end of 1984. 

FAA’s mission expanded in 1995 with the transfer of the Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation from the Office of the Secretary 

and contracted in December 2001 with the transfer of civil aviation 

security activities to the new Transportation Security Administration. 

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorized FAA 

programs through 2015 with several new mandates to improve the 

National Airspace System (NAS), including provisions regarding 

the NextGen program for Air Traffic Control and provisions regarding the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in civilian airspace. 

FAA Reform.—The authorization for the programs and activities 

of the Federal Aviation Administration is set to expire on September 30, 2015. A key issue in the reauthorization of FAA is 

whether to reform the structure of the FAA to give the agency 

more independence and control over agency resources. The Committee believes that congressional oversight of agency resources is 

necessary to ensure accountability for program performance and a 

sustained focus on aviation safety. As reforms are contemplated, 

the Committee believes that consideration should be given to the 

maintenance of a high standard of air traffic, technical and safety 

expertise; the impact of potential reforms on the cost of air travel 

for the consumer; the preservation of existing forums of public 

input; and the ability to sustain air traffic services in small communities. The Committee looks forward to engaging with the authorizing committee and stakeholders as various FAA reform proposals are considered. 

OPERATIONS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $9,740,700,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 9,915,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,847,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +107,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥67,300,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the operation, maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers administrative and 

managerial costs for the FAA’s regulatory, international, medical, 

engineering and development programs as well as policy oversight 

and overall management functions. 

The operations appropriation includes the following major activities: (1) operation on a 24-hour daily basis of a national air traffic 

system; (2) establishment and maintenance of a national system of 

aids to navigation; (3) establishment and surveillance of civil air 

regulations to ensure safety in aviation; (4) development of standards, rules and regulations governing the physical fitness of airmen 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

as well as the administration of an aviation medical research program; (5) administration of the acquisition, and research and development programs; (6) headquarters, administration and other staff 

offices; and (7) development, printing, and distribution of aeronautical charts used by the flying public. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $9,847,700,000 for FAA operations, 

which is $107,000,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

$67,300,000 less than the budget request. 

The following table shows a comparison of the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level, the budget request, and the Committee recommendation by budget activity: 

FY 2015 enacted FY 2016 request Committee 

recommendation 

Air Traffic Organization ............................................................ $7,396,654,000 $7,505,293,000 $7,505,293,000 

Aviation Safety .......................................................................... 1,218,458,000 1,258,411,000 1,258,411,000 

Commercial Space Transportation ............................................ 16,605,000 18,114,000 16,605,000 

Finance and Management ........................................................ 756,047,000 764,621,000 725,000,000 

NextGen and Operations Planning ............................................ 60,089,000 60,582,000 60,089,000 

Staff Offices .............................................................................. 292,847,000 207,099,000 282,302,000 

Security and Hazardous Materials Safety ................................ – – – 100,880,0001 – – – 

Total ................................................................................. 9,740,700,000 9,915,000,000 9,847,700,000

1 The Budget request breaks out Security and Hazardous Materials Safety from Staff Offices. Recommendation leaves these resources in 

Staff Offices. 

Justification of general provisions.—The Committee continues its 

direction to provide a justification for each general provision proposed in the FAA budget and therefore expects the fiscal year 2016 

budget to include adequate information on each proposed general 

provision. 

TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET

The bill derives $8,831,250,000 of the total operations appropriation from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The balance of the 

appropriation, $1,016,450,000, will be drawn from the general fund 

of the Treasury. 

AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

The bill provides $7,505,293,000 for the air traffic organization, 

which is $108,639,000 above the 2015 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

Contract tower program.—The Committee recommendation includes $154,400,000 for the contract tower program, including the 

contract tower cost-share program. The Committee continues to 

support the program as a safe, cost-efficient mechanism for providing air traffic services to pilots and local communities. The Committee notes that there are some contract towers that are more 

than 40 years of age and are non-compliant with OSHA standards. 

FAA should make every effort to address the urgent capital needs 

at these aged facilities. 

Chicago O’Hare International Airport.—The Committee directs 

the FAA to continue to work expeditiously to identify short and 

long term mitigation measures to address local concerns that have 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

been raised as a result of the O’Hare Modernization Program at 

Chicago O’Hare International Airport. The FAA is expected to provide a progress report on these measures to the Committee within 

90 days of enactment of this Act. 

Aeronautical navigation products.—The Committee directs the 

FAA to submit a report to the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations no later than 90 days after the enactment of the 

Act on the Department’s plans to competitively develop and field 

new, modern digital information products and web services that in 

turn will eventually allow the Department to reduce staffing within 

the Aeronautical Navigations Products division, satisfy NextGen 

data requirements, and improve safety. The plan should include details on planned funding by fiscal year, the Department’s acquisition strategy and timetable, and how these modern tools will be integrated into the oversight and management of these important 

programs. 

AVIATION SAFETY

The Committee provides $1,258,411,000 for aviation safety, which is $39,953,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

the same as the budget request. 

The Committee continues its direction requiring the Secretary to 

provide annual reports regarding the use of the funds provided, including, but not limited to, the total full-time equivalent staff years 

in the offices of aircraft certification and flight standards, total employees, vacancies, and positions under active recruitment. 

Aircraft certification.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$222,336,000 for the Aircraft Certification Service, an increase of 

$7,045,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. This funding level will provide an additional 

29 positions to address the increased workload in unmanned aircraft systems as well as support for risk based decision making to 

advance the use of Organization Delegation Authorization (ODA) in 

certification processes. The Committee remains concerned that 

delays in FAA certification of new aircraft and related technologies 

will impact the economic health and competitiveness of the U.S. 

aerospace industry. The Committee strongly supports the ODA program. The use of delegated authority in aircraft certification is a 

longstanding and essential practice in aviation. The Committee 

commends FAA for its intention to move to a systems and riskbased approach to oversight and allow manufacturers to fully use 

the authority provided by existing laws and regulation. However, 

doing so represents a significant shift for the FAA workforce that 

poses a number of challenges for the Agency to execute. The impact 

on the certification workforce in size and skill sets presents uncertainties that will need to be addressed by FAA. The Committee expects FAA to focus on areas that contribute to the greatest improvements while advancing new technologies into the marketplace 

without sacrificing safety. The Committee directs FAA to provide 

a status report regarding its efforts to improve the ODA oversight 

process, and train its workforce in systems and risk-based ODA 

oversight, no later than 180 days after enactment. 

Unmanned aircraft systems.—Given the rise in the number of 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) sightings at our nation’s airVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
20 

ports, the Committee urges the FAA to assess the threat posed by 

any potential interference with airport operations. The FAA is directed to assess the feasibility of integrating proven UAS mitigation technology with airport operations in order to detect, identify 

and track both the air vehicle and ground controller to explicitly 

identify the UAS without interference to existing airport operations. This assessment should review techniques to defeat an errant or hostile UAS without causing any collateral damage to essential navigation systems, wireless communications, the general 

public or other airport operations. The Committee directs that FAA 

to provide a letter report on its findings no later than 180 days 

after enactment of this Act. 

One engine inoperative policy.—The Committee directs FAA to 

carefully consider all comments that are submitted on the proposed 

policy regarding the impact of one engine inoperative procedures in 

obstruction evaluation aeronautical studies and to work with relevant stakeholders to preserve safety and efficiency while balancing the important needs of communities, airports and airport 

users. 

Global tracking of airline flights and recovery of flight data.—The 

Committee is aware that March 2015 marked the one-year anniversary of the disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 370. 

This tragedy and the costly, inconclusive search for the missing aircraft underscore the need for international standards on flight 

tracking and the transmission and recovery of flight data. 

Over the past year, the International Civil Aviation Organization 

(ICAO) has convened meetings with member states and industry 

representatives on the global tracking of airline flights and has 

issued a recommendation calling for the adoption of Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety Systems (GADSS). Under GADSS, all 

commercial aircraft built after 2020 would have to be equipped 

with a series of complimentary, performance-based technological 

capabilities, including deployable recorders, which together would 

ensure rapid location of downed aircraft and Black Box recovery. 

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has issued similar recommendations. 

The Committee supports these efforts and believes the United 

States must lead the international community on aviation safety 

and recovery issues. The Committee therefore expects FAA to work 

collaboratively with NTSB and its ICAO partners to expeditiously 

identify and implement international standards for flight tracking 

in accordance with these recommendations. Further, the Committee directs FAA to provide a report to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations on the agency’s efforts to support 

ICAO’s work in this area, including an update on the deployment 

initiative to demonstrate technological feasibility, as well as an 

evaluation of the costs and benefits of installing automatic 

deployable flight data recorders and other relevant technologies. 

Temporary flight restrictions.—The FAA issues temporary flight 

restrictions (TFRs) to restrict aircraft from operating within a defined area to protect persons or property in the air or on the 

ground. The Committee expects FAA to give careful consideration 

to the use and duration of TFRs issued for large events that 

present increased security risks. In addition, the Committee reVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 

quests that the FAA evaluate the impact of any potential changes 

to TFRs that would have an impact on air traffic management. 

COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

The Committee recommends $16,605,000 for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, which is the same as the fiscal year 

2015 enacted level and $1,509,000 below the budget request. 

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 urges FAA to 

issue 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 C.F.R. 440.9(d). 

The Committee supports utilizing NASA’s super heavy-lift 

launch capability, the Space Launch System (SLS), to execute commercial missions to low Earth orbit and beyond low Earth orbit 

destinations. The Committee applauds actions taken by the FAA 

Office of Commercial Space Transportation confirming the FAA’s 

willingness to leverage its existing launch licensing authority to encourage private sector investment in lunar systems that will work 

in tandem with SLS and Orion, by ensuring that commercial activities can be conducted on a non-interference basis. The Committee 

urges the FAA to continue to add details, such as specified zones 

of exclusive operation on the lunar surface. 

FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $725,000,000 for finance and management activities, which is $31,047,000 below the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $39,621,000 below the budget request. 

Workforce diversity.—The Committee directs FAA to continue to 

update the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the 

diversity of the controller workforce. The Committee notes that revised hiring procedures yielded a class of developmental controllers 

that represent a more diverse demographic. The Committee remains interested in the success of these new controllers and requests a briefing on their progress no later than March 1, 2016. 

NEXTGEN AND OPERATIONS PLANNING

The Committee recommends $60,089,000 for NextGen and Operations Planning, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted 

level and the $493,000 below the budget request. 

STAFF OFFICES

The budget request proposes to create a new Security and Hazardous Materials Safety Office with resources from Staff Offices. 

The Committee recommends maintaining these resources within 

Staff Offices. The Committee recommends $282,302,000 for Staff 

Offices, which is $10,545,000 below the enacted level and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

$25,677,000 below the budget request for both Staff Offices and the 

Security and Hazardous Materials Safety Office. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Second career training program.—The bill retains language prohibiting the use of funds for the second career training program. 

This prohibition has been in annual appropriations Acts for many 

years and is included in the President’s budget request. 

Aviation user fees.—The bill includes a limitation carried for several years prohibiting funds from being used to finalize or implement any new unauthorized user fees. 

Aeronautical charting and cartography.—The bill maintains the 

provision prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to conduct 

aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities through 

the working capital fund (WCF). 

Credits.—This bill includes language allowing funds received 

from specified public, private, and foreign sources for expenses incurred to be credited to the appropriation. 

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $2,600,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 2,855,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,500,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥100,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥355,000,000 

The Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account is the principal 

means for modernizing and improving air traffic control and airway 

facilities. The appropriation also finances major capital investments required by other agency programs, experimental research 

and development facilities, and other improvements to enhance the 

safety and capacity of the airspace system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000,000, 

for the FAA’s facilities and equipment program, $100,000,000 

below the level provided in fiscal year 2015 and a decrease of 

$355,000,000 below the budget request. The bill provides that, of 

the total amount recommended, $2,040,000,000 is available for obligation until September 30, 2018 and $460,000,000 (the amount for 

personnel and related expenses) is available until September 30, 

2016. These obligation availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts. 

The following table provides funding levels for facilities and 

equipment activities and budget line items. 

Program FY 2016 

Request 

FY 2016 

House 

Activity 1—Engineering, Development, Test and Evaluation 

Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping ................................................. $21,300,000 $20,000,000 

NAS Improvement of System Support Laboratory ...................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

William J. Hughes Technical Center Facilities ........................................................... 19,050,000 12,049,000 

William J. Hughes Technical Center Infrastructure Sustainment .............................. 12,200,000 12,200,000 

Separation Management Portfolio .............................................................................. 26,500,000 18,000,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
23 

Program FY 2016 

Request 

FY 2016 

House 

Improved Surface/TFDM Portfolio ............................................................................... 17,000,000 17,000,000 

On Demand NAS Portfolio ........................................................................................... 11,000,000 8,000,000 

Environment Portfolio ................................................................................................. 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Improved Multiple Runway Operations Portfolio ........................................................ 8,000,000 7,000,000 

NAS Infrastructure Portfolio ........................................................................................ 11,000,000 11,000,000 

NextGen Support Portfolio ........................................................................................... 10,000,000 10,000,000 

Performance Based Navigation & Metroplex Portfolio ............................................... 13,000,000 13,000,000 

Total Activity 1 .................................................................................................. 151,050,000 130,249,000 

Activity 2—Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment 

a. En Route Programs 

En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM)—System Enhancements and Tech 

Refresh ................................................................................................................... 79,400,000 75,000,000 

En Route Communications Gateway (ECG) ................................................................ 2,650,000 2,650,000 

Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)—Provide ................................................ 6,500,000 6,500,000 

ARTCC and CERAP Building Improvements/Plant Improvements .............................. 74,200,000 50,000,000 

ARTCC and CERAP Building Improvements/Plant Improvements .............................. 13,700,000 5,729,000 

Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure ................................................................ 9,750,000 3,900,000 

Air Traffic Control En Route Radar Facilities Improvements .................................... 5,810,000 5,100,000 

Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS) ............................................................. 9,900,000 9,900,000 

Oceanic Automation System ....................................................................................... 20,000,000 10,000,000 

Next Generation Very High Frequency Air/Ground Communications (NEXCOM) ......... 43,600,000 35,000,000 

System-Wide Information Management ...................................................................... 37,400,000 37,400,000 

ADS–B NAS Wide Implementation .............................................................................. 45,200,000 184,600,000 

Windshear Detection Service ...................................................................................... 5,200,000 4,300,000 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management Technologies WP2 & WP3 ............................. 9,800,000 9,800,000 

Time Based Flow Management Portfolio .................................................................... 42,600,000 40,000,000 

ATC Beacon Interrogator (ATCBI)—Sustainment ....................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

NextGen Weather Processors ...................................................................................... 7,000,000 7,000,000 

Airborne Collision Avoidance System X (ACASX) ........................................................ 10,800,000 10,800,000 

Data Communications in Support of NG Air Transportation System ........................ 234,900,000 234,900,000 

Subtotal En Route Programs ............................................................................. 659,410,000 733,579,000 

b. Terminal Programs 

Airport Surface Detection Equipment—Model X (ASDE–X) ....................................... 13,500,000 5,436,000 

Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR)—Provide .................................................. 4,900,000 1,900,000 

Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS) (TAMR Phase 1) ...... 81,100,000 81,100,000 

Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement Program (TAMR Phase 3) ........... 159,350,000 159,350,000 

Terminal Automation Program .................................................................................... 7,700,000 3,000,000 

Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities—Replace ....................................................... 45,500,000 45,500,000 

ATCT/Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) Facilities—Improve ................... 58,990,000 45,040,000 

Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR) .............................................................. 6,000,000 2,000,000 

NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards Compliance .............................. 39,600,000 39,600,000 

Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR–9) ........................................................................... 3,800,000 3,800,000 

Terminal Digital Radar (ASR–11) Technology Refresh and Mobile Airport Surveillance Radar (MASR) ............................................................................................... 9,900,000 9,900,000 

Runway Status Lights ................................................................................................ 24,170,000 24,170,000 

National Airspace System Voice System (NVS) .......................................................... 53,550,000 45,000,000 

Integrated Display System (IDS) ................................................................................ 23,300,000 16,917,000 

Remote Monitoring and Logging System (RMLS) ....................................................... 4,700,000 3,930,000 

Mode S Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) ......................................................... 16,300,000 8,100,000 

Surveillance Interface Modernization ......................................................................... 23,000,000 4,000,000 

Voice Recorder Replacement Program (VRRP) ........................................................... 3,000,000 1,000,000 

Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) .............................................................. 5,400,000 4,400,000 

Contingency Funding—Flight and Interfacility ATC Data Interface Modernization .. 9,000,000 9,000,000 

Subtotal Terminal Programs .............................................................................. 592,760,000 513,143,000

c. Flight Service Programs 

Aviation Surface Observation System (ASOS) ............................................................ 8,000,000 8,000,000 

Future Flight Services Program .................................................................................. 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Alaska Flight Service Facility Modernization (AFSFM) ............................................... 2,650,000 2,650,000 

Weather Camera Program .......................................................................................... 1,000,000 200,000 

Subtotal Flight Service Programs ...................................................................... 14,650,000 13,850,000 

d. Landing and Navigational Aids Program 

VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) with Distance Measuring Equipment 

(DME) ...................................................................................................................... 4,500,000 4,500,000 

Instrument Landing System (ILS)—Establish ........................................................... 7,000,000 7,000,000 

Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) for GPS ..................................................... 80,600,000 93,600,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

Program FY 2016 

Request 

FY 2016 

House 

Runway Visual Range (RVR) and Enhanced Low Visibility Operations (ELVO) ......... 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Approach Lighting System Improvement Program (ALSIP) ........................................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) ...................................................................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Visual NAVAIDS—Establish/Expand ........................................................................... 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Instrument Flight Procedures Automation (IFPA) ....................................................... 3,371,000 2,400,000 

Navigation and Landing Aids—Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) ................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 

VASI Replacement—Replace with Precision Approach Path Indicator ..................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

GPS Civil Requirements .............................................................................................. 27,000,000 10,000,000 

Runway Safety Areas—Navigational Mitigation ........................................................ 30,000,000 30,000,000 

Subtotal Landing and Navigational Aids Programs ......................................... 174,471,000 169,500,000 

e. Other ATC Facilities Programs 

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Management ................................................... 18,700,000 10,000,000 

Unstaffed Infrastructure Sustainment ....................................................................... 39,640,000 25,000,000 

Aircraft Related Equipment Program ......................................................................... 9,000,000 5,000,000 

Airport Cable Loop Systems—Sustained Support ..................................................... 12,000,000 5,000,000 

Alaskan Satellite Telecommunications Infrastructure (ASTI) ..................................... 12,500,000 10,000,000 

Facilities Decommissioning ........................................................................................ 6,000,000 5,700,000 

Electrical Power Systems—Sustain/Support .............................................................. 124,970,000 75,000,000 

FAA Employee Housing and Life Safety Shelter System Service ............................... 2,500,000 2,500,000 

Energy Management and Compliance (EMC) ............................................................. 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Child Care Center Sustainment ................................................................................. 1,600,000 1,600,000 

FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure ..................................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Subtotal Other ATC Facilities Programs ............................................................ 229,910,000 142,800,000 

Total Activity 2 ......................................................................................... 1,671,201,000 1,572,872,000 

Activity 3—Non-Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment 

a. Support Equipment 

Hazardous Materials Management ............................................................................. 26,400,000 20,000,000 

Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS) .................................................................... 20,200,000 11,900,000

Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF) ....................................................... 4,000,000 4,000,000 

National Air Space (NAS) Recovery Communications (RCOM) ................................... 12,000,000 12,000,000 

Facility Security Risk Management ............................................................................ 15,000,000 14,300,000 

Information Security ................................................................................................... 12,000,000 12,000,000 

System Approach for Safety Oversight (SASO) .......................................................... 18,900,000 18,900,000 

Aviation Safety Knowledge Management Environment (ASKME) ............................... 7,500,000 7,500,000 

Aerospace Medical Equipment Needs (AMEN) ........................................................... 2,500,000 1,500,000 

System Safety Management Portfolio ......................................................................... 17,000,000 17,000,000 

National Test Equipment Program ............................................................................. 4,000,000 2,000,000

Mobile Assets Management Program ......................................................................... 4,800,000 4,000,000 

Aerospace Medicine Safety Information Systems (AMSIS) ......................................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Tower Simulation System (TSS) Technology Refresh ................................................. 7,000,000 4,000,000 

Subtotal Support Equipment ............................................................................. 154,300,000 132,100,000 

b. Training, Equipment and Facilities 

Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization ..................................................... 15,200,000 12,000,000 

Distance Learning ....................................................................................................... 1,500,000 1,000,000 

Subtotal Training, Equipment and Facilities .................................................... 16,700,000 13,000,000 

Total Activity 3 ......................................................................................... 171,000,000 145,100,000 

Activity 4—Facilities and Equipment Mission Support 

a. System Support and Services 

System Engineering and Development Support ......................................................... 35,000,000 32,000,000 

Program Support Leases ............................................................................................ 46,700,000 40,000,000 

Logistics and Acquisition Support Services ............................................................... 11,000,000 10,000,000 

Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center Leases ............................................................... 18,800,000 18,350,000 

Transition Engineering Support .................................................................................. 19,200,000 14,000,000 

Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC) ............................................................. 23,000,000 17,429,000 

Resource Tracking Program (RTP) .............................................................................. 4,000,000 3,000,000 

Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD) .................................... 60,000,000 50,000,000 

Aeronautical Information Management Program ....................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Cross Agency NextGen Management .......................................................................... 3,000,000 2,000,000 

Total Activity 4 .................................................................................................. 225,700,000 191,779,000 

Activity 5—Personnel and Related Expenses 

Personnel and Related Expenses ............................................................................... 470,049,000 460,000,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

Program FY 2016 

Request 

FY 2016 

House 

Activity 6—Sustain ADS–B services and Wide Area Augmentation Services (WAAS) 

GEOs 

Activity 6—Sustain ADS–B services, WAAS GEOs ..................................................... 166,000,000 0 

SUB TOTAL ALL ACTIVITIES ....................................................................... 2,855,000,000 2,500,000,000 

Engineering, development, test and evaluation (Activity 1).—The 

programs funded in the engineering, development, test and evaluation activity are considered pre-implementation funding for various 

NextGen efforts. Unlike major acquisition programs, these projects 

are not provided a baseline by FAA and do not receive the program 

oversight given to other procurement programs. The Committee expects to understand how funding in this activity has advanced specific NextGen programs for enhancing capacity and reducing delays 

at congested airports. The Committee directs the IG to examine 

how these investments are managed and what specific outcomes 

have been achieved to improve the Nation’s air transportation system. 

NextGen—Separation management portfolio.—The Committee remains interested in space-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) as a means to enhance safety, increase 

capacity, and further the Equip 2020 initiative through early benefits. The Committee recommendation includes the amount in the 

budget estimate for space-based ADS–B and directs the FAA to 

identify resources from unobligated Facilities and Equipment funds 

to ensure the agency will be able to keep pace with neighboring air 

navigation service providers in adjacent oceanic airspace who have 

committed to using space-based ADS–B in 2018 to track aircraft 

and offer reduced separation services over the oceans. The Committee expects the agency to make a final investment decision regarding space-based ADS–B no later than May 31, 2016 and report 

back to the Committee within 30 days of that decision. 

Multi-Function Phased Array Radar program.—The Committee 

recognizes the importance of the Multi-Function Phased Array 

Radar (MPAR) program in the development and implementation of 

the next generation weather and aircraft radar surveillance network. Significant challenges require the collaborative inter-agency 

planning and research and development strategies for the future 

success of the program. The Committee directs that the FAA continue to collaborate with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) for the MPAR research and development 

effort and participate in an interagency committee with NOAA and 

other stakeholders to help formulate key requirements for development and eventual acquisition strategy. Additionally, the Committee directs the FAA to work with NOAA to facilitate a full evaluation of operational and other benefits associated with a fully digital, dual-polarization MPAR system, including but not limited, to 

weather surveillance, fine-scale numerical weather prediction, 

tracking of cooperative and uncooperative aircraft, discrimination 

of biological targets and small unmanned aerial systems, clutter 

suppression, data communication, and system reliability. The FAA 

should collaborate with NOAA to create a business case analysis of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

the MPAR program which considers operational feasibility and includes yearly costs and milestones. 

Performance-based navigation.—The Committee provides $13,000,000 for Performance Based Navigation (PBN), which is 

$13,500,000 below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. The Committee recognizes that PBN is the 

essential stepping stone to NextGen and a top investment priority 

for industry. The IG reported that at the large airports where the 

FAA has implemented advanced PBN procedures, only about 2 percent of eligible airline flights actually used them. The Committee 

is concerned about the obstacles that are hindering FAA’s efforts 

to increase use of PBN routes that have been highlighted in FAA, 

industry, and IG reports. Challenges include outdated controller 

policies and procedures governing PBN, the lack of standard training for pilots and controllers, and the lack of automated controller 

tools to effectively manage and sequence aircraft. The FAA has deployed the Time Based Flow Management automation tool, which 

can help controllers manage PBN operations at high altitude, but 

it is not yet used consistently across the nation. The Committee directs FAA to work with air traffic controllers to develop a plan for 

when and how it can introduce and widely use automation that can 

maximize the benefits of NextGen initiatives, such as PBN. Further, the Committee urges the FAA to substantively engage with 

local communities before the implementation of new flight paths 

and procedures, even when not mandated by law. The Committee 

believes this will yield positive benefits. 

Automatic dependent surveillance—broadcast.—The Committee 

provides $184,600,000 for Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast (ADS–B) implementation, the full amount requested for 

ADS–B in the ‘‘Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment’’ activity (Activity 2) and the ‘‘Sustain ADS–B Services’’’ (Activity 6). The 

Committee recommendation rejects the request to create a new Activity 6, and instead provides ADS–B resources for both of these activities in Activity 2. ADS–B is the Agency’s effort to transition to 

satellite-based navigation systems. FAA has mandated that airspace users equip with new ADS–B avionics by 2020. FAA is taking steps to work with industry and address concerns about the 

mandate through the ‘‘Equip 2020 Work Group’’. The Committee 

requests that the FAA keep the Committee informed of the outcomes and commitment of the working group. 

Data communications.—The Committee has provided 

$234,900,000 for Data Communications (Data Comm), an increase 

of $84,560,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the 

same as the budget request. The Committee notes that the Data 

Comm program has been identified at a priority NextGen activity 

by the NextGen Advisory Committee for its promise to deliver near 

term benefits. 

Runway status lights.—Reducing runway incursions is a high 

priority for improving aviation safety, and the Committee commends the FAA for initiating the runway status lights (RWSL) program to respond to NTSB’s safety recommendations. Due to budget 

constraints and unanticipated construction costs, however, in fiscal 

year 2014, the FAA split the program into two phases and is currently implementing RWSL at 17 airports. For the airports in 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
27 

phase II, the FAA has formed surface safety initiatives teams to 

recommend approaches for improving surface safety, including 

RWSL. The Committee directs FAA to submit a report to the 

House and Senate Appropriations Committees no later than 180 

days after enactment that details the status and analysis of the 

surface safety initiatives teams for each phase II airport that has 

elected to remain in the program. FAA should review the suitability of installing RWSL at airports being equipped with airport 

surface surveillance capabilities and include strategies for reducing 

the costs of installing and supporting RWSL. 

Omni-directional range/minimum operating network.—The Committee commends the FAA on the issuance of the December 15, 

2014 market survey to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of 

outsourcing the service provision of the Very High Frequency 

(VHF) Omni-Directional Range (VOR) Minimum Operating Network (VOR MON). Based on the responses to the survey, the Committee urges the FAA to continue this initiative by expanding the 

scope of the service based model to include tactical air navigation 

(TACAN) and distance measuring equipment (DME). In addition, 

the FAA shall provide the Committee with program milestones for 

implementation of the service based strategy. 

Tactical air navigation system.—The Committee is aware of the 

aging en-route TACAN and its continued importance to military 

aircraft. This navigation system provides the user with bearing and 

distance (slant-range) to a ground or ship-borne station. The existing TACAN system was installed in the early 1980s with the FAA 

en-route VHF Omni-Directional Range (VOR). While new Area 

Navigation (RNAV) systems will bring certain benefits, RNAV upgrades remain several years off for many military aircraft. The 

Committee directs the Secretary to submit a report to the Committee on the Department’s long term en-route TACAN maintenance and modernization plan to address this aging asset and the 

significant costs to transition to RNAV. 

ADS–B services and wide area augmentation services.—The Committee does not include a new activity, as proposed in the budget, 

for ADS–B and Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) leases, 

but instead provides funding for these purposes in the ADS–B and 

WAAS core program lines in the ‘‘Air Traffic Control Facilities and 

Equipment’’ Activity (Activity 2). 

BILL LANGUAGE

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

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $156,750,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 166,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 156,750,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥9,250,000 

This appropriation provides funding for long-term research, engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic conVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
28 

trol system and to raise the level of aviation safety, as authorized 

by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the Federal Aviation Act. The appropriation also finances the research, engineering 

and development needed to establish or modify federal air regulations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $156,750,000, the same as the enacted level and a decrease of $9,250,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes the following funding 

levels for Research, Engineering, and Development programs. 

Program FY 2016 Request FY 2016 House 

Fire Research & Safety ........................................................................................................ $6,643,000 $6,000,000 

Propulsion & Fuel Systems .................................................................................................. 3,034,000 2,500,000 

Advanced Materials/Structural Safety ................................................................................. 3,625,000 3,000,000 

Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety .................................................................................... 6,920,000 6,000,000 

Continued Air Worthiness .................................................................................................... 8,987,000 8,987,000 

Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research ............................................................. 1,433,000 1,433,000 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors .............................................. 9,947,000 6,802,000 

Safety System Management ................................................................................................ 6,063,000 6,063,000 

Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors ................................................... 5,995,000 5,410,000 

Aeromedical Research ......................................................................................................... 10,255,000 8,467,000 

Weather Research ................................................................................................................ 18,253,000 15,388,000 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research ................................................................................ 9,635,000 12,635,000 

NextGen—Alternative Fuels for General Aviation ............................................................... 5,833,000 7,000,000 

Total Safety ................................................................................................................. 96,623,000 89,685,000 

NextGen—Wake Turbulence ................................................................................................ 8,680,000 8,680,000 

NextGen—Air Ground Integration ........................................................................................ 8,875,000 8,875,000 

NextGen—Weather Technology in the Cockpit .................................................................... 4,116,000 4,116,000 

Commercial Space (in FY 15 buried in NextGen Air Ground Integration per FY 14 congressional language) ...................................................................................................... 3,000,000 1,000,000 

Total Economic Competiveness .................................................................................. 24,671,000 22,671,000 

Environment & Energy ......................................................................................................... 15,061,000 15,061,000 

NextGen Environmental Research—Aircraft Technologies, Fuels and Metrics .................. 23,823,000 23,823,000 

Environmental Sustainability ............................................................................................... 38,884,000 38,884,000 

System Planning and Resource Management ..................................................................... 2,377,000 2,100,000

WJHTC Lab Facilities ........................................................................................................... 3,445,000 3,410,000 

Mission Support ................................................................................................................... 5,822,000 5,510,000 

Total ............................................................................................................................ 166,000,000 156,750,000 

Unmanned aircraft systems research.—The FAA has established 

six UAS test sites, which are expected to provide valuable information for developing the regulatory framework for UAS integration. 

However, the FAA will need to ensure it develops a comprehensive 

plan to identify research priorities, including how data from test 

site operations will be gathered, analyzed, and used. The Committee recognizes these challenges and provides $12,635,000 for 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research, which is $3,000,000 above 

the budget request. These additional funds are provided to help 

meet the FAA’s UAS research goals of system safety and data gathering, aircraft certification, command and control link challenges, 

control station layout and certification, sense and avoid, and environmental impacts. 

NextGen-alternative fuels for general aviation.—The Committee 

provides $7,000,000 for alternative fuels research for general aviation, which is $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
29 

and $1,167,000 above the budget request. During the complex transition of the general aviation piston fleet to an unleaded fuel, an 

increase in funding above last year is merited to move from research to a phase focused on coordinating and facilitating the fleetwide evaluation, certification and deployment of an unleaded fuel 

and to help overcome any market issues that prevent it from moving forward. The Committee recognizes this is a multi-year effort 

and looks forward to updates on the continued progress on this initiative as it effectively balances environmental improvement with 

aviation safety, technical challenges, and economic impact. 

NextGen environmental research—aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics.—The Committee provides $23,823,000 for the FAA’s 

NextGen environmental research aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics program, which is $809,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the same as the budget request. In addition, the 

Committee continues to support the FAA’s continuous, lower energy emissions, and noise program (CLEEN). The CLEEN program 

has helped to advance the research and development of advanced 

engine and airframe technologies that conserve more fuel and 

produce fewer emissions than current technologies. 

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ................................................................................... $3,200,000,000 $3,350,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ............................................................................... 3,500,000,000 2,900,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ............................................................................................ 3,600,000,000 3,350,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................................................... +400,000,000 – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................................... +100,000,000 +450,000,000

The bill includes a liquidating cash appropriation of 

$3,600,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, which is 

$400,000,000 above the fiscal year 2015 level and $100,000,000 

above the budget request. This funding provides for liquidation of 

obligations incurred pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on obligations for grants-in-aid for airport planning and development, noise compatibility and planning, the military airport 

program, reliever airports, airport program administration, and 

other authorized activities. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

The bill includes a limitation on obligations of $3,350,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2016, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted 

level and $450,000,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee understands that current FAA regulations requiring commercial space 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 develVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
30 

opments 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 C.F.R. 

440.9(d). 

ADMINISTRATION AND RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Airport administrative expenses.—Within the overall obligation 

limitation, the bill includes $107,100,000 for the administration of 

the airports program by the FAA. This funding level is the same 

as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the budget request. 

Airport cooperative research program (ACRP).—The recommendation includes $15,000,000 which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and the budget request. The ACRP was established 

through Section 712 of the Vision 100—Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108–176) to identify shared problem areas facing airports that can be solved through applied research but are 

not adequately addressed by existing Federal research programs. 

Airport technology research.—The recommendation includes a 

minimum of $31,000,000 for the FAA’s airport technology research 

program which is $1,250,000 above the enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. The funds provided for this program are utilized to conduct research in the areas of airport pavement; airport 

marking and lighting; airport rescue and firefighting; airport planning and design; wildlife hazard mitigation; and visual guidance. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Runway incursion prevention systems and devices.—Consistent 

with prior year appropriations Acts, the bill allows funds under 

this limitation to be used for airports to procure and install runway 

incursion prevention systems and devices. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Section 110. The Committee retains a provision limiting the 

number of technical work years at the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to 600 in fiscal year 2016. 

Section 111. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting FAA 

from requiring airport sponsors to provide the agency ‘without cost’ 

building construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space 

in sponsor-owned buildings, except in the case of certain specified 

exceptions. 

Section 112. The Committee continues a provision allowing reimbursement for fees collected and credited under 49 U.S.C. 45303. 

Section 113. The Committee retains a provision allowing reimbursement of funds for providing technical assistance to foreign 

aviation authorities to be credited to the operations account. 

Section 114. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting the 

FAA from paying Sunday premium pay except in those cases where 

the individual actually worked on a Sunday. 

Section 115. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting FAA 

from using funds to purchase store gift cards or gift certificates 

through a government-issued credit card. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
31 

Section 116. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

approval from the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration of 

the Department of Transportation for retention bonuses for any 

FAA employee. 

Section 117. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

the Secretary to block the display of an owner or operator’s aircraft 

registration number in the Aircraft Situational Display to Industry 

program, upon the request of an owner or operator. 

Section 118. The Committee includes a provision that limits the 

number of FAA political appointees to 9. 

Section 119. The Committee includes a provision that prohibits 

funds for any increase in fees for navigational products until the 

FAA has reported a justification for such fees to the Committees 

on Appropriations. 

Section 119A. The Committee includes a provision that 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 119B. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules at 

Teterboro Airport in Teterboro, New Jersey. 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides financial 

assistance to the states to construct and improve roads and highways. It also provides technical assistance to other agencies and organizations involved in road building activities. Title 23 of the 

United States Code and other supporting statutes provide authority for the activities of the FHWA. Funding is provided by contract 

authority, while program levels are established by annual limitations on obligations, as set forth in appropriations Acts. 

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

At this time, it remains unclear what authorization law (or laws) 

will be effective during fiscal year 2016. Therefore, the Committee 

must recommend appropriations for programs without authorization and the Committee’s recommendations for FHWA are contingent upon reauthorization. 

The Committee therefore provides only minimal bill language 

that sets the overall FHWA obligation limitation for fiscal year 

2016, contingent upon authorization. It is the Committee’s intention that appropriations made by this bill will be wholly contingent 

on a reauthorization of the highway program and will be distributed only in accordance with the new authorization law. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
32 

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 1 ....................................................... $426,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 442,248,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 429,348,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +3,248,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥12,900,000 1Does not include $3,248,000 transferred to the Appalachian Regional Commission. 

The limitation on administrative expenses caps the amount, from 

within the limitation on obligations, that FHWA may spend on salaries and expenses necessary to conduct and administer the federal-aid highway program, highway-related research, and most 

other federal highway programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on FHWA administrative expenses of $429,348,000 including $3,248,000 transferred to 

the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC). After accounting for 

$3,248,000 transferred to ARC in fiscal year 2015, the recommendation is the same as the enacted level. The recommendation is $12,900,000 below the budget request. 

Adequate oversight.—The Committee believes that FHWA must 

carefully balance mission priorities with oversight responsibilities 

when exercising discretion over budgetary resources. The agency 

requires adequate administrative funding to maintain its leadership and oversight role. Without qualified staff and necessary operational investments, FHWA will not be able to maintain the many 

functions critical to supporting its state and local partners in the 

delivery of a safe and efficient transportation network. Recent hiring freezes and delays in key information technology investments 

threaten to undermine FHWA’s ability to administer core Federalaid highway and highway safety programs. The Committee directs 

the Department to allocate contract authority adequate to support 

the Committee’s recommendation for administrative expenses and 

the Appalachian Regional Commission. 

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

[In thousands of dollars] 

Program Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

request 1

Recommended in the 

bill 

Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation) ........................... 40,256,000 50,568,248 40,256,000 

Exempt contract authority ........................................................ 739,000 739,000 739,000 

Total program level ................................................. 40,995,000 51,307,248 40,995,000 

1 Includes $500,000,000 requested for a new program called Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation. 

The federal-aid highways program is designed to aid in the development, operations, and management of an intermodal transportation system that is economically efficient and environmentally 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

sound, to provide the foundation for the nation to compete in the 

global economy, and to move people and goods safely. 

Federal-aid highways and bridges are managed through a federal-state partnership. States and localities maintain ownership of 

and responsibility for the maintenance, repair and new construction of roads. State highway departments have the authority to initiate federal-aid projects, subject to FHWA approval of the plans, 

specifications, and cost estimates. The Federal government provides financial support, on a reimbursable basis, for construction 

and repair through matching grants. 

Programs included within the federal-aid highways program are 

financed from the highway trust fund. The federal-aid highways 

program is funded by contract authority, and liquidating cash appropriations are subsequently provided to fund outlays resulting 

from obligations incurred under contract authority. The Committee 

sets, through the annual appropriations process, an overall limitation on the total contract authority that can be obligated under the 

program in a given year. 

Because the structure of the federal-aid highways program for 

fiscal year 2016 is unknown at this time due to lack of authorizing 

legislation, the Committee includes no detailed summaries of particular programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total program level of $40,995,000,000 for the activities of FHWA in fiscal year 2016, contingent upon reauthorization. This amount is the same as fiscal 

year 2015 and $10,312,248,000 below the budget request. Included 

within the recommended amount is an obligation limitation of 

$40,256,000,000 and $739,000,000 in contract authority that is exempt from the obligation limitation. 

Railway-highway crossings.—The Committee directs the Secretary to encourage states to prioritize projects involving grade separation, with special emphasis on high-risk junctions involving rail 

and road traffic. 

Comprehensive freight networks.—The safe and efficient transportation of freight across our nation is vital to our economy. Section 1115 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act 

(MAP–21) required FHWA to establish a 27,000-mile primary 

freight network to help focus resources to improve the movement 

of freight. DOT’s proposed freight network includes gaps particularly with regard to the connections to international land ports of 

entry. DOT has indicated that a 41,000-mile network would be 

more comprehensive and would result in a connected and 

multimodal freight network system. The Committee encourages the 

authorizing committees of jurisdiction to consider expanding the 

freight network system in the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization bill. The Committee directs FHWA to work with the 

authorizing committees to identify a freight network that connects 

to high-volume land ports of entry. 

Streamlining of environmental impact reviews.—The Committee 

continues to monitor FHWA efforts to carry out the provisions of 

MAP–21. The Committee recognizes the efforts by the Department 

to implement provisions designed to streamline environmental imVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
34 

pact review processes and encourages the Department to continue 

efforts to work cooperatively with other federal and state agencies. 

The Committee urges the Department to continue participating in 

the facilitation of environmental impact process improvements for 

regional and national transportation projects, and to coordinate 

with relevant federal agencies, state and local governments, and 

other public interest groups. 

Marine highway infrastructure.—The Committee encourages 

FHWA to study the inclusion of marine highway infrastructure 

projects, such as the design and construction of innovative barge 

designs and adaptable port terminal infrastructure, within the surface transportation program or national highway performance program, and what impact such projects would have on the Department’s goals for those programs. 

Technology and innovation deployment program.—The Committee supports the technology and innovation deployment program’s efforts to improve the safety, efficiency, reliability, and performance of the nation’s transportation infrastructure. The Committee also notes the growing need to accelerate the adoption of 

proven practices, technologies, and materials that lead to faster 

construction, such as the use of carbon fiber composite materials in 

bridge replacement and rehabilitation. The Committee encourages 

FHWA to continue to support these innovative technologies. 

Other technologies such as GIS-based asset management practices on a cloud-based platform can help improve and optimize traffic through real-time traffic information, advanced structural monitoring of key assets, electrochemical-based fatigue crack growth detection, map-based identification of assets and construction plans, 

and regional and corridor-based truck traffic routing. These technologies, when applied as part of a comprehensive asset management plan, can save money, extend service life, and support riskinformed prioritization of capital expenditures. The Committee encourages the Department to use funds authorized under 503(c) of 

title 23, United States Code, for the demonstration and deployment 

of innovative asset management technologies. 

Accelerated bridge construction.—According to FHWA, nearly one 

fourth of the nation’s bridges require repair, rehabilitation, or replacement, or are not designed to current standards. On-site construction can lead to significantly decreased mobility and safety. To 

help reduce these impacts, and produce long-lasting bridges, the 

Committee encourages the Department to have one of the TIER– 

1 University Transportation Centers focus on accelerated bridge 

construction. 

Transportation infrastructure finance and innovation act program.—The Committee notes the significant role of Transportation 

Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act credit assistance in expanding the capacity of the federal-aid highways program to deliver projects. The Committee encourages FHWA to fully obligate 

amounts available for credit assistance, and to complete new credit 

agreements with eligible project sponsors in a timely manner. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
35 

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ..................................................... $40,995,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 1 ................................................. 51,307,248,000 

Recommended in the bill ............................................................... 40,995,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ............................................... ¥10,312,248,000 1 Includes $500,000,000 requested for a new program called Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation of $40,995,000,000, which is the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and 

$10,312,248,000 below the budget request. This is the amount required to pay the outstanding obligations of the highway program 

at levels provided in this Act and prior appropriations Acts. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

Section 120. The Committee continues a provision that distributes obligation authority among federal-aid highway programs. The 

provision has been updated to be consistent with changes to the 

underlying authorizing statute and is contingent on reauthorization. 

Section 121. The Committee continues a provision that credits 

funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the 

federal-aid highways account. 

Section 122. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

requirements for any waiver of the Buy America Act. 

Section 123. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

congressional notification before the Department provides credit assistance under the TIFIA program. 

Section 124. The Committee adds a provision that aligns certain 

federal and state truck weight requirements in the State of Idaho. 

Section 125. The Committee adds a provision that modifies certain federal truck trailer length requirements. 

Section 126. The Committee adds a provision that includes the 

State of Kansas under an agricultural exemption from federal 

truck trailer length requirements. 

Section 127. The Committee adds a provision that increases the 

set-aside for highway-railroad grade crossings. 

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) was 

established within the Department of Transportation (DOT) by 

Congress through the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 

1999. FMCSA’s mission is to promote safe commercial motor vehicle operations and reduce truck and bus crashes. FMCSA works 

with federal, state, and local entities, the motor carrier industry, 

highway safety organizations, and the public to further its mission. 

FMCSA resources are used to prevent and mitigate commercial 

vehicle accidents through regulation, enforcement, stakeholder 

training, technological innovation, and improved information systems. FMCSA also is responsible for enforcing Federal motor carVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
36 

rier safety and hazardous materials regulations for all commercial 

vehicles entering the United States along its southern and northern borders. 

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

It remains unclear what authorization law (or laws) will be effective during fiscal year 2016. Therefore, the Committee must recommend appropriations for programs without authorization and 

the Committee’s recommendations for FMCSA are contingent upon 

reauthorization. 

It is the Committee’s intention that appropriations made by this 

bill will be wholly contingent on reauthorization and will be distributed only in accordance with the new authorization law. 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of Contract Authorization Limitation on 

Obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................................... $271,000,000 ($271,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ..................................................................... 329,180,000 (329,180,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................. 259,000,000 (259,000,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................... ¥12,000,000 (¥12,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................................. ¥70,180,000 (¥70,180,000) 

This limitation controls FMCSA spending on salaries, operating 

expenses, and research. It provides resources to support motor carrier safety program activities and to maintain the agency’s administrative infrastructure. This funding supports nationwide motor 

carrier safety and consumer enforcement efforts, including the 

Compliance, Safety, and Accountability Program, regulation and 

enforcement of freight transport, and federal safety enforcement at 

the U.S. borders. These resources also fund regulatory development 

and implementation, information management, research and technology, grants to States and local partners, safety education and 

outreach, and the safety and consumer telephone hotline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $259,000,000 in liquidating cash for 

motor carrier safety operations and programs. The Committee also 

recommends limiting obligations from the highway trust fund to 

$259,000,000 for motor carrier safety operations and programs in 

fiscal year 2016. These levels, which are contingent upon reauthorization, are $12,000,000 below fiscal year 2015 and $70,180,000 

below the budget request. 

Within the amounts provided for operations and programs, the 

Committee recommends $1,000,000 for commercial motor vehicle 

operator grants, which provide commercial motor vehicle operators 

with critical safety training. This amount, which is contingent upon 

reauthorization, is $1,300,000 below fiscal year 2015 and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
37 

$1,000,000 above the budget request. These funds are not moved 

into the Motor Carrier Safety Grants account as requested. 

The Committee continues bill language specifying funding 

amounts for the research and technology program and for information management, and making those amounts available until September 30, 2018. 

Commercial driver license tests.—New drivers must obtain a commercial driver license (CDL) in order to begin work as a commercial vehicle operator but in some states CDL applicants are unnecessarily forced to wait up to 45 days to take their skills test. The 

Committee is concerned that these CDL testing delays are causing 

many qualified drivers to endure an unnecessarily long wait to be 

eligible for employment. The Committee directs FMCSA to consider 

steps it can take to ensure that qualified drivers are able to 

promptly enter the workforce. The Committee urges FMCSA to 

work with states to lower skills testing wait times to no more than 

seven days. The Committee encourages FMCSA to inform states 

with current delay times of more than seven days of the availability of third-party testers including schools, carriers, or other approved contractors that administer CDL skills tests. Anecdotal evidence indicates that states currently using the full range of testing 

options, including third-party testing, often have more reasonable 

wait times. 

Advanced safety technologies.—The Committee supports the use 

of safety features on all motor vehicles and is concerned about the 

need for commercial operators to receive exemptions every two 

years from regulations that have not been updated for advances in 

safety technology such as lane departure warning and autonomous 

emergency braking. The need to renew these exemptions is unnecessarily burdensome for industry and creates uncertainty for both 

manufacturers and drivers. The Committee believes these exemptions could be revised to be without ending dates until such time 

as FMCSA determines a reason for revocation. This would allow 

FMCSA to continue its review of these safety matters without imposing unnecessary costs and uncertainty on the industry. 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of Contract 

Authorization 

Limitation on 

Obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................................... $313,000,000 ($313,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ..................................................................... 339,343,000 (339,343,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................. 313,000,000 (313,000,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................................. ¥26,343,000 (¥26,343,000) 

FMCSA’s motor carrier safety grants are used to support compliance reviews in the states, identify and apprehend traffic violators, 

conduct roadside inspections, and conduct safety audits of new entrant carriers. Additionally, grants are provided to states for safety 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
38 

enforcement at the U.S. borders, improvement of state commercial 

driver’s license oversight activities, and improvements in linking 

states’ motor vehicle registration systems and carrier safety data. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $313,000,000 in liquidating cash for 

this program, as well as a $313,000,000 limitation on obligations, 

in fiscal year 2016. These levels, which are contingent upon reauthorization, are the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and 

$26,343,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommends the following obligation limitations 

for grants funded under this account: 

Motor carrier safety assistance program ............................................................................. ($218,000,000) 

Commercial driver’s license program improvement grants ................................................. (30,000,000) 

Border enforcement grants program .................................................................................... (32,000,000) 

Performance and registration information system management grants ............................. (5,000,000) 

Commercial vehicle information systems and networks deployment program ................... (25,000,000) 

Safety data improvement grants .......................................................................................... (3,000,000) 

New entrant audits.—Of the funds made available for the motor 

carrier safety assistance program, the Committee recommends 

$32,000,000 for audits of new entrant motor carriers, which is the 

same as fiscal year 2015. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 130. The Committee continues language subjecting the 

funds appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions included 

in prior appropriations Acts regarding Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

Section 131. The Committee continues language that requires 

FMCSA to send notice of 49 CFR section 385.308 violations by certified mail, registered mail, or some other manner of delivery which 

records receipt of the notice by the persons responsible for the violations. 

Section 132. The Committee continues with modification language to suspend enforcement of the restart provisions of the hours 

of service regulation that went into effect on July 1, 2013 unless 

the Secretary and the Department of Transportation Inspector 

General determine that a mandated study has met statutory requirements and that the results of such study demonstrate improvements across all outcomes. 

Section 133. The Committee continues language that prohibits 

funds from being used to deny an application to renew a hazardous 

materials safety permit unless a carrier has the opportunity to 

present its own corrective actions and the Secretary determines 

such actions are insufficient. 

Section 134. The Committee adds language that prohibits funds 

from being used to issue regulations that increase levels of minimum financial responsibility for motor carriers. 

Section 135. The Committee adds language that prohibits funds 

from being used for a wireless roadside inspection program until 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
39 

180 days after the Secretary makes specific certifications to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

was established in March of 1970 to administer motor vehicle and 

highway safety programs. It was the successor agency to the National Highway Safety Bureau, which was housed in the Federal 

Highway Administration. 

NHTSA’s mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce 

economic costs due to road traffic crashes, through education, research, safety standards and enforcement activity. To accomplish 

these goals, NHTSA establishes and enforces safety performance 

standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, investigates safety defects in motor vehicles, and conducts research on 

driver behavior and traffic safety. 

NHTSA provides grants and technical assistance to state and 

local governments to enable them to conduct effective local highway 

safety programs. Together with state and local partners, NHTSA 

works to reduce the threat of drunk, impaired, and distracted drivers, and to promote policies and devices with demonstrated safety 

benefits including helmets, child safety seats, airbags, and graduated licenses. 

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. 

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

At this time, it remains unclear what authorization law (or laws) 

will be effective during fiscal year 2016. Therefore, the Committee 

must recommend appropriations for programs without authorization and the Committee’s recommendations for NHTSA are contingent upon reauthorization. 

It is the Committee’s intention that appropriations made by this 

bill will be wholly contingent on reauthorization and will be distributed only in accordance with the new authorization law. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $836,500,000, which is $6,500,000 

above fiscal year 2015 and $71,500,000 below the budget request. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations: 

2015 enacted 2016 request Committee recommendation 

Operations and research (general fund and highway trust fund) ........ $268,500,000 $331,000,000 $275,000,000 

Highway traffic safety grants (highway trust fund) .............................. 561,500,000 577,000,000 561,500,000 

Total ............................................................................................... 830,000,000 908,000,000 836,500,000 

The Committee recommends funding levels that provide NHTSA 

with sufficient resources to continue its critical work improving the 

safety of passenger travel on the nation’s highway system. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
40 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(General fund) 1 (Highway trust 

fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................ $130,000,000 $138,500,000 $268,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... 179,000,000 152,000,000 331,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ..................................................................... 150,000,000 125,000,000 275,000,000

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... +20,000,000 ¥13,500,000 +6,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 .................................................... ¥29,000,000 ¥27,000,000 ¥56,000,000 

1 For comparison purposes, the table does not reflect the budget proposal to fund all of NHTSA’s Operations and Research activities with mandatory budget authority. 

The operations and research appropriations support research, 

demonstrations, technical assistance, and national leadership for 

highway safety programs. Many of these programs are conducted 

in partnership with state and local governments, the private sector, 

universities, research units, and various safety associations and organizations. These programs address alcohol and drug countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law enforcement, 

emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic records and licensing, traffic safety evaluations, motorcycle safety, pedestrian 

and bicycle safety, pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy 

driving, young and older driver safety programs, and development 

of improved accident investigation procedures. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $275,000,000, which is $6,500,000 

above fiscal year 2015 enacted and $56,000,000 below the budget 

request. Of this total, $150,000,000 is from the general fund for operations and vehicle safety research, and $125,000,000 is from the 

highway trust fund for operations and behavioral highway safety 

research. The Committee rejects the request to fund vehicle safety 

activities out of the highway trust fund rather than the general 

fund. The recommendation includes a $2,000,000 increase for the 

new car assessment program, a $5,000,000 increase for safety defects investigation, a $3,000,000 increase for crash avoidance, and 

a $4,100,000 increase for vehicle electronics and emerging technologies. 

Highway-rail grade crossing safety.—NHTSA has vast experience 

in addressing driver behaviors that threaten highway safety. Highway-rail grade crossings pose a major risk to highway safety and 

are an ongoing challenge for the safety community. Eliminating the 

most hazardous grade crossings will help reduce the risk to automobile and train passengers. The Committee urges NHTSA to work 

with states to target resources toward the most hazardous crossings. Additionally, increased public awareness will help educate 

drivers on the dangers of entering active highway-rail grade crossings. Therefore, the Committee provides $6,500,000 for NHTSA to 

develop a high visibility enforcement paid-media campaign in the 

area of highway-rail grade crossing safety. The Committee directs 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
41 

NHTSA to coordinate these resources with the media on other 

highway safety campaigns, and to work collaboratively with the 

Federal Railroad Administration on the campaign’s message development. 

Emerging technology research.—As vehicle safety features continue to advance, it is imperative that NHTSA have a clear understanding of various new technologies and implications for cybersecurity. Understanding how these advances are evolving and converging will ensure that consumers, regulators, and safety advocates are best able to navigate and implement these technologies. 

To forward this understanding, the Committee recommendation 

funds amounts requested for vehicle electronics and emerging technology research, and amounts requested for crash avoidance. 

Drug-impaired driving.—The Committee is concerned that incidents of impaired driving are rising, especially as states consider 

measures to decriminalize marijuana. A 2015 GAO report on drugimpaired driving found that NHTSA’s public awareness programs 

do not explicitly include information on the dangers of drug-impaired driving and that a reliance on terms like ‘‘sober’’ and 

‘‘drunk’’ in campaign slogans excludes the dangers of driving after 

consuming drugs like marijuana. GAO also found that state officials cite a need for public education more explicitly focused on 

drugged driving, particularly on impairment due to marijuana, prescription drugs, and over-the-counter medications. GAO recommends that NHTSA identify specific actions that the agency can 

take, in addition to its currently planned efforts, to support state 

efforts to increase public awareness of drug-impaired driving. The 

Committee directs NHTSA to follow GAO’s recommendation. 

NHTSA shall deliver a plan to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment that identifies and 

details these additional actions and provides a schedule of when 

and how they will be implemented. 

Distracted driving research alternatives.—NHTSA continues to 

conduct and rely on diverse research methodologies, including laboratory, simulator, test track, and naturalistic studies to understand and address the complex nature of distracted driving. 

NHTSA has a long history of using laboratory, simulator and test 

track methodologies as evidenced by 19 studies the agency has conducted over the past 12 years and has recently added naturalistic 

studies to expand its understanding of distracted driving. The Committee encourages NHTSA to continue conducting and using diverse methodologies in the agency’s efforts to address this challenging and risky driving behavior. 

Plastics and polymer-based composite materials.—The Committee 

recognizes the importance that plastics and polymer-based composite materials play in reducing vehicle weight and improving fuel 

economy. 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 federal fuel efficiency standards. The Committee recognizes that composite manufacturing is a new and growing industry and encourages NHTSA 

to work with industry partners to accelerate the advancement of 

the state of the art for computer modeling of advanced plastic and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
42 

polymer composites. This includes testing and evaluation techniques as well as validation of polymer-based composite safety performance in structural applications for the automotive industry. 

NHTSA should help facilitate cooperation between DOT, the Department of Energy, and industry stakeholders for the development 

of safe, light-weight automotive designs. 

Vehicle safety and fuel economy rulemaking and research priority 

plan.— The Committee commends NHTSA for its effort to keep the 

public abreast of its long term plans for ensuring motor vehicle 

safety. Documents such as the NHTSA Vehicle Safety and Fuel 

Economy Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011–2013 published in 2011 provide researchers, manufacturers, and consumers 

with a road map and timeline of how the agency plans to proceed 

with specific reforms. The Committee encourages NHTSA to reengage the public through biennial updates of the priority plan in 

an effort to ensure that all stakeholders are prepared for actions 

being considered. 

Child vehicle heatstroke prevention.—The Committee commends 

NHTSA for its work to educate the public on the dangers involving 

heatstroke in young children. These efforts have raised awareness 

and resulted in changes in behavior by parents and others. In order 

to sustain this progress, the Committee urges NHTSA to continue 

its prevention campaign including engagement with stakeholders. 

The Committee further urges NHTSA to focus on those states that 

experience the most child deaths per capita, and to utilize existing 

communications platforms, such as dynamic highway message 

signs, to enhance ongoing awareness programs during the hot 

weather season. 

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................................... $561,500,000 ($561,500,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ........................................................................... 577,000,000 (577,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 561,500,000 (561,500,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................................................... – – – (– – –) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................... ¥15,500,000 (¥15,500,000) 

The highway traffic safety state grant programs authorized 

under MAP–21 include: highway safety programs, national priority 

safety programs, and the high visibility enforcement program. 

These grant programs provide resources to states for highway 

safety programs that are data-driven and that meet states’ most 

pressing highway safety problems. They are a critical asset in reducing highway traffic fatalities and injuries. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $561,500,000 in liquidating cash 

from the highway trust fund to pay outstanding obligations of the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
43 

highway safety grant programs at the levels provided in this Act 

and prior appropriations Acts. The Committee also recommends 

limiting the obligations from the highway trust fund in fiscal year 

2016 for the highway traffic safety grants programs to 

$561,500,000. These levels are the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted 

and $15,500,000 below the budget request. The recommendation includes $5,574,000 for in-vehicle alcohol detection device research. 

The Committee recommends the following funding allocations for 

grant programs: 

Highway safety programs ..................................................................................................... ($235,000,000) 

National priority safety programs ......................................................................................... (272,000,000) 

High visibility enforcement program .................................................................................... (29,000,000) 

Administrative expenses ....................................................................................................... (25,500,000) 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 140. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

limited funding for travel and related expenses associated with 

state management reviews and highway safety core competency development training. 

Section 141. The Committee continues a provision that exempts 

from the current fiscal year’s obligation limitation any obligation 

authority that was made available in previous public laws. 

Section 142. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funding for the national highway safety advisory committee. 

Section 143. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funding for NHTSA’s national roadside survey. 

Section 144. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funds from being used to mandate global positioning system tracking without providing full and appropriate consideration of privacy 

concerns under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, subchapter II. 

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) was established by 

the Department of Transportation Act, on October 15, 1966. The 

FRA plans, develops, and administers programs and regulations to 

promote the safe operation of freight and passenger rail transportation in the United States. The U.S. railroad system consists of 

over 650 railroads with 200,000 freight employees, 171,000 miles of 

track, and 1.35 million freight cars. In addition, the FRA continues 

to oversee grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 

(Amtrak) with the goal of assisting Amtrak with improvements to 

its passenger service and physical infrastructure. 

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $186,870,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 203,800,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 186,870,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥16,930,000 

The safety and operations account provides funding for FRA’s 

safety program activities related to passenger and freight railroads. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
44 

Funding also supports salaries and expenses and other operating 

costs related to FRA staff and programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $186,870,000 for safety and operations, which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

$16,930,000 below the budget request. Of the amount provided 

under this heading, $15,400,000 is available until expended. Funding includes $1,060,000 to hire 16 new grade crossing managers 

and $265,000 to hire four trespass prevention managers. 

FRA hiring and vacancies.—Retaining employees and filling vacant positions has been an on-going challenge for FRA. On September 25, 2014, FRA finalized its Strategic Human Capital Plan, 

a document that includes strategies to recruit, retain, and align 

personnel with a changing environment. FRA has employed new 

strategies and appears to be making some progress in filling positions. However, as of April 10, 2015, the agency had 99 vacancies, 

a total of 11 percent of the agency’s 933 authorized positions. More 

than half of the vacancies (56) are in the office of railroad safety, 

and the overwhelming majority of those (43) are safety inspectors. 

The Committee directs FRA to provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation with comprehensive hiring and vacancy 

reports on a quarterly basis. 

Grade crossing safety.—According to FRA, from fiscal year 2013 

to 2014, the number of collisions at highway-railroad grade crossings increased by 12 percent and the number of fatalities remained 

a constant 249. However, on a calendar year basis, the number of 

fatalities increased by more than 15 percent. Since the beginning 

of this year, three tragic collisions in New York, North Carolina 

and California resulted in 7 fatalities and dozens of injuries. Rail 

grade crossing safety is a multi-modal safety challenge for the Department of Transportation. The Committee notes that the Acting 

FRA Administrator has reached out to law enforcement officials to 

increase awareness of the dangers at highway-railroad grade crossings and to urge additional oversight at crossings that present the 

highest risk. The Committee directs the FRA to require each State 

to develop and implement a State grade crossing action plan, which 

identifies specific solutions to improve safety at high risk crossings. 

In addition, the Committee directs FRA to require completion of 

plans no later than 18 months after enactment of this Act and to 

make each plan publicly available on its website. Further, FRA 

should collaborate with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on efforts to increase public awareness of the dangers 

at highway-railroad grade crossings and with the Federal Highway 

Administration to urge States to utilize highway safety improvement program funds to eliminate the grade crossings that pose the 

greatest risk. 

Congestion at international rail crossings.—Last year, the Committee directed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct an assessment of the best practices to reduce rail border crossing times and associated street blockage on the United States side 

of the border. The Committee understands GAO’s review will examine the impact of reduced staff changing times, pre-clearance options for train operators on either side of the border, and train opVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
45 

erator locations. GAO has commenced its review and the Committee looks forward to the final report and findings. 

Passenger Rail between Mexico & United States.—The Committee 

understands that standards or protocols for passenger rail between 

the United States and Mexico do not currently exist. The Committee encourages FRA to work with all relevant state and Federal 

agencies and their Mexican counterparts to study what standards 

and protocols are needed to facilitate a passenger and freight rail 

line between the United States and Mexico, in Texas, and other 

international land crossings. 

Transportation of crude oil by rail.—There have been three accidents involving crude oil shipments since the beginning of 2015, occurring in West Virginia, Illinois, and North Dakota. On April 17, 

2015, the FRA Acting Administrator, in coordination with the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration, announced a 

package of targeted actions to address some of the issues identified 

in recent crude oil and ethanol train accidents. It issued a new 

emergency order limiting trains carrying large amounts of class 3 

flammable liquid through highly populated areas to 40 mph in 

High Threat Urban Areas. In addition, it issued a safety advisory 

that strengthened brake and mechanical inspections on trains 

transporting large quantities of flammable liquids, and directed the 

industry to decrease the threshold for wayside detectors that measure wheel impacts. Another safety advisory directed that information about the train and its cargo immediately be available for use 

by emergency responders and Federal investigators. In addition, on 

May 1, 2015 DOT announced a final and comprehensive rule aimed 

at improving the safe transport of high hazard flammable liquids. 

Positive train control (PTC).—Section 104 of the Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) of 2008 required specified freight and passenger railroads to deploy positive train control systems by December 31, 2015, on regularly scheduled passenger commuter lines and 

lines that carry poisonous or toxic-inhalation-hazard materials. 

During the Committee’s March 25, 2015 hearing on FRA’s fiscal 

year 2016 budget request, FRA’s Acting Administrator acknowledged that full system build-out of PTC will not occur by the deadline. The Committee notes that the authorizing committees of jurisdiction are considering legislation that could address some of the 

issues associated with the PTC deadline. Full implementation of 

PTC will enhance the safety and efficiency of railroad operations; 

therefore, the Committee urges affected railroads to move aggressively to implement this important technology. The Committee directs FRA to provide progress updates on railroads’ PTC implementation. 

Multi-state planning.—The Committee urges the FRA to engage 

stakeholders in the southeastern region of the United States to develop a multi-state planning process for improving the intercity 

passenger rail network. The Committee directs FRA to provide an 

update on this effort to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees within 180 days of enactment. 

State-supported passenger rail.—Section 209 of the Passenger 

Rail Improvement and Investment Act (PRIIA) required Amtrak 

and affected states to develop and implement a standardized methodology for establishing and allocating operating and capital costs 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
46 

for State-supported Amtrak routes. As states and Amtrak progress 

in implementation of the section 209 cost-allocation methodology, 

the Committee urges FRA to provide the Section 209 Working 

Group appropriate technical and operational assistance. 

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $39,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 39,250,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 39,100,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥150,000 

The railroad research and development program provides science 

and technology support for FRA’s policy and regulatory efforts. The 

program’s objectives are to reduce the frequency and severity of 

railroad accidents through scientific advancement, and to support 

technological innovations in conventional and high speed railroads. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,100,000 for 

railroad research and development, which is $150,000 below the 

fiscal year 2016 budget request and equal to the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level. 

The funding level includes $2,000,000 to improve safety practices 

and safety training for Class II and Class III freight railroads. This 

supports FRA’s initiative to partner with short-line and regional 

railroads to build a stronger, sustainable safety culture in this segment of the rail industry. The initiative will support safety compliance assessments and training on short lines that transport crude 

oil. 

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM

The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) 

program was established by Public Law 109–178 to provide direct 

loans and loan guarantees to state and local governments, government-sponsored entities, and railroads. Credit assistance under the 

program may be used for rehabilitating or developing rail equipment and facilities. No federal appropriation is required to implement the program, because a non-federal partner may contribute 

the subsidy amount required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in 

the form of a credit risk premium. 

The Committee maintains bill language specifying that no new 

direct loans or loan guarantee commitments may be made using 

federal funds for the payment of any credit premium amount during fiscal year 2016. 

RAIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $2,325,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥2,325,000,000 1The Administration’s budget requested $2,325,000,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust 

Fund for a new rail service improvement program. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
47 

The FRA budget documents include a new rail service improvement program. The program is a new, unauthorized program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the rail service improvement program in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation is the 

same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level, and $2,325,000,000 

below the budget request. 

CURRENT PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 1 $2,450,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥2,450,000,000 1The Administration requested $2,450,000,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust Fund for a 

rail service improvement program, which includes funding for both capital and operating grants. 

In fiscal year 2016, the FRA requested a new current passenger 

rail service program that replaces the National Passenger Rail program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the current passenger rail service program in fiscal year 2016 instead; the Committee provides funds for this purpose under the heading, ‘‘Grants 

to the National Passenger Railroad Program’’. The recommendation 

is the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

$2,450,000,000 below the budget request. 

GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

(AMTRAK) 

Amtrak operates trains over 20,000 miles of track owned by 

freight railroad carriers, and over about 654 miles of its own track, 

most of which is on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) from Washington, D.C., to Boston, Massachusetts. Amtrak operates both electrified trains, which can achieve speeds of up to 150 mph on the 

highest quality track on the NEC, and diesel locomotives, which 

currently can achieve speeds between 74–110 miles per hour. 

Amtrak runs a deficit each year and requires a federal subsidy 

to cover both operating losses and capital investments. In the past, 

it was impossible to discern from Amtrak’s or FRA’s budget request 

or other publically available data, Federal funding required to operate Amtrak’s network by line of business. In fact, funding requests 

consistently exceeded operating losses by one-third. Amtrak is requesting funds in a clearer structure, by four lines of business. Amtrak budget request details revenues and expenses by each line of 

business. It is now transparent to Congress and the American taxpayers where Amtrak is using its Federal appropriations. 

Congressional budget justification.—The Committee appreciates 

the level of detail in the fiscal year 2016 budget justifications and 

directs Amtrak to continue to submit justifications with a similar 

level of detail in all future budget years. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
48 

The Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (PRRIA 

2015).—The U.S. House of Representatives passed PRRIA 2015 by 

a 316:101 margin on March 4, 2015. The bill developed a new 

structure for Amtrak that delineated the funding for Amtrak into 

two lines of business: the Northeast Corridor Improvement Fund; 

and the National Network, which includes long-distance trains and 

state supported routes; and overhead. It also includes authorizations for national infrastructure investments, or capital projects. 

The Committee looks forward to the enactment of a final bill. 

OPERATING GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER

CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... 1 $250,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 2 0 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3 288,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +38,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

1The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, allowed Amtrak to transfer up to 

$50,000,000 if and to the extent that operating losses exceeded $250,000,000. Amtrak’s operating loss totaled 

$289,600,000 in fiscal year 2015. A total of $39,600,000 of capital funds were transferred to offset operating 

losses. 2FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested 

$2,450,000,000 for the Current Passenger Rail account, which includes both operating and capital funds for 

Amtrak. 3The appropriation allows transfers of up to $20,000,000 if and to the extent that Amtrak’s operating 

losses exceed $288,500,000 in fiscal year 2016. 

Northeast Corridor profits are expected to increase to 

$366,800,000, an all-time high. However, losses on long-distance 

and state supported routes increased slightly and result in a total 

operating loss of $288,500,000 for the Corporation, mainly due to 

losses on the long-distance routes. The Corporation expects to require $1,100,000 fewer Federal dollars to subsidize the operation in 

fiscal year 2016 than it required in fiscal year 2015. The table 

below reflects the profitability, or lack thereof, of each of Amtrak’s 

lines of business. 

AMTRAK’S OPERATING PROFIT/(LOSS) 

By Line of Business 

FY 2011–FY 2016 

Line of business FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 1 FY 2014 FY 2015 

(Forecast) 

FY 2016 

(Request) 

Northeast Corridor $255,000,000 $283,000,000 $289,600,000 $286,300,000 $356,900,000 $366,800,000 

State Corridors .... (148,000,000) (156,000,000) (161,400,000) (88,600,000) (94,900,000) (93,100,000) 

Long Distance 

Routes ............. (554,000,000) (558,000,000) (587,000,000) (614,700,000) (628,400,000) (639,200,000) 

National Assets ... 1,000,000 69,000,000 100,400,000 77,000,000 76,900,000 76,900,000 

Total Profit/(Loss) (446,000,000) (362,000,000) (358,400,000) (340,000,000) (289,600,000) (288,500,000) 

1 The fiscal year 2013 figures include Hurricane Sandy impacts, which resulted in an operating loss of $50,000,000. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $288,500,000 for operating grants 

for Amtrak, equal to the amount of operating losses Amtrak expects to sustain in fiscal year 2016. This amount is $38,500,000 

above the fiscal year 2015 enacted appropriation; but $1,100,000 

less than the total operating subsidy after accounting for 

$39,600,000 in capital funds transfers in fiscal year 2015. For fiscal 

year 2016, the Committee includes a provision allowing Amtrak to 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
49 

transfer up to $20,000,000 in capital funds to the extent that the 

corporation’s operating losses exceed $288,500,000. 

Food, beverage and first class services.—Although Amtrak has 

consistently incurred losses on its food and beverage and first class 

service, the Corporation has developed a food and beverage plan 

that will end losses on food and beverage service in 2019. As the 

table below demonstrates, total food and beverage revenue has increased, and costs are fairly stable, resulting in some improvement 

in cost recovery. The Corporation continues to incur losses in this 

area, as expenses—particularly labor expenses—overwhelm revenues. In fiscal year 2016, Amtrak anticipates that losses will decrease to $53,200,000, and cost recovery will increase to 74 percent. 

AMTRAK’S FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES AND COST RECOVERY

FISCAL YEAR 2011–FY 2016 

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 (Forecast) 

FY 2016 (Forecast) 

Revenue ................ $121,500,000 $132,900,000 $134,400,000 $138,600,000 $143,900,000 $153,100,000 

Expenses ............... 206,000,000 204,900,000 207,400,000 214,400,000 203,800,000 206,300,000 

Loss ...................... (84,600,000) (72,000,000) (73,000,000) (75,800,000) (59,900,000) (53,200,000) 

Cost Recovery ....... 59% 65% 65% 65% 71% 74% 

As the tables below indicate, the major contributor to food and 

beverage losses is labor costs. The average fully loaded hourly compensation for the nearly 1,300 food and beverage employees ranged 

from $38.91 to $50.46 in fiscal year 2015. Amtrak’s last negotiated 

labor agreement expired in January 2015, and a new one is currently under negotiation. 

The Committee notes that on March 26, 2015, Amtrak’s president announced that the corporation will make changes to nonagreement retirement benefits, specifically pension and retiree 

medical plans, effective this summer. The new policy will not eliminate any benefits that employees have already accrued. Amtrak’s 

press release stated that the Corporation is an outlier compared to 

its competitors and can no longer sustain the growing financial 

burden of its retirement benefits. Amtrak stated that after modification, retiree benefits will be more consistent with other companies in the industry and other for-profit companies. These changes 

will affect approximately 3,000 managers, or about 15 percent of 

the workforce. It will result in almost $7,000,000 cash and 

$150,000,000 non-cash (liability) savings in fiscal year 2016 and additional amounts in the outyears. The Committee applauds Amtrak 

for making these hard choices and encourages Amtrak to consider 

similar measures to save taxpayers funds. 

FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES BY ROUTE TYPE

FISCAL YEAR 2015 (FORECAST) 

Routes 

Revenues Expenses 

Profit/Loss Cost Recovery Food and Beverage Revenue On-Board Labor Commissary Total Direct Costs 

Northeast Corridor $44,500,000 $14,400,000 $19,400,000 $33,800,000 $10,700,000 131.6% 

State-supported .... 27,300,000 17,400,000 16,000,000 33,400,000 (6,100,000) 81.7 

Long-Distance ....... 72,200,000 85,700,000 50,900,000 136,600,000 (64,400,000) 52.8 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
50 

FISCAL YEAR 2015 (FORECAST)—Continued 

Routes 

Revenues Expenses 

Profit/Loss Cost Recovery Food and Beverage Revenue On-Board Labor Commissary Total Direct 

Costs 

Total 143,900,000 117,500,000 86,300,000 203,800,000 (59,900,000) 70.6 

FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES BY ROUTE TYPE

FISCAL YEAR 2016 (FORECAST) 

Routes 

Revenues Expenses 

Profit/Loss Cost Recovery Food and Beverage Revenue On-Board Labor Commissary Total Direct 

Costs 

Northeast Corridor $47,200,000 $15,000,000 $19,500,000 $34,600,000 $12,600,000 136.4% 

State-supported .... 29,300,000 18,100,000 15,700,000 33,800,000 (4,500,000) 86.6 

Long-Distance ....... 76,600,000 87,300,000 50,600,000 137,900,000 (61,300,000) 55.1 

Total ............. 153,100,000 120,500,000 85,800,000 206,300,000 (53,200,000) 74.2 

Long distance routes accounted for the majority of food and beverage losses. While the Northeast Corridor will fully cover its costs 

and make a profit, the long distance routes will incur a loss and 

only recover a little over half of its food and beverage costs. 

Amtrak has implemented some efficiency improvements and continues to do so. Amtrak’s OIG report dated October 31, 2013 stated 

that past actions resulted in limited efficiency gains because they 

were applied to the existing business model and were balanced by 

increased labor costs. 

Amtrak Overtime.—Overtime expenses rose in calendar year 

2014 to $213,212,097, an increase of 14 percent above calendar 

year 2013. Overtime earned constituted nearly 17 percent of total 

wages for the corporation in calendar year 2014. 

AMTRAK WAGES AND OVERTIME

AGREEMENT EMPLOYEES 

Calendar Year 2011–Calendar Year 2014 

CY 2011 CY 2012 CY 2013 CY 2014 

Straight time Wages .............................. $957,800,000 $977,200,000 $1,022,700,000 $1,046,300,000 

Overtime Wages ..................................... 201,773,400 163,539,500 186,808,700 213,212,100 

Total Wages ........................................... 1,159,573,400 1,140,739,500 1,209,508,700 1,259,512,100 

Overtime as a Percentage of Wage ....... 17.4% 14.3% 15.4% 16.9% 

The Committee has included a provision for four years that limits overtime to $35,000 per employee, and allows Amtrak’s president to waive this restriction for specific employees for safety or 

operational efficiency reasons. As the table below shows, the number of employees that earned more than $35,000 in overtime totaled 1,197, an increase of 17 percent above calendar year 2013. 

Amtrak overtime payments to those that exceeded $35,000 per year 

totaled $58,648,300, an increase of nearly 20 percent above 2013. 

According to the corporation, overtime for employees earning over 

$35,000 per year increased because of the deterioration of on-time 

performance of many long-distance trains and vacancies and absences. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
51 

AMTRAK OVERTIME

OVERTIME EARNINGS EXCEEDING $35,000 PER YEAR 

Calendar Year 2011–Calendar Year 2014 

CY 2011 CY 2012 CY 2013 CY 2014 

Total Overtime Wages for employees 

that exceed $35,000 per year ........... $54,818,000 $32,681,000 $49,082,458 $58,648,000 

Number of Employees with Overtime Exceeding $35,000 per year ................. 1,123 703 1,022 1,197 

To ensure the Corporation continues to make progress managing 

its personnel and focusing on overtime reduction, the Committee 

includes bill language consistent with prior years, that limits overtime to $35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak’s president to waive 

this restriction for specific employees for safety or operational efficiency reasons, and requires notification to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations quarterly regarding waivers granted. It also requires Amtrak to submit an annual report summarizing overtime payments incurred by the corporation for calendar 

year 2015 and the three prior years. The summary shall include 

total number of employees that received waivers, total overtime 

payments paid to employees receiving waivers for each month for 

2015 and the prior three calendar years. 

Reduced price fares.—The bill continues a provision that prohibits funding on routes where Amtrak is offering 50 percent or 

more off the normal, peak fare. 

CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD

PASSENGER CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $1,140,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 1 ..................................................... – – – Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 850,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥290,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

1FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested $2,450,000,000 for the Current Passenger Rail account, which includes both operating and capital funds for 

Amtrak. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $850,000,000 for capital grants and 

debt service compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

The Committee’s recommendation is $290,000,000 below the level 

enacted in fiscal year 2015. 

Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission.—The Committee recommends up to $3,000,000. The Committee directs the Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission to submit its fiscal year 2017 budget 

request to the Appropriations Committees in similar format and 

substance as those submitted by other executive agencies of the 

federal government. 

Capital planning.—Amtrak OIG’s report dated September 27, 

2013 found that Amtrak had significant weaknesses in its capital 

planning process, and did not consistently employ sound business 

practices. The report stated that Amtrak approved purchases without a needs assessment or without identifying how a project would 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
52 

relate the financial and non-financial goals of the company. In the 

summer of 2014, Amtrak issued a corporate-wide policy for developing sound project proposals and improving business practices. 

The corporation has continued to strengthen that document. To ensure Amtrak continues to focus on sound financial practices, the 

Committee includes bill language requiring a business case analysis on capital investments that exceed $10,000,000 in life cycle 

costs. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

Section 150. The Committee retains a provision which allows 

FRA to receive and use cash or spare parts to repair and replace 

damaged automated track inspection cars and equipment in connection with the automated track inspection program. 

Section 151. The Committee continues a provision that limits 

overtime to $35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak’s president to 

waive this restriction for specific employees for safety or operational efficiency reasons, and requires notification to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of granting such waivers. It also requires Amtrak to submit an annual report summarizing overtime payments incurred by the Corporation 

for calendar year 2015 and the prior three years. The summary 

shall include total number of employees that received waivers, total 

overtime payments paid to employees receiving waivers for each 

month for 2015 and the prior three calendar years. 

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) was established as a 

component of the Department of Transportation on July 1, 1968, 

when most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit Act (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) were transferred from 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Known as the 

Urban Mass Transportation Administration until enactment of the 

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Federal Transit Administration administers federal financial assistance programs for planning, developing, and improving comprehensive mass transportation systems in both urban and non-urban 

areas. 

The most recent authorization for the programs under the Federal Transit Administration is contained in the Moving Ahead for 

Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21) (P.L. 112–141) and extensions. Annual Appropriations Acts included annual limitations 

on obligations for the transit formula grants programs, and direct 

appropriations of budget authority from the General Fund of the 

Treasury for the FTA’s administrative expenses, research programs, and capital investment grants. The transit programs authorized under MAP–21 expire on May 31, 2015. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
53 

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $105,933,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 114,400,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 102,933,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥11,467,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $102,933,000 for FTA’s administrative expenses, a decrease of $11,467,000 below the budget 

request and $3,000,000 below the 2015 enacted level. Of the funds 

provided, up to $4,000,000 is for authorized safety activities and 

not less than $750,000 is for asset management activities. The 

Committee’s recommendation provides these funds from the General Fund, as usual, and rejects the proposal to fund basic salaries 

and expenses from a trust fund. 

Operating plans.—The Committee reiterates its direction from 

previous years which requires the FTA’s operating plan to include 

a specific allocation of administrative expenses resources. The operating plan should include a delineation of full time equivalent employees, for the following offices: Office of the Administrator; Office 

of Administration; Office of Chief Counsel; Office of Communications and Congressional Affairs; Office of Program Management; 

Office of Budget and Policy; Office of Research, Demonstration and 

Innovation; Office of Civil Rights; Office of Planning and Environment; Office of Safety and Oversight; and Regional Offices. Further, the operating plan must include any new programs or 

changes to the budget request, including new grant programs. In 

addition, the Committee directs the FTA to notify the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations at least thirty days in advance of any change that results in an increase or decrease of more 

than five percent from the initial operating plan submitted to the 

Committees for fiscal year 2016. 

Budget justifications.—If the quality of the congressional budget 

justification documents was directly related to the funding recommendation of the Committee, FTA would be looking an administrative expenses level of $100. However, that wouldn’t allow for the 

timely release of formula funds and transit agencies across the 

country would suffer as a consequence, so the Committee is holding 

administrative expenses to near last year’s funding level. 

The Committee is open to considering increases, where appropriate, with careful and thoughtful justification provided by the 

agency. Asking for a 50 FTE increase with only one half-page chart 

comparing the number of staff against mythical program levels proposed in the budget is absurd. If FTA continues to seek additional 

staffing resources in fiscal year 2017, the budget justifications must 

improve. 

The Committee continues the direction to FTA to submit future 

budget justifications in a format consistent with the instruction 

provided in House Report 109–153. FTA is free to submit a budget 

in alternate formats, but must also include the information required by the Committee. Further, consistent with the direction 

provided in Office of the Secretary—Transportation, FTA is diVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
54 

rected to justify each general provision proposed. If the budget proposes to drop or delete a general provision, the Department is directed to explain the change as well. FTA failed to comply fully 

with this very simple and basic requirement in the fiscal year 2016 

budget documents. The Committee reminds FTA to provide this information. 

Annual new starts report.—The Committee has again included 

bill language requiring FTA to submit the annual new starts report 

with the initial submission of the budget request due in February, 

2016. 

Transit security.—The Committee continues bill language prohibiting FTA from creating a permanent office of transit security. 

Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).—TEA–21 required that 

the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Banking sixty days before 

executing a full funding grant agreement. In its notification to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the Committee 

directs the FTA to include the following: (1) a copy of the proposed 

full funding grant agreement; (2) the total and annual federal appropriations required for that project; (3) yearly and total federal 

appropriations that can be reasonably planned or anticipated for 

future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2020; (4) a detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and anticipated FFGAs 

against the program authorization; (5) an evaluation of whether 

the alternatives analysis made by the applicant fully assessed all 

viable alternatives; (6) a financial analysis of the project’s cost and 

sponsor’s ability to finance the project, which shall be conducted by 

an independent examiner and which shall include an assessment 

of the capital cost estimate and the finance plan; (7) the source and 

security of all public- and private-sector financial instruments; (8) 

the project’s operating plan, which enumerates the project’s future 

revenue and ridership forecasts; and (9) a listing of all planned contingencies and possible risks associated with the project. 

The Committee continues the direction to FTA to inform the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing thirty 

days before approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any 

full funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to changes 

shall include any budget revisions or program changes that materially alter the project as originally stipulated in the full funding 

grant agreement, including any proposed change in rail car procurements. 

In addition, the Committee directs FTA to continue reporting 

monthly to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on 

the status of each project with a full funding grant agreement or 

that is within two years of a full funding grant agreement. Considering the scale of the proposed projects, the changes to the program 

in MAP–21 and any future authorization acts, and the massive 

growth in this account, the Committee finds monthly oversight reports particularly useful. 

Core capacity.—FTA’s Rail Modernization Study in 2009 highlighted the state-of-good repair needs of our nation’s oldest transit 

systems and the challenges of increasing capacity on established 

legacy fixed-guideway systems to meet ridership demand. This 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
55 

study provided the framework for the eventual authorization of the 

core capacity program, and the Committee is interested in FTA’s 

implementation of this new, MAP-21 program. The Committee directs FTA to report within 180 days of enactment of this Act on 

how the new core capacity program could address both increased 

ridership and constrained infrastructure expansion challenges, particularly in legacy heavy rail systems. 

TRANSIT FORMULA GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................... $9,500,000,000 $8,595,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ........................................................... 13,800,000,000 13,800,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................ 9,500,000,000 8,595,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 .................................................. ¥4,300,000,000 ¥5,205,000,000 

MAP–21 provided contract authority for the transit formula 

grant programs from the mass transit account of the highway trust 

fund. These programs include: urbanized area formula, state safety 

oversight program, state of good repair grants, formula grants for 

rural areas, growing states and high density states, mobility for 

seniors and persons with disabilities, bus and bus facility formula 

grants, the bus testing facility, planning programs, transit oriented 

development, National Transit Institute, and the National Transit 

Database. The Appropriations Act sets an annual obligation limitation for such authority. This account is the only FTA account funded from the Highway Trust Fund. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an obligation limitation of 

$8,595,000,000 for the formula programs and activities, which is 

the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level. The Committee’s 

recommendation also includes $9,500,000,000 in liquidating funds. 

Funds are consistent with the final year of MAP–21 and contingent 

on authorization. 

Transit formula allocations.—The Committee stands by the principle that small and mid-sized cities should have equal opportunity 

to access Federal transit dollars as larger cities do, and supports 

efforts to recalculate funding formulas in order to ensure parity for 

these systems. The Committee is still awaiting the report due October 1, 2015 as requested in H. Report 113–136 regarding the transit formula allocation to medium and small cities. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
56 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... $25,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥25,000,000 

MAP–21 authorized a new program to provide funds to transit 

agencies after disaster events to restore service. Both capital and 

operating costs are eligible. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for emergency relief program. The Committee will make funding determinations for emergency funds on a case-by-case basis. 

TRANSIT RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $33,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 33,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 26,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥7,000,000 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to provide funds under § 5312 of title 49 

to invest in the development, testing, and deployment of innovative 

technologies, materials and processes; and under § 5313 of title 49 

to fund the National Academy of Sciences to conduct investigative 

research on subjects related to public transportation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $26,000,000 for transit research authorized, $7,000,000 below last year and the budget request. Funds 

are available for activities under § 5312 of title 49. The 2016 budget 

proposed $60,000,000 in one research account instead of the two account structure provided last year and in this bill. Of the total request, $33,000,000 was identified for innovative technologies and 

research. 

The Committee requires FTA to report by May 15, 2016, on all 

FTA-sponsored research projects from fiscal year 2015 and 2016 at 

the National Academy of Sciences. 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $4,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 27,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥1,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥24,000,000 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to provide technical assistance under 

§ 5314 of title 49 to the public transportation industry and to develop standards for transit service provision, with an emphasis on 

improving access for all individuals and transportation equity; and 

under § 5222 of title 49 for human resource and training activities, 

and workforce development programs. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
57 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for technical assistance 

and training, $1,500,000 below the 2015 level, and $24,000,000 

below the request. Funds are available for activities under § 5312 

of title 49. The 2016 budget proposed $60,000,000 in one research 

account instead of the two account structure provided last year and 

in this year’s bill. Of the total request, $27,000,000 was identified 

for innovative technologies and research. 

Public transportation options for seniors.—The Committee encourages FTA to continue exploring improvements for the transportation options for seniors, including public transportation options 

where available, but also including software programs that leverage unused private transportation capacity to promote transportation for seniors in small and rural communities. 

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $2,120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 3,250,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,921,395,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥198,605,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,328,605,000 

Grants for capital investment to rail or other fixed guideway 

transit systems are awarded to public bodies and agencies (transit 

authorities and other state and local public bodies and agencies 

thereof) including states, municipalities, other political subdivisions 

of states; public agencies and instrumentalities of one or more 

states; and certain public corporations, boards and commissions 

under state law. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,921,395,000 for capital invest- ment grants which is $198,605,000 below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $1,328,605,000 below the budget request. 

The fiscal year 2016 recommendation provides $1,250,000,000 for 

all current and on-going full funding grant agreements (FFGA) consistent with the agreed-upon payout schedules for each project. 

Signed FFGAs Fiscal Year 2016 Funds 

CA—Regional Connector Transit Corridor ........................................................................................... $100,000,000 

CA—Third Street Light Rail Phase 2—Central .................................................................................. 150,000,000 

CA—Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension .............................................................................................. 150,000,000 

CO—RTD Eagle Denver ........................................................................................................................ 150,000,000 

MA—Cambridge to Medford, Green Line ............................................................................................. 150,000,000 

HI—Honolulu ........................................................................................................................................ 250,000,000 

NC—Blue Line Extension, NE Corridor ................................................................................................ 100,000,000 

OR—Portland Milwaukie LRT ............................................................................................................... 100,000,000 

CA—Westside Subway Extension ......................................................................................................... 100,000,000 

Signed FFGA Total ....................................................................................................................... $1,250,000,000 

The Committee’s recommendation provides $250,000,000 for 

projects that will be signed under a FFGA by September 30, 2016. 

In addition, $353,000,000 is provided for nine new small start 

projects proposed in the budget. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
58 

Small Starts Fiscal Year 2016 Funds 

CA—FAX Blackstone/Kings Canyon Fresno ......................................................................................... $11,000,000 

CA—Van Ness Ave San Francisco ....................................................................................................... 30,000,000 

CA—San Rafael to Larkspur San Rafael ............................................................................................ 20,000,000 

NC—CityLYNX Gold Line Charlotte ...................................................................................................... 75,000,000 

NV—4th St/Prater Way Reno ............................................................................................................... 6,000,000 

OH—Cleveland Ave Columbus ............................................................................................................. 38,000,000 

TX—Montana Corridor El Paso ............................................................................................................ 27,000,000 

UT—Provo Orem Provo ......................................................................................................................... 71,000,000 

WA—Tacoma Link Tacoma .................................................................................................................. 75,000,000 

New Small Starts Total ............................................................................................................... $353,000,000 

Further, the Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the core capacity program authorized in MAP–21 and provides a total 

$28,395,000 (about 1.5 percent) for oversight activities related to 

the investments of this account. 

WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $150,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 150,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 100,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥50,000,000 

Section 601 of Division B of the Passenger Rail Investment and 

Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) (Public Law 110–432) authorized 

$1,500,000,000 over a ten-year period for preventive maintenance 

and capital grants for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA). The law requires that the federal funds 

be matched dollar-for-dollar by Virginia, Maryland and the District 

of Columbia in equal proportions. The compact required under the 

law has been established and Virginia, Maryland and the District 

of Columbia have all committed to providing $50,000,000 each in 

local matching funds. Fiscal year 2016 represents the 7th year of 

payments under PRIIA. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $100,000,000 for preventive maintenance and capital grants for WMATA, which is 

$50,000,000 below both the budget request and last year’s enacted 

level. 

The Committee does not make this recommendation lightly, and 

remains committed to assisting WMATA with its capital and safety 

needs. However, the Committee is looking to WMATA, FTA, and 

the governments of Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia to demonstrate their commitment to the region’s transit system, it’s financial health and sound planning, and actions to address infrastructure and safety concerns. Recruiting a strong leader 

to address the concerns raised by the National Transportation 

Safety Board (NTSB) and FTA would be a step in the right direction. 

The Committee directs WMATA to continue addressing the safety issues within the agency, specifically, those identified by the 

NTSB. WMATA is further directed to implement any and all corVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
59 

rective actions to address financial, contracting, and accounting 

concerns raised by FTA’s financial management oversight audit. 

As the fiscal year 2016 process continues, WMATA and FTA are 

directed to update the Committee monthly about any improvements made to WMATA’s financial and contracting systems and 

addressing material weaknesses. Should FTA indicate substantial 

improvement at WMATA in addressing these issues, the Committee will reevaluate the funding recommendation as the bill 

moves to conference. 

Finally, should the WMATA board endorse any effort to defer 

maintenance, or move funds from maintenance and safety to operating in order to address an operating budget shortfall, the Committee will view those budgetary shifts as a lack of commitment to 

the spirit in which PRIIA funds were provided and the Committee 

will consider its financial contributions accordingly. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

Section 160. The Committee continues the provision that exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on obligations. 

Section 161. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

funds appropriated for capital investment grants and bus and bus 

facilities not obligated by September 30, 2020, plus other recoveries 

to be available for other projects under 49 U.S.C. 5309. 

Section 162. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

for the transfer of prior year appropriations from older accounts to 

be merged into new accounts with similar, current activities. 

Section 163. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project with a new 

starts share greater than 50 percent. 

Section 164. The Committee includes a provision regarding a certain fixed guideway project in Houston, Texas. 

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $32,042,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 36,400,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 32,042,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – –

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥4,358,000 

The Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System, located between Montreal and Lake Erie, is a binational, 15-lock system 

jointly operated by the U.S. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 

Corporation (SLSDC) and its Canadian counterpart, the Canadian 

St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation. The SLSDC was 

established by the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of 1954 and is a wholly owned government corporation and an operating administration 

of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The SLSDC is 

charged with operating and maintaining the U.S. portion of the St. 

Lawrence Seaway. This responsibility includes the two U.S. locks 

in Massena, New York, vessel traffic control in portions of the St. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
60 

Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, and trade development functions to enhance the utilization of the St. Lawrence Seaway. 

The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorized the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund as a source of appropriations for 

SLSDC operations and maintenance. Additionally, the SLSDC generates non-federal revenues which can then be used for operations 

and maintenance. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $32,042,000 

to fund the operations, maintenance, and capital asset renewal 

needs of the SLSDC. This funding level is the same as the fiscal 

year 2015 appropriation and $4,358,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee continues the direction to the SLSDC to provide 

semiannual reports consistent with the requirements stated in the 

Explanatory Statement of the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2009. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes funds as requested 

for the replacement of the Robinson Bay tugboat due to the safety, 

emergency response, and ice breaking missions of the vessel. While 

the Committee’s recommendation does not include new funds for 

the hands-free mooring system installation at Snell Lock, the 

SLSDC is free to utilize prior year unobligated funds for the 

project. 

MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is responsible for programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime industry in support of the 

Nation’s security and economic needs, as authorized by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936. MARAD’s mission is to promote the development and maintenance of an adequate, well-balanced United 

States merchant marine, sufficient to carry the Nation’s domestic 

waterborne commerce and a substantial portion of its waterborne 

foreign commerce, and capable of serving as a naval and military 

auxiliary in time of war or national emergency. MARAD, working 

with the Department of Defense (DoD), helps provide a seamless, 

time-phased transition from peacetime to wartime operations, 

while balancing the defense and commercial elements of the maritime transportation system. MARAD also manages the maritime 

security program, the voluntary intermodal sealift agreement program and the ready reserve force, which assures DoD access to 

commercial and strategic sealift and associated intermodal capability. Further, MARAD’s education and training programs through 

the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and six state maritime academies help create skilled U.S. merchant marine officers. 

MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $186,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 211,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 186,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥25,000,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
61 

The purpose of the Maritime Security Program (MSP) is to maintain and preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet to serve the national 

security needs of the United States. The MSP provides direct payments to U.S. flagship operators engaged in U.S.-foreign trade. 

Participating operators are required to keep the vessels in active 

commercial service and are required to provide intermodal sealift 

support to the Department of Defense in times of war or national 

emergency. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $186,000,000 for this account, consistent with the authorized funding level and the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2015, and $25,000,000 below the request. Funds are 

available until expended. 

The Committee does not provide $25,000,000 requested for new 

payments to shippers as the Congress has not adopted changes to 

the food aid program. 

OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $148,050,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 184,637,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 164,158,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +16,108,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥20,479,000 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $164,158,000 for MARAD operations and training expenses, $16,108,000 more than the fiscal year 2015 

funding level and $20,479,000 below the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

MARAD operations.—Of the funds provided, a total of 

$46,758,000 is for headquarters and regional office operations, of 

which $46,758,000 is for maritime environment and compliance 

program expenses. The Committee continues the reporting requirement that MARAD submit information on the number of vacancies 

at MARAD headquarters and regional offices, and the duties associated with each vacancy concurrent with the fiscal year 2016 

budget submission. 

United States Merchant Marine Academy.—The U.S. Merchant 

Marine Academy (the Academy or USMMA) provides educational 

programs for men and women to become shipboard officers and 

leaders in the maritime industry. The Committee continues to include language requiring all funding for the Academy go directly to 

the Secretary, and that 50 percent of the funding will not be available until MARAD submits a plan detailing how the funding will 

be spent. The Committee’s funding recommendation includes a 

total of $83,800,000 in fiscal year 2016 for the USMMA, of which 

up to $64,100,000 is for Academy operations and not less than 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
62 

$19,700,000 is for capital improvements. The committee’s recommendation includes $15,000,000 as requested for the renovation 

of Gibbs Hall, but not the $5,000,000 requested for architecture 

and engineering work associated with renovations of Melville and 

Fulton Halls. 

State maritime academies.—The Committee recommends 

$33,600,000 for the state maritime academies. Of the funds provided, $3,000,000 is for direct payments, $2,400,000 is for student 

payments, and $1,200,000 is for fuel assistance. Funds requested 

for enhanced mariner compliance and training are not included in 

the funding recommendation. 

Schoolships.—Per the direction in last year’s report, MARAD has 

examined the state of repair of all schoolships across the country 

and reported back to the Committee. The situation is dire. As suspected, the training ships at the various maritime academies are 

at the end of, if not beyond, their useful life. Extensive and expensive repairs are required to simply keep vessels safe. Schoolships 

are vital to a quality maritime education. The Committee’s recommendation for the state maritime academies includes 

$22,000,000 for the repair and maintenance of existing schoolships. 

Further, another $5,000,000 is recommended, as requested, for the 

design of a common schoolship design for all maritime academies 

under MARAD. 

SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $4,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥4,000,000 

MARAD serves as the federal government’s disposal agent for 

government-owned merchant vessels weighing 1,500 gross tons or 

more. The ship disposal program provides resources to dispose of 

obsolete merchant-type vessels in the National Defense Reserve 

Fleet (NDRF). The Maritime Administration was required by Public Law 106–398 to dispose of its obsolete inventory by the end of 

2006. These vessels pose a significant environmental threat due to 

the presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid 

and liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for ship disposal activities, the same as the fiscal year 2015 funding level and $4,000,000 

below budget request. Funds are available until expended. Considering MARAD has routinely exceeded its own performance goals for 

ship disposal in years past, this funding level should be sufficient 

to meet the 2017 deadline for ship disposal. The Committee encourages MARAD to continue all efforts to sell ships slated for disposal. 

Finally, MARAD should explore shifting costs associated with 

maintenance of the NS Savannah to the National Maritime Heritage Grant Program in either this year’s budget or the 2017 request. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
63 

MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAD (TITLE XI) PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $3,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 3,135,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,135,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... 35,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, as provided for by 

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

expended. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $3,135,000 for 

the Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program, which is 

$35,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funds 

are transferred to the ‘‘Operations and Training’’ account. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Section 170. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and 

make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD and rental payments 

shall be paid into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. 

Section 171. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

MARAD ship disposal. 

PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) administers nationwide safety programs designed to protect the public and the environment from risks inherent in the 

commercial transportation of hazardous materials by pipeline, air, 

rail, vessel, and highway. Many of these materials are essential to 

the national economy. The agency’s highest priority is safety, and 

it uses safety management principles and security assessments to 

promote the safe transport of hazardous materials and the security 

of the nation’s pipelines. 

OPERATIONAL EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $22,225,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 22,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,725,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥1,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,775,000 

This appropriation finances the operational support costs for 

PHMSA, including agency-wide functions of administration, management, policy development, legal counsel, budget, financial manVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
64 

agement, civil rights, human resources, acquisition services, information technology, and governmental and public affairs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,725,000 for PHMSA operational 

expenses. This is $1,500,000 below fiscal year 2015 enacted, and 

$1,775,000 below the budget request. The recommendation does not 

include funding for pipeline information grants to communities. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $52,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 64,254,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 60,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +8,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥3,754,000 

The hazardous materials safety program advances the safe and 

secure transport of hazardous materials (hazmat) in commerce by 

air, truck, railroad and vessel. PHMSA evaluates hazmat safety 

risks, develops and enforces regulations for transporting hazmat, 

educates shippers and carriers, investigates hazmat incidents and 

failures, conducts research, and provides grants to improve emergency response to transportation incidents involving hazmat. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $60,500,000, $8,500,000 above fiscal 

year 2015 enacted and $3,754,000 below the request. This funding 

level supports the agency’s existing hazardous materials safety program as well as increases requested to support the safe transport 

of energy products initiative. Increases requested for the risk management framework are not provided. The Committee recommends 

$7,570,000 of the total to remain available for three years for longterm research and development contracts. 

Special permits and approval fee proposal.—The Committee does 

not include the request for new special permits and approval fees. 

Additional fees within this account should be considered in the context of authorizing legislation originating in the committees of jurisdiction. 

Crude oil stabilization.—In order to better understand the energy 

product transportation safety problem, the Committee encourages 

the Federal Railroad Administration and PHMSA to jointly study 

the issue of vapor pressure, a measure of crude oil volatility during 

transport. The agencies are encouraged to also study potential options for stabilizing crude prior to transfer and costs associated 

with each option. The Department shall update the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on their joint findings within 

180 days of enactment of this Act. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
65 

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

(Pipeline safety 

fund) 

(Oil spill liability 

trust fund) 

(Pipeline safety 

design review 

fund) 

(General fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 $124,500,000 $19,500,000 $2,000,000 $0 $146,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2016 .................................... 152,104,000 19,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 175,104,000 

Recommended in the bill ........ 124,500,000 19,500,000 0 1,870,000 145,870,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2015 ........................... – – – – – – ¥2,000,000 +1,870,000 ¥130,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2016 ................... ¥27,604,000 – – – ¥2,000,000 +370,000 ¥29,234,000 

PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage prevention, education and training, development and enforcement of regulations 

and policies, research and development, grants for states pipeline 

safety programs, and emergency planning and response to accidents. The pipeline safety program is responsible for a national 

regulatory program to protect the public against the risks to life 

and property in the transportation of natural gas, petroleum and 

other hazardous materials by pipeline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $145,870,000 to continue pipeline 

safety operations, research and development, and state grants-inaid, which is $130,000 below fiscal year 2015 enacted and 

$29,234,000 below the budget request. Of the total, $19,500,000 is 

from the oil spill liability trust fund, $124,500,000 is from the pipeline safety fund, and $1,870,000 is from the general fund. 

The Committee recommends $66,309,000 of the funds provided to 

remain available until September 30, 2018. 

The Committee recommendation provides $12,000,000 for research and development. $46,000,000 is provided for state pipeline 

safety grants, $1,000,000 is provided for state one-call grants, and 

$1,500,000 is provided for state damage prevention grants. Funding is provided for full year costs of additional staff hired in 2015, 

net of attrition. However, no additional program or personnel increases are funded in 2016. Funding requested for a national pipeline safety exchange is not provided. PHMSA shall deliver a report 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 120 

days of enactment that details staffing and hiring plans for fiscal 

year 2016 as well as actual turnover and hiring in fiscal year 2015. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
66 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

(Emergency preparedness fund) 

(Emergency preparedness grant 

program) 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................................... $188,000 ($28,318,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................................... 188,000 (28,318,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... 188,000 (28,318,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................................................... – – – (– – –) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................................................... – – – (– – –) 

The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 

1990 (Public Law 101–616) requires PHMSA to: (1) develop and implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grant program; 

(2) monitor public sector emergency response training and planning 

and provide technical assistance to states, political subdivisions 

and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update periodically a mandatory training curriculum for emergency responders. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $28,318,000 for the emergency preparedness grants program, which is the same as fiscal year 2015 

enacted and the budget request. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Inspector General’s office was established in 1978 to provide 

an objective and independent organization that would be more effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, waste, and abuse in 

departmental programs and operations; and (2) providing a means 

of keeping the Secretary of Transportation and the Congress fully 

and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of such programs and operations. According to the authorizing legislation, the Inspector General (IG) is to report dually to 

the Secretary of Transportation and to the Congress. 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $86,223,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 87,472,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 86,223,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,249,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $86,223,000 for the Office of Inspector General, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $1,249,000 below the budget request. The Committee continues to highly value the work of the IG in oversight of 

departmental programs and activities. 

Unfair business practices.—The bill maintains language first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the OIG to investigate 

allegations of fraud and unfair or deceptive practices and unfair 

methods of competition by air carriers and ticket agents. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
67 

Audit Reports.—The Committee requests the IG to continue forwarding copies of all audit reports to the Committee immediately 

after they are issued, and to continue to make the Committee 

aware immediately of any review that recommends cancellation or 

modifications to any major acquisition project or grant, or which 

recommends significant budgetary savings. The OIG is also directed to withhold from public distribution for a period of 15 days 

any final audit or investigative report which was requested by the 

House or Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Audit of Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, 

Texas.—The Committee directs the IG to conduct an audit into the 

financial solvency of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris 

County, Texas (Houston METRO). As part of this audit, the IG 

should conduct a stress test to determine if Houston Metro has 

adequate finances to pay for the construction of new rail lines, as 

well as the operation and maintenance of existing rail lines and the 

operation and maintenance of buses. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $31,375,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 32,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 31,375,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,124,000 

The Surface Transportation Board (STB) was created in the 

Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 and is 

the successor agency to the Interstate Commerce Commission. The 

STB is an economic regulatory and adjudicatory body charged by 

Congress with resolving railroad rate and service disputes and reviewing proposed railroad mergers. The STB is decisionally independent, although it is administratively affiliated with the Department of Transportation. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–432, (PRIIA), included new responsibilities for the STB. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,375,000 for 

fiscal year 2016, which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted 

level and 1,124,000 less than the request. The STB is estimated to 

collect $1,250,000 in fees which will offset the appropriation for a 

total program cost of $30,125,000. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Section 180. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department of Transportation (DOT) to use funds for aircraft, 

motor vehicles, liability insurance, uniforms, or allowances, as authorized by law. 

Section 181. The Committee continues the provision limiting appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S. C. 3109 to the rate 

for an Executive Level IV. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
68 

Section 182. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for salaries and expenses of more than 110 

political and Presidential appointees in DOT. The provision also requires that none of the personnel covered by this provision may be 

assigned on temporary detail outside DOT. 

Section 183. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

recipients of funds made available in this Act from releasing certain personal information and photographs from a driver’s license 

or motor vehicle record without express consent of the person to 

whom such information pertains, and prohibits the withholding of 

funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision. 

Section 184. The Committee continues the provision permitting 

funds received by specified DOT agencies from states or other private or public sources for expenses incurred for training to be credited to certain specified agency accounts. 

Section 185. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds for loans, loan guarantees, lines of credit, or grants unless 

the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations no less than three days in advance, 

and directs the Secretary to give concurrent notification for any 

‘‘quick release’’ of funds from the Federal Highway Administration’s emergency release program. 

Section 186. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds received from rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be 

credited to appropriations of the DOT. 

Section 187. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

amounts from improper payments to a third party contractor that 

are lawfully recovered by the DOT to be available to cover expenses 

incurred in the recovery of such payments, and allows the Secretary to credit an account that is associated with such improper 

payments. 

Section 188. The Committee continues the provision mandating 

that reprogramming action notifications shall be transmitted solely 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, and are 

to be approved or denied solely by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 189. The Committee continues the provision capping the 

amount of fees the Surface Transportation Board can charge and 

collect for rate or practice complaints filed at the amount authorized for court civil suit filing fees. 

Section 190. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds appropriated to modal administrations to be obligated for the 

Office of the Secretary for costs related to assessments only when 

such funds provide a direct benefit to that modal administration. 

Section 191. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

DOT to set uniform standards for transit benefits for agency transit passes and transit benefits. 

Section 192. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting the 

Surface Transportation Board to take any actions with respect to 

the construction of the high speed rail in California unless the 

Board has jurisdiction over the entire project. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
69 

Section 193. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds to be used to facilitate scheduled air transportation to, or 

pass through, property confiscated by the Cuban Government. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(70) 

TITLE II—DEPARMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Management and Administration accounts provide operating support to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Funding supports the salaries and expenses of nearly all HUD employees as well as certain non-personnel expenses critical to carrying 

out HUD’s mission including funding for shared service agreements. The Committee supports the Department’s efforts to transform the way it does business and encourages the Department to 

continue efforts to streamline operations while making targeted 

technology and human capital investments. 

Shared service agreements.—The Committee supports the Department’s efforts to improve its financial management and human 

capital operations by establishing shared service arrangements 

with the Department of Treasury. Dedicated funding is specifically 

provided to fully fund the request for these agreements. Because 

costs are based on transaction volumes that are uncertain, recommended funding for shared service agreements is available until 

expended and can be used to support payments in future fiscal 

years should transaction volumes in 2016 fall short of projections. 

Similarly, should shared service agreement costs exceed projections, funding provided to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

and the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer is also available 

for this same purpose. The Committee expects the Department to 

offset the cost of outsourcing this transaction work with significant 

reductions or reallocations of HUD staff previously dedicated to delivering these services. The Department shall deliver a report to 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 

days of enactment that includes current and projected shared service agreement transaction volume and cost data for the fiscal year, 

as well as a staff reorganization plan that demonstrates cost reductions and staff reorganizations planned in conjunction with this 

new operating model. 

Budget presentation.—The Committee commends HUD for improvements made to the structure and clarity of its budget request. 

However, inconsistencies in the classification of resources by function continue to make it difficult to distinguish baseline activities 

from new activities or to draw comparisons across fiscal years. The 

Committee directs HUD to clearly identify and explain within its 

budget request the movement, reclassification, or transfer of budgetary resources from one account, program, project, or activity to 

another account, program, project, or activity so that year-over-year 

comparisons are possible. Any programs, projects, or activities that 

are newly requested or transferred from accounts outside ManageVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
71 

ment and Administration shall also be clearly identified and clearly 

distinguished from adjustments to baseline spending. 

Budgetary resource planning and oversight.—The Committee remains concerned with HUD’s ability to consistently establish and 

execute budgetary resource plans across its various offices and 

across fiscal years. HUD consistently requests to reprogram funds 

late in the fiscal year to resolve deficiencies and other financial 

management problems. The Department continues to over-rely on 

transfer authorities that undermine internal fiscal discipline and 

the resource allocation process. Further, actual budget execution 

often differs dramatically from what is projected in the budget request and inconsistencies across budget years call into question 

whether HUD offices consistently track resources. It is critical that 

HUD senior management hold offices accountable to resource demands made both during formulation of the budget and throughout 

the fiscal year. While HUD should be commended for progress 

made to reduce amounts left unobligated, management of resources 

at fiscal yearend remains a challenge. To improve budgetary resource planning and execution, transfer and reprogramming authorities provided in previous fiscal years are eliminated. Instead, 

a portion of funding provided under this heading is eligible for 

transfer across all HUD offices and is available through September 

30, 2017. HUD is directed to include in its annual operating plan 

a transfer plan for these funds that delineates the purpose and 

timing of transfers by office. The operating plan shall also include 

a review of how management will track budget execution and what 

conditions or milestones will be used to determine when the transfer plan requires amendment. In addition, HUD shall report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations quarterly on any 

amendments made to the transfer plan and include an explanation 

for each change. 

New initiatives.—The Committee reiterates that the Department 

must limit the reprogramming of funds between the programs, 

projects, and activities within each account and that no changes 

may be made to any program, project, or activity without prior approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. Unless otherwise identified in the bill or report, the most detailed allocation of budgetary resources presented in the budget justifications 

is approved with any deviation from such approved allocation subject to reprogramming requirements. All carryover funds, including 

recaptures and deobligations, are also subject to reprogramming requirements. 

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $14,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 14,646,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 14,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥146,000 

The Executive Offices account funds the salaries and expenses of 

the Immediate Office of the Secretary, the Immediate Office of the 

Deputy Secretary, the Office of Adjudicatory Services, the Office of 

Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, the Office of PubVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
72 

lic Affairs, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, and the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. 

The Immediate Office of the Secretary provides program and policy guidance, and operations management and oversight in administering all programs, functions and authorities of the Department. 

The Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary provides operations management and helps the Department achieve its strategic 

goals by providing management support to program offices under 

the direction of the Office of the Secretary. 

The Office of Adjudicatory Services, formerly known as the Office 

of Hearings and Appeals, conducts hearings and makes determinations regarding formal complaints or adverse actions initiated by 

HUD based upon alleged violations of federal statutes and implementing regulations. 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and 

Intergovernmental Relations is responsible for coordinating Congressional and intergovernmental relations activities involving program offices to ensure the effective and accurate presentation of 

the Department’s views. 

The Office of Public Affairs educates the American people about 

the Department’s mission through media outreach and other communication tools such as press releases, press conferences, the 

Internet, media interviews, new media and community outreach. 

The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization provides small business program design and outreach to the business 

community and serves as the central referral point for small business regulatory compliance information. 

The Center for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships conducts outreach, recommends changes to HUD policies and programs that present barriers to grassroots organizations, and initiates special projects, such as grant writing training. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The committee recommends $14,500,000, which is the same as 

fiscal year 2015 enacted and $146,000 below the budget request. 

The bill also provides that no more than $25,000 provided under 

the immediate Office of the Secretary shall be available for official 

reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may determine. 

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OFFICES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $518,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 577,861,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 547,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +28,900,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥30,861,000 

The Administrative Support Offices account funds the salaries 

and expenses of the Office of Administration, the Office of the Chief 

Human Capital Officer, the Office of General Counsel, the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer, the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, the Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
73 

the Office of Field Policy and Management, the Office of Strategic 

Planning and Management, and the Office of the Chief Information 

Officer. 

The Office of Administration provides general operational support services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. These 

services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure 

in the following areas: nationwide management and operation of 

buildings, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) processing, records 

management, Privacy Act administration, protective and physical 

security for HUD’s Secretary and Deputy Secretary, and disaster 

and emergency response coordination. 

The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer provides human 

resource services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. 

These services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure in the following areas: strategic human capital management, enterprise level training and learning, recruitment and staffing, workforce planning, retention, engagement, succession planning and Departmental performance management. 

The Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM) serves as the 

principal advisor providing oversight and communicating Secretarial priorities and policies to field office staff and HUD clients. 

The Regional and Field Office Directors act as the operational managers in each of the field offices and manage and coordinate crossprogram delivery in the field. 

The Office of the Chief Procurement Officer’s (OCPO) mission is 

to provide high-quality acquisition support services to all HUD program offices by purchasing necessary operational and mission-related goods and services; provide advice, guidance and technical assistance to all departmental offices on matters concerning procurement; assist program offices in defining and specifying their procurement needs; develop and maintain all procurement guidance 

including regulations, policies, and procedures; and assist in the 

development of sound acquisition strategies. 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) provides leadership in instituting financial integrity, fiscal responsibility and accountability. The CFO is responsible for all aspects of financial 

management, accounting and budgetary matters; ensuring the Department establishes and meets financial management goals and 

objectives; ensuring the Department is in compliance with financial 

management legislation and directives; analyzing budgetary implications of policy and legislative proposals; and providing technical 

oversight with respect to all budget activities throughout the Department. 

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is led by the 

Chief Information Officer (CIO) who reports to the Office of the 

Secretary/Deputy Secretary. HUD’s CIO advises senior managers 

on the strategic use of information technology to support core business processes and to achieve mission critical goals. OCIO is responsible for providing modern information technology that is secure, accessible and cost effective while ensuring compliance with 

applicable regulatory requirements. 

The General Counsel, as the chief legal officer and legal voice of 

the Department, is the legal adviser to the Secretary and other 

principal staff of the Department. It is the responsibility of the OfVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
74 

fice of the General Counsel (OGC) to provide legal opinions, advice 

and services with respect to all programs and activities, and to provide counsel and assistance in the development of the Department’s 

programs and policies. 

The mission of the Office of Departmental Equal Employment 

Opportunity (ODEEO) is to ensure the enforcement of Federal laws 

relating to the elimination of all forms of discrimination in the Department’s employment practices. The mission is carried out 

through the functions of three divisions: the Affirmative Employment division, the Alternative Dispute Resolution division, and the 

Equal Employment Opportunity division. 

The Office of Strategic Planning and Management drives organizational, programmatic, and operational change across the Department to maximize efficiency and performance. The office will facilitate HUD’s strategic planning process by identifying the Department’s strategic priorities and transformational change initiatives, 

create and manage work plans for targeted transformation projects, 

and develop key program performance measures and targets for 

monitoring. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $547,000,000 for this account, which 

is $28,900,000 above fiscal year 2015 enacted and $30,861,000 

below the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation reflects full funding for the Department’s promise zone initiative. Additional funding requested to 

support administration of the housing trust fund program, expansion of the rental assistance demonstration, and establishment of 

a digital services team are not provided. 

Funding specified for each office is as follows: 

Office Amount 

Office of Administration ....................................................................................................................................... $199,000,000 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................................................................................... 39,000,000 

Office of the General Counsel .............................................................................................................................. 93,000,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer .......................................................................................................... 40,000,000 

Office of Field Policy and Management ............................................................................................................... 49,000,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer .............................................................................................................. 16,000,000 

Office of the Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity ............................................................................... 3,000,000 

Office of Strategic Planning and Management ................................................................................................... 4,000,000 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ................................................................................................................ 44,000,000 

PROGRAM OFFICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $203,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 210,002,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 203,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥7,002,000 

The Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) oversees the administration of HUD’s public housing, housing choice voucher, and 

native american programs. PIH is responsible for administering 

and managing programs authorized and funded by Congress under 

the basic provisions of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
75 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $203,000,000 for this account, which 

is the same as the level enacted in fiscal year 2015, and $7,002,000 

below the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $102,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 112,115,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 102,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥10,115,000 

The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) assists communities in their efforts to provide affordable housing and 

expanded economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income 

persons. The primary means toward this end is the development of 

partnerships among all levels of government and the private sector. 

This office is responsible for the effective administration of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), the Home Investment 

Partnerships (HOME), Homeless Assistance Grants and other 

HUD community development programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $102,000,000 for this account, which 

is the same as the level enacted in fiscal year 2015, and 

$10,115,000 below the budget request. The Committee recommendation reflects full funding for the Department’s promise 

zone initiative. 

Office of economic resilience.—No funding is provided for activities requested under the office of economic resilience and the Department is directed to eliminate this office. No funding is provided 

for any activities previously conducted under the office of sustainable communities. 

HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $379,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 397,174,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 372,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥25,174,000 

The Office of Housing implements programmatic, regulatory, financial, and operational responsibilities under the leadership of six 

deputy assistant secretaries and the field staff for activities related 

to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) multifamily and single 

family homeownership programs, and assisted rental housing programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $372,000,000 for this account, which 

is $7,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2015, and 

$25,174,000 below the budget request. The Committee expects the 

Department to leverage the reorganization of the office of multiVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
76 

family to realize budgetary savings and to reallocate resources to 

other baseline functions. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $22,700,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 23,907,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 22,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,207,000 

The Office of Policy Development and Research (PDR) directs the 

Department’s annual research agenda to support the research and 

evaluation of housing and other departmental initiatives to improve HUD’s effectiveness and operational efficiencies. Research 

proposals are determined through consultation with senior staff 

from each HUD program office, the Office of Management and 

Budget, and Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $22,700,000 for this account, which 

is the same as the level enacted in fiscal year 2015 and $1,207,000 

below the budget request. 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $68,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 81,132,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 73,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥8,132,000 

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) is responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for providing 

technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and the 

civil rights statutes. FHEO serves as the central point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information related to fair housing 

issues. FHEO receives, investigates, conciliates and recommends 

the issuance of charges of discrimination and determinations of 

non-compliance for complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil 

rights authorities. Additionally, FHEO conducts civil rights compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $73,000,000 for this account, which 

is $5,000,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 2015 and 

$8,132,000 below the budget request. The Committee recommendation provides additional resources to support implementation of the 

affirmatively furthering fair housing rule. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
77 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $6,700,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 7,812,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,112,000 

The Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control 

(OHHLHC) is directly responsible for the administration of the 

Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction program authorized by Title X 

of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The office also addresses multiple housing-related hazards affecting the 

health of residents, particularly children. The office develops leadbased paint regulations, guidelines, and policies applicable to HUD 

programs, and enforces the Lead Disclosure Rule issued under 

Title X. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $6,700,000 for this account, which is 

the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and $1,112,000 below the 

budget request. 

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $19,304,160,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 21,123,496,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 19,918,643,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +614,483,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,204,853,000 

In fiscal year 2005, the Housing Certificate Fund was separated 

into two new accounts: Tenant-Based Rental Assistance and 

Project-Based Rental Assistance. This account administers the tenant-based Section 8 rental assistance program otherwise known as 

the Housing Choice Voucher program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $19,918,643,000 for tenant-based 

rental assistance, which is $614,483,000 above the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $1,204,853,000 below the budget request. Consistent with the budget request, the Committee continues the advance of $4,000,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading for Section 8 programs to October 1, 2016. 

Voucher Renewals.—The Committee provides $18,151,000,000 for the renewal of tenant-based vouchers. This level is $665,000,000 

above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $182,816,000 below 

the budget request. The Committee directs the Department to monitor and report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter on the trends in Section 8 subsidies and to report on the required program alterations due to changes in rent or 

changes in tenant income. 

The Committee recommendation does not include bill language 

proposed in the budget request for new special purpose vouchers, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
78 

including targeted vouchers for the Family Unification Program, 

homeless veterans, and vouchers authorized by the Violence 

Against Women Act (VAWA). However, the Committee encourages 

HUD to facilitate the issuance of vouchers for these and other vulnerable populations as vouchers become available to PHAs upon 

turnover. 

Tenant protection.—The Committee provides $130,000,000 for 

tenant protection vouchers, which is the same as the fiscal year 

2014 enacted level and $20,000,000 below the budget request. 

Administrative fees.—The Committee provides $1,530,000,000 for 

allocations to Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) to conduct activities associated with placing and maintaining individuals under Section 8 assistance. This amount is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $490,037,000 below the budget request. 

Mainstream voucher renewals.—The Committee provides $107,643,000 to renew expiring Section 811 tenant-based subsidies. 

This level is $24,483,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level 

and equal to the budget request. The Committee directs HUD to 

issue guidance to the housing agencies administering these vouchers to continue to serve people with disabilities upon turnover. 

The Committee continues in bill language the direction to the 

Department to communicate to each PHA, within 60 days of enactment, the fixed amount that will be made available to each PHA 

for fiscal year 2016. The amount provided in this account is the 

only source of federal funds that may be used to renew tenantbased vouchers. The amounts appropriated here may not be augmented from any other source. 

Section 8 reforms.—The budget request includes a number of authorizing provisions to reform the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) 

program, including provisions that result in cost-saving measures 

that provide administrative relief to PHAs. Any reforms that make 

significant changes to the Housing Act of 1937 and its amendments 

are more properly addressed by the authorizing committee. The 

Committee is fully supportive of reforms that relieve administrative burdens, enable housing authorities to serve more families, 

and promote work opportunities and self-sufficiency. The Authorizing Committee is urged to consider reforms that address both the 

growing liability of housing programs and the administrative burdens imposed on local housing authorities. 

Housing quality standards.—The Committee is concerned that 

HUD’s housing quality standards do not effectively protect the 

health and safety of Housing Choice Voucher residents. They have 

not been updated in two decades to reflect the latest science on 

health and safety threats in the home. The Committee encourages 

the Secretary to update the standards. 

Public housing assessment system.—The Committee directs HUD 

to study and report back to the Committee on potential changes to 

the Public Housing Assessment System for PHAs that operate 550 

or fewer public housing units and Housing Choice Vouchers combined by taking into consideration physical inspections and an annual financial assessment based on current assets and liabilities. 

Physical needs assessment prohibition.—The Committee has included bill language prohibiting funds for HUD’s Physical Needs 

Assessment (PNA) requirement for PHAs. Implementation of PNA 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
79 

requirements on PHAs unnecessarily increase administrative burdens on PHAs and appear to have no operational benefit for local 

housing programs. 

Veterans affairs supportive housing (VASH) on tribal lands.—The 

Committee directs the Department to submit a report to the Committee on the progress that it has made in implementing the HUDVASH pilot program for homeless Native American veterans on 

tribal lands. The report should include an update on the status of 

the pilot and compare regional variation in implementing the program on different reservations. 

Equal access rule guidance.—The Committee encourages the Department to continue its work to support the lesbian, gay, bisexual, 

transgender (LGBT) community by further clarifying the Equal Access Rule published in 2012. This guidance will ensure HUD programs are open to all eligible individuals regardless of actual or 

perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status. 

The Committee requests the Secretary to submit a report within 90 

days of enactment of this Act detailing: (1) the Department’s strategy for continuing to ensure that LGBT individuals have access to 

HUD programs for which they are eligible; and (2) the plan for disseminating this information to PHAs. 

RENTAL ASSISTANCE DEMONSTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $0 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 50,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥50,000,000 

The Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) was authorized in 

fiscal year 2012 to preserve public housing by enabling Public 

Housing Authorities to use a portion of their operating and capital 

funds to leverage private sector funding to recapitalize their housing stock and maintain their units of affordable housing primarily 

through the conversion to long-term Section 8 rental assistance 

contracts. The budget request includes a request of $50,000,000 for 

an expansion of the program to public housing properties that cannot convert their housing under this program at their existing 

funding levels. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not provide a separate line of funding for 

this program. The Committee notes that the fiscal year 2015 enacted bill extended the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) 

program to 2018 and raised the cap on units eligible for conversion 

from 60,000 units to 185,000 units. This expansion of the program 

in fiscal year 2015, along with the availability of operating and capital funds in fiscal year 2016, will allow a significant number of 

PHAs to undertake RAD conversions. The Committee will continue 

to monitor RAD conversions and expects HUD to provide regular 

updates on the number of units converted, as well as the impact 

to the operating, capital and project-based rental assistance accounts. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
80 

HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

(RESCISSION)

The Housing Certificate Fund, until fiscal year 2005, provided 

funding for both the project-based and tenant-based components of 

the Section 8 program. Project-Based Rental Assistance and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance are now separately funded accounts. 

The Housing Certificate Fund retains balances from previous years’ 

appropriations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Language is included to allow unobligated balances from specific 

accounts may be used to renew or amend Project-Based Rental Assistance contracts. 

PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $1,875,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 1,970,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,681,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥194,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥289,000,000 

The public housing capital fund provides funding for public housing capital programs, including public housing development and 

modernization. Examples of capital modernization projects include 

replacing roofs and windows, improving common spaces, upgrading 

electrical and plumbing systems, and renovating the interior of an 

apartment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,681,000,000 for the public housing capital fund, which is $194,000,000 below the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $289,000,000 below the budget request. 

Within the amounts provided the Committee directs that: 

—No more than $3,000,000 is directed to support the ongoing 

public housing financial and physical assessment activities of the 

Real Estate Assessment Center; 

—Up to $20,000,000 is made available for emergency capital 

needs, excluding Presidentially-declared disasters. The Committee 

continues to include language to ensure that funds are used only 

for repairs needed due to an unforeseen and unanticipated emergency event or natural disaster that occurs during fiscal year 2016; 

—$30,000,000 is for the Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program; and 

—$15,000,000 is provided for the Jobs Plus program to improve 

employment opportunities and earnings of public housing residents. 

PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $4,440,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 4,600,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,440,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥160,000,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
81 

The public housing operating fund subsidizes the costs associated 

with operating and maintaining public housing. This subsidy supplements funding received by public housing authorities (PHA) 

from tenant rent contributions and other income. In accordance 

with section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula to public housing authorities for 

the following purposes: utility costs; anti-crime and anti-drug activities, including the costs of providing adequate security; routine 

maintenance cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,440,000,000 for the Federal 

share of PHA operating expenses. This amount is the same as the 

fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $160,000,000 below the budget 

request. The Committee does not include language in the budget 

request that would allow PHAs to entirely merge their Capital and 

Operating Funds and use those funds for either purpose. While the 

Committee supports the idea of giving high performing PHAs regulatory relief so they can operate more efficiently, HUD has provided 

limited information on how it would identify and budget for capital 

and operating needs in the future if this authority to merge funds 

were approved. 

CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $80,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 250,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥60,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥230,000,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Program, which is $60,000,000 below the 2015 

enacted level and $230,000,000 below the budget request. 

FAMILY SELF SUFFICIENCY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $75,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 85,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 75,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥10,000,000 

The Family Self-Sufficiency program funds coordinators to help 

HUD-assisted residents achieve economic independence. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $75,000,000 to support the Family SelfSufficiency program. This is the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $10,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee expects the Department to prioritize assistance to individuals and families that results in job stability, increased tenant incomes, and greater rent contributions. The Committee also expects 

the Department to report to the House and Senate Committees on 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
82 

Appropriations the best practices of the program that result in increased rent contributions of program participants, and practices 

that result in residence achieving full self-sufficiency in meeting 

their housing needs, no later than March 31, 2016. 

NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $650,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 660,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 650,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥10,000,000 

The Native American Housing Block Grants program, authorized 

by the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S. C. 4111 et se.), provides funds to American Indian tribes and their Tribally Designated Housing Entities 

(TDHEs) to address affordable housing needs within their communities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $650,000,000 for Native American 

Housing Block Grants, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $10,000,000 below the budget request. 

—$3,500,000 is for organizations representing Native American 

housing interests to provide training and technical assistance to Indian housing authorities and Tribal Designated Housing Entities 

(TDHEs). Of this amount, no less than $2,000,000 is for a national 

organization as authorized under NAHASDA. 

—$2,000,000 is for Title VI loan guarantees up to $17,452,000. 

Timely expenditure of funds.—The Committee continues language 

requiring fiscal year 2016 funds to be spent within 10 years. 

Bill language is included to withhold reduce formula allocation 

funding from any grantee that has an unexpended balance greater 

than three times its formula allocation, unless that grantee’s formula allocation is less than $5,000,000. 

INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Credit subsidy: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... $7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................ 8,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

Limitation on guaranteed loans: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... 744,047,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... 1,269,841,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................ 1,269,841,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +525,794,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 

1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native American individuals and housing authorities to build new housing or purchase 

existing housing on trust land. This program provides access to priVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
83 

vate financing that otherwise might be unavailable because of the 

unique legal status of Indian trust land. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 in new credit subsidy for 

the Section 184 loan guarantee program, which is $1,000,000 above 

the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the same as the budget request. This will guarantee a loan volume of $1,269,841,000, which 

is $525,794,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the 

same as the budget request. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $6,477,627,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 6,752,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,392,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥85,627,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥360,000,000 

The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) is responsible for administering the Community Development Block 

Grants (CDBG), the Home Investment Partnerships program 

(HOME), Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) 

program, Homeless Assistance Grants (HAG), and other HUD community development programs. Most of these programs pass Federal funds through to state and local governments and other entities to address housing and development needs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $6,392,000,000 for community planning and development programs, which is $85,627,000 below fiscal 

year 2015 enacted and $360,000,000 below the budget request. 

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $330,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 332,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 332,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program provides states and localities with resources to address the 

housing needs of low-income persons living with HIV/AIDS. Funding is distributed by formula to qualifying states and metropolitan 

areas based on the cumulative incidences of AIDS reported to the 

Centers for Disease Control. Government recipients are required to 

have a HUD-approved comprehensive plan or comprehensive housing affordability strategy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $332,000,000 for the 

HOPWA program, which is $2,000,000 above fiscal year 2015 enacted and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes formula grants and 

funding for the renewal of certain expiring contracts that were preVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
84 

viously funded under HOPWA competitive grants. The Committee 

encourages ongoing efforts at the Department for stronger coordination between HOPWA and the Department’s other homeless prevention and support programs. However, the Committee directs the 

Department to review the level of technical assistance that has 

been provided to HOPWA grantees in prior years and to make certain that it is maintaining the same level of service in fiscal year 

2016. 

Formula modernization.—The current HOPWA formula, which is 

based on cumulative AIDS cases and area incidence, no longer reflects the nature of an epidemic that has been transformed by both 

advances in HIV health care and surveillance, and by the increasingly disproportionate impact of the virus on communities of poverty and color. The Committee encourages the Department to work 

with the authorizing committees on any additional statutory authority needed to modernize the HOPWA formula. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $3,066,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 2,880,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,060,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... +180,000,000 

The Community Development Fund, authorized by the Housing 

and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S. C. 5301 et se.), 

provides funding, primarily through community development block 

grants, to state and local governments and other eligible entities to 

carry out community and economic development activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $3,060,000,000 for the 

Community Development Fund account, which is the $6,000,000 

below fiscal year 2015 enacted and $180,000,000 above the budget 

request. 

Of the amounts made available: 

—$3,000,000,000 is for the community development block grants 

(CDBG) formula program for entitlement communities and states. 

This is the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and $200,000,000 

above the budget request; and 

—$60,000,000 is for the Native American housing and economic 

development block grant (also known as ‘‘Indian CDBG’’), which is 

$6,000,000 below fiscal year 2015 enacted and $20,000,000 below 

the budget request. No funding is provided for the teacher housing 

set-aside requested in the budget. 

$7,000,000 of the amount provided for the CDBG formula program is for insular areas, per 42 U.S. C. 5306(a)(2), which is the 

same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and the budget request. The recommendation continues language requiring the Department to notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act. 

Entitlement community eligibility.—The Committee does not support the changes to entitlement community eligibility referenced in 

the budget as such changes may have adverse effects on smaller 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
85 

communities. Communities that would otherwise have received direct funding would only be eligible for funding allocated to their 

state. Assuming allocations remain unchanged, states would be 

forced to support a greater number of communities without additional funds. The Committee further notes that communities that 

have voluntarily joined an urban county for purposes of CDBG allocations have already achieved efficiencies similar to those referenced in the budget as benefits of reform. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS)

Budget Authority Limitation on 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................................... – – – ($500,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ........................................................................... – – – (300,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ – – – (300,000,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................................................... – – – (200,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................... – – – – – – 

The section 108 loan guarantee program is a source of variable 

and fixed-rate financing for communities undertaking projects eligible under the community development block grant (CDBG) program. Such activities may include economic development, housing 

rehabilitation, public facilities, and large-scale physical development projects. By pledging their current and future CDBG allocations to cover the loan amount as security, communities are able 

to finance large-scale projects with a federally guaranteed loan. 

HUD may require additional security for a loan, as determined on 

a case-by-case basis. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation continues the section 108 loan 

guarantee program as a borrower-paid subsidy program, and therefore recommends providing no budget authority, which is the same 

as fiscal year 2015 enacted and the budget request. The Committee 

also accepts the request to lower the limit on guaranteed loan volume from $500,000,000 to $300,000,000 which is $200,000,000 

below fiscal year 2015. With the conversion to a borrower-paid subsidy program structure complete, the Committee recommends the 

rescission of all unobligated balances of subsidy budget authority. 

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $900,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 1,060,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 900,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥160,000,000 

The HOME investment partnerships program provides block 

grants to participating jurisdictions (states, units of local government, Indian tribes, and insular areas) to undertake activities that 

expand the supply of affordable housing in the jurisdiction. HOME 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
86 

block grants are distributed based on formula allocations. Upon receipt of these Federal funds, state and local governments develop 

a housing affordability strategy to acquire, rehabilitate, or construct new affordable housing, or to provide rental assistance to eligible families. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $900,000,000 for activities funded 

under this account, which is the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted 

and $160,000,000 below the budget request. Of the total amounts 

provided, $767,000,000 is directly appropriated and the remainder 

is derived from a transfer of budgetary resources from the housing 

trust fund. 

Statutory reforms.—The Committee does not include the statutory reforms to HOME requested in the budget that would eliminate communities from the program that receive less than 

$500,000. HOME funding is a vital resource for communities working to meet the needs of low-income families and individuals in 

need of supportive housing, including veterans, persons with disabilities, seniors and persons experiencing homelessness. The program allows states and localities to respond to individuals’ most 

pressing housing needs. HOME provides gap financing that is critical to the creation and provision of affordable housing for the families who need it the most. 

SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 50,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... +50,000,000 

Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP) funds 

are distributed through grants to nonprofit organizations and consortia that have experience in providing or facilitating self-help 

homeownership opportunities. Grant funds are used for land acquisition and improvements associated with developing new, decent 

dwellings for low-income persons, including those living in colonias, 

using the self-help model. 

Section 4 capacity building funds are set-aside within this account for activities described under section 4(a) of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S. C. 9816 note). Section 4 funds are 

awarded to a limited number of non-profits, which use the funds 

to develop the capacity of community development corporations 

(CDCs) and community housing development organizations 

(CHDOs). The CDCs and CHDOs then undertake community development and affordable housing activities. Section 4 funds must be 

matched by recipients with at least three times the grant amount 

in private funding. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for this account which 

includes $10,000,000 for SHOP, $35,000,000 for Section 4 capacity 

building, and $5,000,000 for capacity building grants to national 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
87 

rural housing organizations that operate capacity building activities in at least seven HUD regions. The recommended funding level 

for each of these activities is the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted. 

The Committee rejects the request to support these activities 

through other programs. 

Energy star.—The Committee is concerned that energy efficiency 

requirements imposed on SHOP grantees is undermining the affordability of the units supported by the program. Therefore, the 

recommendation includes a general provision that prohibits HUD 

from requiring any grantee, including SHOP grantees, to meet energy star building standards or any other energy efficiency standard that is beyond what is required under applicable state and 

local building codes. 

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $2,135,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 2,480,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,185,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥295,000,000 

The Homeless Assistance Grants account provides funding for 

programs under title IV of the McKinney Act, as amended by the 

Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing 

(HEARTH) Act of 2009. HEARTH Act programs include the continuum of care (CoC) competitive grants, the emergency solutions 

grants (ESG) program, and the rural housing stability grants program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends funding the homeless assistance grant programs at $2,185,000,000, which is $50,000,000 above fiscal year 2015 enacted and $295,000,000 below the budget request. 

The recommendation includes funding to support continuum of care 

project renewals of no less than $1,905,000,000 as well as at least 

$250,000,000 in emergency solutions grants. Up to $5,000,000 is 

available for the national homeless data analysis project. 

Minimum project performance standards.—HUD cannot afford to 

blindly renew all projects based solely on the fact that they were 

once funded in the past. Holding projects accountable to their ability to demonstrate effectiveness is essential to getting the most out 

of limited federal resources. The recommendation includes language which directs the Secretary to establish minimum project 

performance thresholds based on program performance data. These 

thresholds should reflect what is required to improve system-wide 

performance for each continuum of care and should also take into 

consideration what subpopulations are served. The Committee also 

includes language that prohibits funding for projects that fail to 

meet minimum performance standards. 

Continuum of care funding reallocation.—The recommendation 

includes language that directs the Secretary to prioritize funding to 

grantees that, when appropriate, reallocate funding from lower performing projects to higher performing projects. Reallocation drives 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
88 

higher return on investment and can also serve as a mechanism for 

containing annual inflation. 

Training, education, and other services.—The Committee has 

heard concerns from community housing providers that the ‘Housing First’ approach to homelessness under the continuum of care 

program is compromising training, education, and continuity of integration efforts. HUD should consider the value of housing providers that deliver a full spectrum of resources under this program. 

Highly vulnerable populations study.—Certain groups of Americans are particularly vulnerable to homelessness. As the federal 

government works toward ending homelessness, it is important to 

identify particular populations that should receive extra attention. 

Further, the Committee is concerned about the ability of HUD’s 

outreach and prevention programs to target subpopulations most 

vulnerable to homelessness beyond those who are chronically 

homeless. Therefore, the Committee directs HUD, in coordination 

with the Interagency Council on Homelessness, to report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180 days 

of enactment on what populations beyond the chronically homeless 

are highly vulnerable to homelessness. This report shall identify 

highly vulnerable subpopulations, identify for each subpopulation 

barriers to access across all federal outreach and prevention programs, and recommend policies to address these barriers. This report shall be completed within six months of enactment. 

HOUSING PROGRAMS

PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $9,730,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 10,760,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,654,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +924,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥106,000,000 

The Project-Based Rental Assistance account provides a rental 

subsidy to a private landlord tied to a specific housing unit so that 

the properties themselves, rather than the individual living in the 

unit, remain subsidized. Amounts provided in this account include 

funding for the renewal of expiring project-based contracts, including Section 8, moderate rehabilitation, and single room occupancy 

contracts, amendments to Section 8 project-based contracts, and 

administrative costs for contract administration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides a total of $10,654,000,000, including 

$400,000,000 provided as advance appropriations, for the annual 

renewal of project-based contracts. This funding level is 

$924,000,000 above the enacted level for fiscal year 2015 and 

$106,000,000 below the budget request. Up to $150,000,000 is 

available for performance-based contract administrators (PBCA). 

The Committee once again rejects the budget proposal to administer PBCA funds as grants or cooperative agreements, and assumes that HUD will realize cost savings in fiscal year 2015 and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
89 

fiscal year 2016 by procuring contracts for PBCA services as required by law. 

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $420,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 455,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 414,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥41,000,000 

The Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) program provides eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants to finance 

the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of housing intended 

for low income elderly people. In addition, the program provides 

project-based rental assistance contracts (PRAC) to support operational costs for units constructed under the program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $414,000,000, which is $6,000,000 

below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $41,000,000 below the 

budget request. In addition, to these funds, HUD shall use a total 

of $47,000,000 in uncommitted funds from prior year appropriations for the program. This includes $20,000,000 available from an 

elderly demonstration program, $20,000,000 available from supportive housing capital advance program funds, and $7,000,000 of 

the $16,000,000 available in fiscal year 2015 residual receipt recaptures. 

The total appropriation plus uncommitted balances provide a 

total program level of $461,000,000, which will fully fund contract 

renewals and amendments in fiscal year 2016 for the elderly program. The Committee rejects the budget proposal to fund 

$16,000,000 of the section 202 program under the project-based 

rental assistance account and instead funds them under this heading. 

The recommendation allocates available funding as follows: 

• $381,000,000 for the renewal and amendment of project rental assistance contracts (PRAC); 

• Up to $77,000,000 for service coordinators and the continuation of congregate services grants; and 

• $3,000,000 is for property inspections and related costs. 

The Committee continues to include bill language relating to the 

initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided under 

this heading and language allowing these funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office. 

HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $135,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 177,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 152,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +17,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥25,000,000 

The Housing for Persons with Disabilities (Section 811) program 

provides eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital 

grants to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
90 

supportive housing for disabled persons and provides project-based 

rental assistance (PRAC) to support operational costs for such 

units. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $152,000,000 for Section 811 activities, $17,000,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

$25,000,000 below the budget request. This level will fully fund the 

project rental assistance and project assistant contract renewals 

and amendments in fiscal year 2016. The Committee continues to 

include bill language allowing these funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office, and provides $2,000,000 for this purpose. 

HOUSING COUNSELING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $47,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 60,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 47,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥13,000,000 

Section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 

authorized HUD to provide housing counseling services to homebuyers, homeowners, low and moderate income renters, and the 

homeless. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $47,000,000 for housing counseling, equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $13,000,000 below 

the budget request. 

The Committee retains bill language that provides two year 

funding availability to allow HUD flexibility to reprogram unobligated balances and re-obligate any recaptures to support counseling activity rather than expire. The bill retains language that requires HUD to make grants within 180 days of enactment, and allows multi-year agreements, subject to the availability of annual 

appropriations. 

The Committee encourages HUD to coordinate with FEMA’s 

Flood Insurance Advocate to ensure HUD counselors located in 

flood-prone states receive adequate training and information to 

educate future homeowners on their potential flood risks, associated flood insurance premiums, home mitigation measures available proven to reduce flood risk, and any federal assistance available for mitigation projects and activities. 

RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $18,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 30,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 30,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +12,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

The Rental Housing Assistance account includes existing longterm project-based rental assistance contracts covering approximately 18,000 affordable housing units under the Rent Supplement 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
91 

and Section 236 Rental Assistance Payment (RAP) programs. Enacted in 1965 and 1974 respectively, these programs created affordable units for low-income families. Monthly payments are made to 

project owners from existing contract balances, and new budget authority provided is required for short-term extensions of expiring 

contracts and annual contract amendments. Contract amendments 

provide additional subsidy to below-market contracts where rents 

have been constrained and owners are unable to adequately service 

properties and perform ongoing maintenance. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $30,000,000 in funding for the Rental Housing Assistance program, which is $12,000,000 above the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2015 and the same as the budget request. This appropriation plus projected carryover will fully fund 

contract amendment and extension needs in fiscal year 2016. The 

increase reflects a greater number of expirations scheduled to occur 

in fiscal year 2016 (7,000) relative to fiscal year 2015 (3,500). The 

Committee continues bill language that allows HUD to use unobligated balances and recaptured funds for extensions and amendments. 

PAYMENT TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 11,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... +1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 

Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 

Improvement Act of 2000, authorized the Secretary to establish 

Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards for 

the construction, design, and performance of manufactured homes. 

All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs of administering the Act. HUD estimates that there are 8 million manufactured homes built since 1976 that are currently in use. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends up to $11,000,000 for the manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from certification 

label fees collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing 

Fees Trust Fund established pursuant to the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000. The Committee does not provide a 

direct appropriation for this account. The recommendation is 

$1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level, and equal to 

the budget request. 

The Committee includes language allowing the Department to 

collect fees from program participants for the dispute resolution 

and installation programs. These fees are to be deposited into the 

trust fund and may be used by the Department subject to the overall cap placed on the account. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
92 

FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION

MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation of direct 

loans 

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans 

Administrative contract 

expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................... $20,000,000 $400,000,000,000 $130,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................... 5,000,000 400,000,000,000 174,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................... 5,000,000 400,000,000,000 130,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ..................................... ¥15,000,000 – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 .................................. – – – – – – ¥44,000,000 

The Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA) mutual mortgage 

insurance program account includes the mutual mortgage insurance (MMI) and cooperative management housing insurance funds. 

This program account covers unsubsidized programs, primarily the 

single-family home mortgage program, which is the largest of all 

the FHA programs. These include the Condominium, Section 203(k) 

rehabilitation, and Home Equity Conversion Mortgage programs 

(HECM) and the multifamily Cooperative Management Housing Insurance Funds (CMHI). The cooperative housing insurance program provides mortgages for cooperative housing projects of more 

than five units that are occupied by members of a cooperative housing corporation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 

commitments in the MMI program account: $400,000,000,000 for 

loan guarantees and $5,000,000 for direct loans. The recommendation also includes $130,000,000 for administrative contract expenses. 

The Committee’s recommendation for administrative contract expenses is $44,000,000 below the budget request and equal to the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2015. The Committee denies a transfer 

of administrative contract expense funding to the Management and 

Administration account. 

The Committee includes bill language that lifts the statutory aggregate cap of 275,000 HECM loan guarantees in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee has carried similar language in prior years. 

The Committee continues to be concerned about proposals for 

local governments to seize underwater performing mortgages and 

then refinance them into an FHA product. The Committee required 

HUD to submit a report on April 1, 2014 detailing the effects using 

eminent domain for these purposes will have on the housing market, including FHA primary and refinance market as well as the 

broader mortgage market, interest rates, homeownership, and affordability. The Committee continues to await the delivery of this 

report, and continues to prohibit HUD from financing mortgages 

for properties that have been subject to eminent domain. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
93 

GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of direct 

loans 

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................................... $20,000,000 $30,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 5,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................................................... ¥15,000,000 – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................... – – – – – – 

The Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA) general insurance 

and special risk insurance (GI and SRI) program account includes 

17 different programs administered by FHA. The GI fund includes 

a wide variety of insurance programs for special-purpose single and 

multifamily loans, including loans for property improvements, manufactured housing, multifamily rental housing, condominiums, 

housing for the elderly, hospitals, group practice facilities, and 

nursing homes. The SRI fund includes insurance programs for 

mortgages in older, declining urban areas that would not be otherwise eligible for insurance, mortgages with interest reduction payments, and mortgages for experimental housing and for high-risk 

mortgagors who would not normally be eligible for mortgage insurance without housing counseling. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on loan guarantees of 

$30,000,000,000, the same as the fiscal year 2015 level and equal 

to the budget request. It includes a limitation of $5,000,000 for direct loans, which is $15,000,000 below the fiscal year 2015 level 

and equal to the budget request. This program provides short-term 

purchase money mortgages to allow non-profit and governmental 

agencies to acquire single family properties and resell to low income purchasers. However, use has declined recently due to the 

shortage of state/local government subsidies needed to offset participants’ development costs associated with administering the program. 

The Committee encourages HUD to coordinate with FEMA’s 

Flood Insurance Advocate and identify rehabilitation activities eligible under section 203(k) that also fulfill FEMA’s hazard mitigation standards and to identify qualifying disaster mitigation rehabilitation options on its website and other promotional materials. 

GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans Administrative contract expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................................... $500,000,000,000 $23,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ........................................................................... 500,000,000,000 28,320,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 500,000,000,000 23,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 .......................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................................... – – – ¥5,320,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
94 

The Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Program facilitates the financing of residential mortgage loans insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, and the Rural Housing Services program. The 

Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) guarantees 

the timely payment of principal and interest on securities issued by 

private service institutions such as mortgage companies, commercial banks, savings banks, and savings and loan associations that 

assemble pools of mortgages and issue securities backed by the 

pools. In turn, investment proceeds are used to finance additional 

mortgage loans. Investors include non-traditional sources of credit 

in the housing market such as pension and retirement funds, life 

insurance companies, and individuals. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation includes a $500,000,000,000 limitation on 

loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities, as requested, 

and $23,000,000 for the personnel costs of GNMA, to be funded by 

Commitment and Multiclass fees. The recommendation for personnel costs is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and 

$5,320,000 below the budget request. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $72,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 50,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 52,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥19,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... +2,500,000 

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 $52,500,000 for this account, which 

is $2,500,000 more than the budget request and $19,500,000 below 

last year’s level. 

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, and $2,500,000 for 

an evaluation of programs serving homeless youth, which is to be 

conducted in partnership with the Department of Health and 

Human Resources. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
95 

As in prior years, the bill includes a general provision in Title 

II that prohibits funds from being used for a doctoral dissertation 

research grant program. 

The bill includes a new general provision in Title II that allows 

the Department to use prior year deobligated or unexpended funds 

made available to the Office of Policy Development and Research 

for other research and evaluations. The Committee provides this 

authority under the condition that any new obligations are subject 

to the regular reprogramming procedures outlined in section 405. 

Unlike the prior year, funds are not provided under this heading 

for the purposes of technical assistance. 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $65,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 71,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 65,300,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥5,700,000 

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (OFHEO) is 

responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for providing 

technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and the 

civil rights statutes. OFHEO serves as the central point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information related to fair housing 

issues. OFHEO receives, investigates, conciliates and recommends 

the issuance of charges of discrimination and determinations of 

non-compliance for complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil 

rights authorities. Additionally, OFHEO conducts civil rights compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $65,300,000 for this account, which 

is the same as fiscal year 2015 and $5,700,000 below the request. 

Of the funds provided, $24,300,000 is for the fair housing assistance programs, $300,000 is for the limited english proficiency initiative and $1,500,000 is for the National Fair Housing Training 

Academy. Of the $39,200,000 for the fair housing initiative programs, not less than $7,450,000 is education and outreach programs. The Committee directs the Department to focus resources 

on education, outreach, and training initiatives, and supporting 

local and state organizations that conduct investigations and adjudicate claims. 

The Committee directs the Department to provide a spend plan 

for all funds and activities in this account concurrent with the fiscal year 2016 operating plan and provide 3 days’ notice prior to the 

announcement of any grant. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
96 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $110,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 75,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥35,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥45,000,000 

The Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes is responsible for administering the lead-based paint hazard reduction program authorized by Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The office also addresses multiple housing-related health hazards through the Healthy Homes Initiative, pursuant to the Secretary’s authority in sections 501 and 502 of the 

Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 

and 1701z-2). 

The office develops lead-based paint regulations, guidelines, and 

policies applicable to HUD programs and enforces the lead disclosure rule issued under Title X. For both lead-related and healthy 

homes issues, the office designs and administers programs for 

grants, training, research, demonstration, and education. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $75,000,000 for the lead programs, 

which is $35,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2015 

and $45,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommends no more than $15,000,000 for the 

healthy homes initiative, and directs the Department to fund activities aimed at reducing incidences of asthma, mold, pests and 

radon. 

The Committee directs the Department to provide a spend plan 

for all funds and activities in this account concurrent with the fiscal year 2016 operating plan and provide 3 days’ notice prior to the 

announcement of any grant. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $250,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 334,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 100,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥150,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥234,000,000 

While HUD’s Working Capital Fund (WCF) was established pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the development of, modifications to, and infrastructure for Departmentwide information technology systems, and for the continuing operation of both Department-wide and program-specific information 

technology systems, HUD has never created the cost-accounting 

structure to operate a true WCF, and the Committee changed the 

name of the account from ‘‘Working Capital Fund’’ to the ‘‘Information Technology Fund’’ in 2015. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
97 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 in direct appropriations for the IT Fund to support Department-wide information 

technology system activities, $150,000,000 less than the fiscal year 

2015 enacted level and $234,000,000 below than the budget request. The Department requires approximately $250,000,000 simply to operate basic telecommunication services and existing information technology contracts, plus another $40,000,000 to 

$60,000,000 to transition over to the new information technology 

contract in fiscal year 2016—a requirement for the Department. 

The Committee strongly urges the Department to establish a true 

Working Capital Fund in 2015 so that in fiscal year 2016 the Department is able to appropriately charge the various offices for the 

services used to make up the funding difference and keep the systems running. 

The Department’s leadership has made great strides in focusing 

the scarce information technology resources available to achieve 

the highest priorities in terms of systems development and investment. The Committee sees a surprising and encouraging emphasis 

on oversight, management, planning, and accountability; and 

should additional resources become available, the Committee would 

recommend further investment in this area. 

The Committee directs HUD to continue with efforts to retire obsolete, unproductive, and expensive information technology systems 

in an effort to direct resources for higher priority and more effective systems. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $126,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 129,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 126,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥3,000,000 

The Office of Inspector General (IG) provides agency-wide audit 

and investigative functions to identify and correct management and 

administrative deficiencies that create conditions for existing or potential instances of waste, fraud, and mismanagement. The audit 

function provides internal audit, contract audit, and inspection 

services. Contract audits provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, award, administration, re-pricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits evaluate all facets of agency operations. Inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of agency 

operations. The investigative function provides for the detection 

and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $126,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 enacted 

level and $3,000,000 below the budget request. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
98 

The Committee has found the reports and investigations undertaken by the IG over the past couple of years to be interesting and 

pertinent to the work of the Committee. The reduction from the 

budget request is taken without prejudice. 

TRANSFORMATION INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 1 120,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – – 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥120,000,000 1The budget proposes to transfer up to $120,000,000 from other accounts into the Transformation Initiative. 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee continues to withhold funds for the Transformation Initiative. 

First, the tired and many times over rejected mass take down 

and transfer of funds is an awkward method of funding the activities proposed under this account, and distorts the resources required and available under the various donor program accounts. 

Second, the Department has failed year after year to articulate 

effectively the need for a transfer funded ‘‘transformation.’’ Research projects and demonstrations should be planned, requested, 

and accounted for under the Policy, Demonstration, and Research 

(PDR) account, and the Committee has made its funding recommendation and direction under the header ‘‘Policy, Demonstration, and Research.’’ 

Finally, the Department has demonstrated that even with direction and directly appropriated dollars, their interpretation of what 

is technical assistance, and what activities should be funded by 

contract or a notice of funding available (NOFA) is suspect. Technical assistance funds and authorities are available under many existing HUD accounts and the Committee directs HUD to limit technical assistance to those accounts. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

(INCLUDES RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Section 201. The Committee continues with modification a provision regarding certain overpayments to be returned to Treasury. 

Section 202. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to investigate or prosecute legal activities under 

the Fair Housing Act. 

Section 203. The Committee continues the provision extending 

HOPWA formula modifications affecting certain jurisdictions in 

New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
99 

Section 204. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

that funds be distributed on a competitive basis unless specified 

otherwise in statute. 

Section 205. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

HUD to use funds to reimburse the Government National Mortgage 

Association (GNMA), Fannie Mae and other Federal entities for 

services and facilities. 

Section 206. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

HUD to comport with the budget estimates except as otherwise 

provided in this Act or through an approved reprogramming. 

Section 207. The Committee continues the provision providing 

authorization for HUD corporations to utilize funds under certain 

conditions and restrictions. 

Section 208. The Committee continues the provision requiring a 

report on available balances each quarter. 

Section 209. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

that the Administration’s budget and the Department’s budget justifications for fiscal year 2017 be submitted in the identical account 

and sub-account structure provided in this Act. 

Section 210. The Committee continues the provision exempting 

PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi and the County of 

Los Angeles from the public housing resident representation requirement, and provides alternative requirements. 

Section 211. The Committee continues the provision exempting 

GNMA from certain requirements of the Federal Credit Reform Act 

of 1990. 

Section 212. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

HUD to transfer debt and use agreements from an obsolete project 

to a viable project, provided certain conditions are met. 

Section 213. The Committee continues the provision setting forth 

the requirements for eligibility for section 8 voucher assistance. 

Section 214. The Committee continues the provision distributing 

Native American Housing Block Grant funds to the same Native 

Alaskan recipients as in Fiscal Year 2005. 

Section 215. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

the Secretary to insure mortgages under section 255 of the National Housing Act. 

Section 216. The Committee continues the provision instructing 

HUD on managing and disposing of any multifamily property that 

is owned or held by HUD. 

Section 217. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

amounts provided under the Section 108 loan guarantee program 

to be used to guarantee notes or other obligations issued by any 

State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State. 

Section 218. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

PHAs that own and operate 400 or fewer units of public housing 

to be exempt from asset management requirements. 

Section 219. The Committee continues the provision restricting 

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 limits established in the 

Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998. 

Section 220. The Committee continues the provision directing 

that no HUD employee, including those working in the offices of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
100 

the IG and GNMA, shall be designated as an allotment holder unless the Chief Financial Officer determines that they have received 

training. 

Section 221. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

that the Secretary publish all notice of funding availability on the 

internet for fiscal year 2016. 

Section 222. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

that attorney fees for programmatic litigation must be paid from 

the personnel and benefits accounts of affected offices and the Office of General Counsel, and be restricted to payment of attorney 

fees only. 

Section 223. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Disaster Housing Assistance Programs to be considered a program 

of HUD for the purpose of income verifications and matching. 

Section 224. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

HUD to take certain actions against owners receiving rental subsidies that do not maintain safe properties. 

Section 225. The Committee continues the provision placing a 

salary and bonus limit on public housing agency officials and employees. 

Section 226. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for the doctoral dissertation research grant 

program at HUD. 

Section 227. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

the Secretary to provide the Committees on Appropriations advance notice of discretionary awards. 

Section 228. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used to require or enforce the physical needs assessment (PNA). 

Section 229. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds for HUD financing of mortgages for properties that have 

been subject to eminent domain. 

Section 230. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

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. 

Section 231. The Committee includes a provision requiring unexpended funding for research, evaluation and statistical purposes at 

the completion of a contract, grant or cooperative agreement to be 

deobligated and reobligated for additional research, subject to reprogramming requirements in this Act. 

Section 232. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting the 

Secretary from requiring Energy Star standards or any other energy efficiency standards that exceed the requirements of applicable State and local building codes. 

Section 233. The Committee includes a provision rescinding unobligated balances appropriated in section 1497(a) of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and section 2301(a) of title III of division B of the Housing and Economic 

Recovery Act of 2008. 

Section 234. The Committee includes a provision rescinding unobligated balances remaining from funds appropriated under the 

headings ‘‘Rural Housing and Economic Development’’, ‘‘ManageVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
101 

ment and Administration’’, and ‘‘Program Office Salaries and Expenses’’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(102) 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES 

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $7,548,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 8,023,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,548,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥475,000 

The United States Access Board (Access Board) was established 

by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 with the primary 

mission of ensuring accessibility for people with disabilities. The 

Access Board is responsible for developing guidelines under the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, the Architectural Barriers Act, 

and the Telecommunications Act. The Access Board is responsible 

for developing standards under section 508 of the Rehabilitation 

Act for accessible electronic and information technology used by 

Federal agencies. The Access Board also enforces the Architectural 

Barriers Act and provides training and technical assistance on the 

guidelines and standards it develops. 

The Access Board has been given responsibilities under the Help 

America Vote Act to serve on the Election Assistance Commission’s 

Board of Advisors and Technical Guidelines Development Committee. Additionally, the Board maintains a small research program that develops technical assistance materials and provides information needed for rulemaking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $7,548,000 for the operations of the 

Access Board, which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 level and 

$475,000 below the request. 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $25,660,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 27,387,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,660,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,727,000 

Established in 1961, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is 

an independent government agency, responsible for the regulation 

of oceanborne transportation in the foreign commerce of the United 

States. FMC policy focuses on (1) maintaining an efficient and competitive international ocean transportation system; and (2) protecting the public from unlawful, unfair, and deceptive ocean transVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
103 

portation practices. The Federal Maritime Commission monitors 

ocean common carriers, marine terminal operators, conferences, 

ports, and ocean transportation intermediaries to ensure they 

maintain just and reasonable practices. Among other activities, 

FMC also maintains a trade monitoring and enforcement program, 

monitors the laws and practices of foreign governments and their 

impacts on shipping conditions in the U.S., and enforces special 

regulatory requirements as they apply to controlled carriers. 

The principal shipping statutes administered by the FMC are the 

Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101–41309), the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988 (46 U.S.C. 42301–42307), Section 19 of 

the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. 42101–42109), and Public Law 89–777 (46 U.S.C. 44101–44106). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $25,660,000 for the Federal Maritime Commission, which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 appropriation and $1,727,000 less than the budget request. Of the funds provided, not less than $527,637 is available for the Office of Inspector 

General. 

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $23,999,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 24,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 23,999,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥500,000 

The Amtrak Inspector General is an independent, objective unit 

responsible for detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and 

violations of law and for promoting economy, efficiency and effectiveness at Amtrak. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $23,999,000 for Amtrak’s Office of 

Inspector General (Amtrak OIG), which is equal to the fiscal year 

2015 enacted level and $500,000 below the amount proposed in the 

fiscal year 2016 budget. The recommended level will allow Amtrak 

OIG to undertake audits, evaluations, and investigations and will 

ensure the OIG’s effective oversight of Amtrak’s programs and operations. The OIG’s efforts have resulted in valuable studies and 

recommendations for this Committee and for the Corporation that 

have yielded cost savings and management improvements. These 

studies have been in a number of areas, including food and beverage service, capital planning, overtime, and fraud. In addition, 

Amtrak OIG has been instrumental in developing an audit process 

to review invoices and identifying overpayments. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
104 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $103,981,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 105,170,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,981,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥1,189,000 

Initially established along with the Department of Transportation (DOT), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent federal 

agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation 

accident in the United States, as well as significant accidents in 

other modes of transportation—railroad, highway, marine and 

pipeline—and issuing safety recommendations aimed at preventing 

future accidents. Although it has always operated independently, 

the NTSB relied on the DOT for funding and administrative support until the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 

93–633) severed all ties between the two organizations effective 

April of 1975. 

In addition to its investigatory duties, the NTSB is responsible 

for maintaining the government’s database of civil aviation accidents and conducting special studies of transportation safety issues 

of national significance. Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international treaties, the NTSB supplies investigators to 

serve as U.S. Accredited Representatives for aviation accidents 

overseas involving U.S.-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or 

major components of U.S. manufacture. The NTSB also serves as 

the court of appeals for any airman, mechanic or mariner whenever 

certificate action is taken by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant, 

or when civil penalties are assessed by the FAA. In addition, the 

NTSB operates the NTSB Academy in Ashburn, Virginia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $103,981,000 for the salaries and 

expenses of the NTSB, which is the same as the fiscal year 2015 

enacted level and $1,189,000 below the budget request. 

NTSB Academy.—The agency is encouraged to continue to seek 

additional opportunities to lease out, or otherwise generate revenue 

from the NTSB Academy, so that the agency can appropriately 

focus its resources on the important investigative work that is central to the agency’s mission. In addition, the agency is again directed to submit detailed information on the costs associated with 

the NTSB Academy, as well as the revenue the facility is expected 

to generate, as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget request. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
105 

NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $185,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 182,300,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 177,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... ¥8,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... ¥5,300,000 

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by the 

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978). Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation now operates under the trade 

name ‘NeighborWorks America.’ NeighborWorks America helps 

local communities establish working partnerships between residents and representatives of the public and private sectors. These 

partnership-based organizations are independent, tax-exempt, community-based nonprofit entities, often referred to as 

NeighborWorks organizations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $177,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2016, which is $5,300,000 below the request and 

$8,000,000 below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level. 

Of the funds provided, $135,000,000 is for the core program, 

which is equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level, and $1,000,000 

below the request. In addition, there is a total of $42,000,000 for 

the National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling (NFMC) Program, 

which is $3,700,000 below the budget request and $8,000,000 below 

the fiscal year 2015 enacted level. 

Program Fiscal Year 2015 Enacted 

Fiscal Year 2016 

Budget Request 

Fiscal Year 2016 Committee Recommendation 

Core ........................................................................................... $135,000,000 $136,600,000 $135,000,000 

NFMC ......................................................................................... 50,000,000 45,700,000 42,000,000 

Total ................................................................................. 185,000,000 182,300,000 177,000,000 

The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2007, Congress provided 

‘‘one-time funding’’ for NFMC in response the housing foreclosure 

crisis. According to RealtyTrac’s Year-End Year-End 2014 U.S. 

Foreclosure Market Report, which shows foreclosure filings—default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions—were reported on 1.1 million properties in 2014, down 18 percent from 

2013 and down 61 percent from the peak of 2.9 properties with 

foreclosure filings in 2010. The foreclosure filings in 2014 were at 

the lowest annual total since 2006, when there were 717,522 properties with foreclosure filings nationwide. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
106 

Recognizing the continuing improvement in the housing market 

and the reduction in foreclosures, the Committee reduces funding 

for NFMC. 

UNITED STATES INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... $3,530,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ....................................................... 3,530,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,530,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2016 ................................................... – – – 

The mission of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) is to coordinate the Federal response to homelessness and to create a national partnership at every level of government and with the private sector to reduce and end homelessness in the nation while maximizing the effectiveness of the Federal government in contributing to the end of homelessness. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,530,000 for the USICH, which is 

the same as fiscal year 2015 enacted and the budget request. The 

Committee does not include requests to make this program permanent or to increase the salary for the executive director. 

The Committee encourages the nineteen USICH member agencies to use the next year to establish permanent working relationships and interagency efficiencies that will endure USICH’s sunset 

date in 2017. The Committee directs USICH to facilitate this work 

and to establish a plan for transition of its coordination function to 

permanently authorized agencies. USICH is directed to assist those 

agencies in conducting reorganization activities necessary to carry 

out interagency coordination beyond 2017 on Opening Doors: the 

Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness. The 

Committee directs USICH to provide a report within 90 days of enactment of this Act on how it plans to transition its functions in 

anticipation of the sunset date. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 140 93770A.001
107 

GENERAL PROVISION—THIS ACT

Section 401. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act. 

Section 402. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of 

funds unless expressly so provided herein. 

Section 403. The Committee continues the provision limiting consulting service expenditures through a procurement contract to 

contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record, 

with exceptions. 

Section 404. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

employee training not specifically related to the performance of official duties. 

Section 405. The Committee continues the provision specifying 

reprogramming procedures and requires tables to include prior 

year enacted levels. 

Section 406. The Committee continues the provision allowing up 

to fifty percent of unobligated balances appropriated for salaries 

and expenses to remain available for certain purposes, contingent 

upon approval by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 407. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for any project that seeks to use the power 

of eminent domain unless eminent domain is employed only for a 

public use. 

Section 408. The Committee continues the provision denying the 

transfer of funds made available in this Act, except pursuant to a 

transfer made by this Act or by authority granted in this Act. 

Section 409. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used to permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his or her past occupation after completion of military service. 

Section 410. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used unless the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 411. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being made available to any person or entity that has 

been found to have violated the Buy American Act. 

Section 412. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds for first-class airline accommodations in contravention of section 301–10.122 and 301–10.123 of title 41, C.F.R. 

Section 413. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

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 of 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 U.S. law. 

Section 414. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds to be used by the Federal Maritime Commission or the AdVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
108 

ministrator of the Maritime Administration to issue a license or 

certificate for a commercial vessel that was docked or anchored 

within 7 miles of a port on property confiscated by the Cuban Government. 

Section 415. The Committee includes a provision that establishes 

a spending reduction account. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The following materials are submitted in accordance with various 

requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives: 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

RESCISSION OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the rescissions of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Housing Certificate Fund’’; 

• $7,000,000 of budget authority from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Rural Housing and Economic Development’’; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Management and Administration’’; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Program Office Salaries 

and Expenses’’; and 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Community Development 

Loan Guarantees Program Account’’. 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the transfers of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 

UNDER TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Office of the Secretary ............................ Office of the Secretary .......................... ≤5% of certain funds subject to conditions 

Office of the Secretary, National Infrastructure Investments.Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Federal 

Railroad Administration, Maritime 

Administration.

Up to $5,000,000 

Federal Aviation Administration, Operations.Federal Aviation Administration, Operations.

≤2% of certain funds subject to conditions 

FHWA: Limitation on administrative expenses.Appalachian Regional Commission ....... $3,248,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
109 

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Maritime Administration, Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account.

Maritime Administration, Operations 

and Training.

$3,135,000 

UNDER TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Administrative Support Offices ............... Program Office Salaries and Expenses ≤$14,400,000 subject to conditions 

Housing Trust Fund ................................ Home Investment Partnerships Program Such sums as available 

Shelter Plus Care Renewal ..................... Homeless Assistance Grants ................. Such sums as available 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

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

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS 

* * * * * * * 

§ 127. Vehicle weight limitations - Interstate System 

(a) IN GENERAL.— (1) The Secretary shall withhold 50 percent of the apportionment of a State under section 104(b)(1) in any fiscal year in 

which the State does not permit the use of The Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways within 

its boundaries by vehicles with a weight of twenty thousand 

pounds carried on any one axle, including enforcement tolerances, or with a tandem axle weight of thirty-four thousand 

pounds, including enforcement tolerances, or a gross weight of 

at least eighty thousand pounds for vehicle combinations of 

five axles or more. 

(2) However, the maximum gross weight to be allowed by 

any State for vehicles using The Dwight D. Eisenhower System 

of Interstate and Defense Highways shall be twenty thousand 

pounds carried on one axle, including enforcement tolerances, 

and a tandem axle weight of thirty-four thousand pounds, including enforcement tolerances and with an overall maximum 

gross weight, including enforcement tolerances, on a group of 

two or more consecutive axles produced by application of the 

following formula: W=500(LN/(N-1)+12N+36) 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
110 

where W equals overall gross weight on any group of two or 

more consecutive axles to the nearest five hundred pounds, L 

equals distance in feet between the extreme of any group of 

two or more consecutive axles, and N equals number of axles 

in group under consideration, except that two consecutive sets 

of tandem axles may carry a gross load of thirty-four thousand 

pounds each providing the overall distance between the first 

and last axles of such consecutive sets of tandem axles (1) is 

thirty-six feet or more, or (2) in the case of a motor vehicle 

hauling any tank trailer, dump trailer, or ocean transport container before September 1, 1989, is 30 feet or more: Provided, 

That such overall gross weight may not exceed eighty thousand 

pounds, including all enforcement tolerances, except for vehicles using Interstate Route 29 between Sioux City, Iowa, and 

the border between Iowa and South Dakota or vehicles using 

Interstate Route 129 between Sioux City, Iowa, and the border 

between Iowa and Nebraska, and except for those vehicles and 

loads which cannot be easily dismantled or divided and which 

have been issued special permits in accordance with applicable 

State laws, or the corresponding maximum weights permitted 

for vehicles using the public highways of such State under laws 

or regulations established by appropriate State authority in effect on July 1, 1956, except in the case of the overall gross 

weight of any group of two or more consecutive axles on any 

vehicle (other than a vehicle comprised of a motor vehicle hauling any tank trailer, dump trailer, or ocean transport container 

on or after September 1, 1989), on the date of enactment of the 

Federal-Aid Highway Amendments of 1974, whichever is the 

greater. 

(3) Any amount which is withheld from apportionment to 

any State pursuant to the foregoing provisions shall lapse if 

not released and obligated within the availability period specified in section 118(b)(2) of this title. 

(4) This section shall not be construed to deny apportionment 

to any State allowing the operation within such State of any 

vehicles or combinations thereof, other than vehicles or combinations subject to subsection (d) of this section, which the 

State determines could be lawfully operated within such State 

on July 1, 1956, except in the case of the overall gross weight 

of any group of two or more consecutive axles, on the date of 

enactment of the Federal-Aid Highway Amendments of 1974. 

(5) With respect to the State of Hawaii, laws or regulations 

in effect on February 1, 1960, shall be applicable for the purposes of this section in lieu of those in effect on July 1, 1956. 

(6) With respect to the State of Colorado, vehicles designed 

to carry 2 or more precast concrete panels shall be considered 

a nondivisible load. 

(7) With respect to the State of Michigan, laws or regulations 

in effect on May 1, 1982, shall be applicable for the purposes 

of this subsection. 

(8) With respect to the State of Maryland, laws and regulations in effect on June 1, 1993, shall be applicable for the purposes of this subsection. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
111 

(9) he State of Louisiana may allow, by special permit, the 

operation of vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of up to 

100,000 pounds for the hauling of sugarcane during the harvest season, not to exceed 100 days annually. 

(10) With respect to Interstate Routes 89, 93, and 95 in the 

State of New Hampshire, State laws (including regulations) 

concerning vehicle weight limitations that were in effect on 

January 1, 1987, and are applicable to State highways other 

than the Interstate System, shall be applicable in lieu of the 

requirements of this subsection. 

(11)(A) With respect to all portions of the Interstate Highway 

System in the State of Maine, laws (including regulations) of 

that State concerning vehicle weight limitations applicable to 

other State highways shall be applicable in lieu of the requirements under this subsection through December 31, 2031. 

(B) With respect to all portions of the Interstate Highway 

System in the State of Vermont, laws (including regulations) of 

that State concerning vehicle weight limitations applicable to 

other State highways shall be applicable in lieu of the requirements under this subsection through December 31, 2031. 

(12) HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), 

in order to promote reduction of fuel use and emissions because of engine idling, the maximum gross vehicle weight 

limit and the axle weight limit for any heavy-duty vehicle 

equipped with an idle reduction technology shall be increased by a quantity necessary to compensate for the additional weight of the idle reduction system. 

(B) MAXIMUM WEIGHT INCREASE.—The weight increase 

under subparagraph (A) shall be not greater than 550 

pounds. 

(C) PROOF.—On request by a regulatory agency or law 

enforcement agency, the vehicle operator shall provide 

proof (through demonstration or certification) that— 

(i) the idle reduction technology is fully functional at 

all times; and 

(ii) the 550-pound gross weight increase is not used 

for any purpose other than the use of idle reduction 

technology described in subparagraph (A). 

(b) REASONABLE ACCESS.—No State may enact or enforce any law 

denying reasonable access to motor vehicles subject to this title to 

and from the Interstate Highway System to terminals and facilities 

for food, fuel, repairs, and rest. 

(c) OCEAN TRANSPORT CONTAINER DEFINED.—For purposes of this 

section, the term ‘‘ocean transport container’’ has the meaning 

given the term ‘‘freight container’’ by the International Standards 

Organization in Series 1, Freight Containers, 3rd Edition (reference number IS0668-1979(E)) as in effect on the date of the enactment of this subsection. 

(d) LONGER COMBINATION VEHICLES.— (1) PROHIBITION.— (A) GENERAL CONTINUATION RULE.—A longer combination vehicle may continue to operate only if the longer 

combination vehicle configuration type was authorized by 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
112 

State officials pursuant to State statute or regulation conforming to this section and in actual lawful operation on 

a regular or periodic basis (including seasonal operations) 

on or before June 1, 1991, or pursuant to section 335 of the 

Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1991 (104 Stat. 2186). 

(B) APPLICABILITY OF STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.— 

All such operations shall continue to be subject to, at the 

minimum, all State statutes, regulations, limitations and 

conditions, including, but not limited to, routing-specific 

and configuration-specific designations and all other restrictions, in force on June 1, 1991; except that subject to 

such regulations as may be issued by the Secretary pursuant to paragraph (5) of this subsection, the State may 

make minor adjustments of a temporary and emergency 

nature to route designations and vehicle operating restrictions in effect on June 1, 1991, for specific safety purposes 

and road construction. 

(C) WYOMING.—In addition to those vehicles allowed 

under subparagraph (A), the State of Wyoming may allow 

the operation of additional vehicle configurations not in actual operation on June 1, 1991, but authorized by State 

law not later than November 3, 1992, if such vehicle configurations comply with the single axle, tandem axle, and 

bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a) and do not 

exceed 117,000 pounds gross vehicle weight. 

(D) OHIO.—In addition to vehicles which the State of 

Ohio may continue to allow to be operated under subparagraph (A), such State may allow longer combination vehicles with 3 cargo carrying units of 28 1/2 feet each (not including the truck tractor) not in actual operation on June 

1, 1991, to be operated within its boundaries on the 1-mile 

segment of Ohio State Route 7 which begins at and is 

south of exit 16 of the Ohio Turnpike. 

(E) ALASKA.—In addition to vehicles which the State of 

Alaska may continue to allow to be operated under subparagraph (A), such State may allow the operation of 

longer combination vehicles which were not in actual operation on June 1, 1991, but which were in actual operation 

prior to July 5, 1991. 

(F) IOWA.—In addition to vehicles that the State of Iowa 

may continue to allow to be operated under subparagraph 

(A), the State may allow longer combination vehicles that 

were not in actual operation on June 1, 1991, to be operated on Interstate Route 29 between Sioux City, Iowa, and 

the border between Iowa and South Dakota or Interstate 

Route 129 between Sioux City, Iowa, and the border between Iowa and Nebraska. 

(2) ADDITIONAL STATE RESTRICTIONS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this subsection shall prevent any State from further restricting in any manner or 

prohibiting the operation of longer combination vehicles 

otherwise authorized under this subsection; except that 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
113 

such restrictions or prohibitions shall be consistent with 

the requirements of sections 31111-31114 of title 49. 

(B) MINOR ADJUSTMENTS.—Any State further restricting 

or prohibiting the operations of longer combination vehicles or making minor adjustments of a temporary and 

emergency nature as may be allowed pursuant to regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to paragraph (5) of 

this subsection, shall, within 30 days, advise the Secretary 

of such action, and the Secretary shall publish a notice of 

such action in the Federal Register. 

(3) PUBLICATION OF LIST.— (A) SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY.—Within 60 days of the 

date of the enactment of this subsection, each State (i) 

shall submit to the Secretary for publication in the Federal 

Register a complete list of (I) all operations of longer combination vehicles being conducted as of June 1, 1991, pursuant to State statutes and regulations; (II) all limitations 

and conditions, including, but not limited to, routing-specific and configuration-specific designations and all other 

restrictions, governing the operation of longer combination 

vehicles otherwise prohibited under this subsection; and 

(III) such statutes, regulations, limitations, and conditions; 

and (ii) shall submit to the Secretary copies of such statutes, regulations, limitations, and conditions. 

(B) INTERIM LIST.—Not later than 90 days after the date 

of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall 

publish an interim list in the Federal Register, consisting 

of all information submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A). 

The Secretary shall review for accuracy all information 

submitted by the States pursuant to subparagraph (A) and 

shall solicit and consider public comment on the accuracy 

of all such information. 

(C) LIMITATION.—No statute or regulation shall be included on the list submitted by a State or published by the 

Secretary merely on the grounds that it authorized, or 

could have authorized, by permit or otherwise, the operation of longer combination vehicles, not in actual operation on a regular or periodic basis on or before June 1, 

1991. 

(D) FINAL LIST.—Except as modified pursuant to paragraph (1)(C) of this subsection, the list shall be published 

as final in the Federal Register not later than 180 days 

after the date of the enactment of this subsection. In publishing the final list, the Secretary shall make any revisions necessary to correct inaccuracies identified under 

subparagraph (B). After publication of the final list, longer 

combination vehicles may not operate on the Interstate 

System except as provided in the list. 

(E) REVIEW AND CORRECTION PROCEDURE.—The Secretary, on his or her own motion or upon a request by any 

person (including a State), shall review the list issued by 

the Secretary pursuant to subparagraph (D). If the Secretary determines there is cause to believe that a mistake 

was made in the accuracy of the final list, the Secretary 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
114 

shall commence a proceeding to determine whether the list 

published pursuant to subparagraph (D) should be corrected. If the Secretary determines that there is a mistake 

in the accuracy of the list the Secretary shall correct the 

publication under subparagraph (D) to reflect the determination of the Secretary. 

(4) LONGER COMBINATION VEHICLE DEFINED.—For purposes of 

this section, the term ‘‘longer combination vehicle’’ means any 

combination of a truck tractor and 2 or more trailers or 

semitrailers which operates on the Interstate System at a 

gross vehicle weight greater than 80,000 pounds. 

(5) REGULATIONS REGARDING MINOR ADJUSTMENTS.—Not 

later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall issue regulations establishing criteria for the States to follow in making minor adjustments 

under paragraph (1)(B). 

(e) OPERATION OF CERTAIN SPECIALIZED HAULING VEHICLES ON

INTERSTATE ROUTE 68.—The single axle, tandem axle, and bridge 

formula limits set forth in subsection (a) shall not apply to the operation on Interstate Route 68 in Garrett and Allegany Counties, 

Maryland, of any specialized vehicle equipped with a steering axle 

and a tridem axle and used for hauling coal, logs, and pulpwood 

if such vehicle is of a type of vehicle as was operating in such counties on United States Route 40 or 48 for such purpose on August 

1, 1991. 

(f) OPERATION OF CERTAIN SPECIALIZED HAULING VEHICLES ON

CERTAIN WISCONSIN HIGHWAYS.—If the 104-mile portion of Wisconsin State Route 78 and United States Route 51 between Interstate Route 94 near Portage, Wisconsin, and Wisconsin State Route 

29 south of Wausau, Wisconsin, is designated as part of the Interstate System under section 103(c)(4)(A), the single axle weight, tandem axle weight, gross vehicle weight, and bridge formula limits 

set forth in subsection (a) shall not apply to the 104-mile portion 

with respect to the operation of any vehicle that could legally operate on the 104-mile portion before the date of the enactment of this 

subsection. 

(g) OPERATION OF CERTAIN SPECIALIZED HAULING VEHICLES ON

CERTAIN PENNSYLVANIA HIGHWAYS.—If the segment of United 

States Route 220 between Bedford and Bald Eagle, Pennsylvania, 

is designated as part of the Interstate System, the single axle 

weight, tandem axle weight, gross vehicle weight, and bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a) shall not apply to that segment with respect to the operation of any vehicle which could have 

legally operated on that segment before the date of the enactment 

of this subsection. 

(h) WAIVER FOR A ROUTE IN STATE OF MAINE DURING PERIODS

OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

this section, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary 

of Defense, may waive or limit the application of any vehicle 

weight limit established under this section with respect to the 

portion of Interstate Route 95 in the State of Maine between 

Augusta and Bangor for the purpose of making bulk shipments 

of jet fuel to the Air National Guard Base at Bangor InterVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
115 

national Airport during a period of national emergency in order 

to respond to the effects of the national emergency. 

(2) APPLICABILITY.—Emergency limits established under 

paragraph (1) shall preempt any inconsistent State vehicle 

weight limits. 

(i) SPECIAL PERMITS DURING PERIODS OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

this section, a State may issue special permits during an emergency to overweight vehicles and loads that can easily be dismantled or divided if— 

(A) the President has declared the emergency to be a 

major disaster under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); 

(B) the permits are issued in accordance with State law; 

and 

(C) the permits are issued exclusively to vehicles and 

loads that are delivering relief supplies. 

(2) EXPIRATION.—A permit issued under paragraph (1) shall 

expire not later than 120 days after the date of the declaration 

of emergency under subparagraph (A) of that paragraph. 

(j) OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN OTHER WISCONSIN HIGHWAYS.—If any segment of the United States Route 41 corridor, as 

described in section 1105(c)(57) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, is designated as a route on the 

Interstate System, a vehicle that could operate legally on that segment before the date of such designation may continue to operate 

on that segment, without regard to any requirement under subsection (a). 

(k) OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN MISSISSIPPI HIGHWAYS.—If any segment of United States Route 78 in Mississippi 

from mile marker 0 to mile marker 113 is designated as part of the 

Interstate System, no limit established under this section may 

apply to that segment with respect to the operation of any vehicle 

that could have legally operated on that segment before such designation. 

(l) OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN KENTUCKY HIGHWAYS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—If any segment of highway described in 

paragraph (2) is designated as a route on the Interstate System, a vehicle that could operate legally on that segment before the date of such designation may continue to operate on 

that segment, without regard to any requirement under subsection (a). 

(2) DESCRIPTION OF HIGHWAY SEGMENTS.—The highway segments referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows: 

(A) Interstate Route 69 in Kentucky (formerly the Wendell H. Ford (Western Kentucky) Parkway) from the Interstate Route 24 Interchange, near Eddyville, to the Edward 

T. Breathitt (Pennyrile) Parkway Interchange. 

(B) The Edward T. Breathitt (Pennyrile) Parkway (to be 

designated as Interstate Route 69) in Kentucky from the 

Wendell H. Ford (Western Kentucky) Parkway Interchange to near milepost 77, and on new alignment to an 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
116 

interchange on the Audubon Parkway, if the segment is 

designated as part of the Interstate System. 

(m) LONGER COMBINATION VEHICLES IN IDAHO.—No limit or other 

prohibition under this section, except as provided in this subsection, 

applies to a longer combination vehicle operating on a segment of 

the Interstate System in the State of Idaho if such vehicle— 

(1) has a gross vehicle weight of 129,000 pounds or less; 

(2) complies with the single axle, tandem axle, and bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a); and 

(3) is authorized to operate on such segment under Idaho 

State Law. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 130. Railway-highway crossings 

(a) Subject to section 120 and subsection (b) of this section, the 

entire cost of construction of projects for the elimination of hazards 

of railway-highway crossings, including the separation or protection 

of grades at crossings, the reconstruction of existing railroad grade 

crossing structures, and the relocation of highways to eliminate 

grade crossings, may be paid from sums apportioned in accordance 

with section 104 of this title. In any case when the elimination of 

the hazards of a railway-highway crossing can be effected by the 

relocation of a portion of a railway at a cost estimated by the Secretary to be less than the cost of such elimination by one of the 

methods mentioned in the first sentence of this section, then the 

entire cost of such relocation project, subject to section 120 and 

subsection (b) of this section, may be paid from sums apportioned 

in accordance with section 104 of this title. 

(b) The Secretary may classify the various types of projects involved in the elimination of hazards of railway-highway crossings, 

and may set for each such classification a percentage of the costs 

of construction which shall be deemed to represent the net benefit 

to the railroad or railroads for the purpose of determining the railroad’s share of the cost of construction. The percentage so determined shall in no case exceed 10 per centum. The Secretary shall 

determine the appropriate classification of each project. 

(c) Any railroad involved in a project for the elimination of hazards of railway-highway crossings paid for in whole or in part from 

sums made available for expenditure under this title, or prior Acts, 

shall be liable to the United States for the net benefit to the railroad determined under the classification of such project made pursuant to subsection (b) of this section. Such liability to the United 

States may be discharged by direct payment to the State transportation department of the State in which the project is located, in 

which case such payment shall be credited to the cost of the 

project. Such payment may consist in whole or in part of materials 

and labor furnished by the railroad in connection with the construction of such project. If any such railroad fails to discharge 

such liability within a six-month period after completion of the 

project, it shall be liable to the United States for its share of the 

cost, and the Secretary shall request the Attorney General to institute proceedings against such railroad for the recovery of the 

amount for which it is liable under this subsection. The Attorney 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
117 

General is authorized to bring such proceedings on behalf of the 

United States, in the appropriate district court of the United 

States, and the United States shall be entitled in such proceedings 

to recover such sums as it is considered and adjudged by the court 

that such railroad is liable for in the premises. Any amounts recovered by the United States under this subsection shall be credited 

to miscellaneous receipts. 

(d) SURVEY AND SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS.—Each State shall conduct and systematically maintain a survey of all highways to identify those railroad crossings which may require separation, relocation, or protective devices, and establish and implement a schedule 

of projects for this purpose. At a minimum, such a schedule shall 

provide signs for all railway-highway crossings. 

(e) FUNDS FOR PROTECTIVE DEVICES.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Before making an apportionment under 

section 104(b)(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall set aside, 

from amounts made available to carry out the highway safety 

improvement program under section 148 for such fiscal year, 

at least ø$220,000,000¿ $350,000,000 for the elimination of 

hazards and the installation of protective devices at railwayhighway crossings. At least 1/2 of the funds authorized for and 

expended under this section shall be available for the installation of protective devices at railway-highway crossings. Sums 

authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section shall be 

available for obligation in the same manner as funds apportioned under section 104(b)(1) of this title. 

(2) SPECIAL RULE.—If a State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the State has met all its needs for 

installation of protective devices at railway-highway crossings, 

the State may use funds made available by this section for 

other highway safety improvement program purposes. 

(f) APPORTIONMENT.— 

(1) FORMULA.—Fifty percent of the funds set aside to carry 

out this section pursuant to subsection (e)(1) shall be apportioned to the States in accordance with the formula set forth 

in section 104(b)(3)(A) as in effect on the day before the date 

of enactment of the MAP-21, and 50 percent of such funds 

shall be apportioned to the States in the ratio that total public 

railway-highway crossings in each State bears to the total of 

such crossings in all States. 

(2) MINIMUM APPORTIONMENT.—Notwithstanding paragraph 

(1), each State shall receive a minimum of one-half of 1 percent 

of the funds apportioned under paragraph (1). 

(3) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share payable on account 

of any project financed with funds set aside to carry out this 

section shall be 90 percent of the cost thereof. 

(g) ANNUAL REPORT.—Each State shall report to the Secretary 

not later than December 30 of each year on the progress being 

made to implement the railway-highway crossings program authorized by this section and the effectiveness of such improvements. 

Each State report shall contain an assessment of the costs of the 

various treatments employed and subsequent accident experience 

at improved locations. The Secretary shall submit a report to the 

Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
118 

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, of the Senate and the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 

Representatives, not later than April 1, 2006, and every 2 years 

thereafter,, on the progress being made by the State in implementing projects to improve railway-highway crossings. The report 

shall include, but not be limited to, the number of projects undertaken, their distribution by cost range, road system, nature of 

treatment, and subsequent accident experience at improved locations. In addition, the Secretary’s report shall analyze and evaluate 

each State program, identify any State found not to be in compliance with the schedule of improvements required by subsection (d) 

and include recommendations for future implementation of the railroad highway crossings program. 

(h) USE OF FUNDS FOR MATCHING.—Funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section may be used to provide a local 

government with funds to be used on a matching basis when State 

funds are available which may only be spent when the local government produces matching funds for the improvement of railwayhighway crossings. 

(i) INCENTIVE PAYMENTS FOR AT-GRADE CROSSING CLOSURES.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

this section and subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), a State may, 

from sums available to the State under this section, make incentive payments to local governments in the State upon the 

permanent closure by such governments of public at-grade railway-highway crossings under the jurisdiction of such governments. 

(2) INCENTIVE PAYMENTS BY RAILROADS.—A State may not 

make an incentive payment under paragraph (1) to a local government with respect to the closure of a crossing unless the 

railroad owning the tracks on which the crossing is located 

makes an incentive payment to the government with respect to 

the closure. 

(3) AMOUNT OF STATE PAYMENT.—The amount of the incentive payment payable to a local government by a State under 

paragraph (1) with respect to a crossing may not exceed the 

lesser of— 

(A) the amount of the incentive payment paid to the government with respect to the crossing by the railroad concerned under paragraph (2); or 

(B) $7,500. 

(4) USE OF STATE PAYMENTS.—A local government receiving 

an incentive payment from a State under paragraph (1) shall 

use the amount of the incentive payment for transportation 

safety improvements. 

(j) BICYCLE SAFETY.—In carrying out projects under this section, 

a State shall take into account bicycle safety. 

(k) EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS.—Not more than 2 percent of funds 

apportioned to a State to carry out this section may be used by the 

State for compilation and analysis of data in support of activities 

carried out under subsection (g). 

(l) NATIONAL CROSSING INVENTORY.— (1) INITIAL REPORTING OF CROSSING INFORMATION.—Not later 

than 1 year after the date of enactment of the Rail Safety ImVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
119 

provement Act of 2008 or within 6 months of a new crossing 

becoming operational, whichever occurs later, each State shall 

report to the Secretary of Transportation current information, 

including information about warning devices and signage, as 

specified by the Secretary, concerning each previously unreported public crossing located within its borders. 

(2) PERIODIC UPDATING OF CROSSING INFORMATION.—On a 

periodic basis beginning not later than 2 years after the date 

of enactment of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 and 

on or before September 30 of every year thereafter, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary, each State shall report to the 

Secretary current information, including information about 

warning devices and signage, as specified by the Secretary, 

concerning each public crossing located within its borders. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle VI—MOTOR VEHICLE AND 

DRIVER PROGRAMS 

* * * * * * * 

PART B—COMMERCIAL 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 311—COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY 

* * * * * * * 

Subchapter II—LENGTH AND WIDTH 

LIMITATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

§ 31111. Length limitations 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply: 

(1) AUTOMOBILE TRANSPORTER.—The term ‘‘automobile transporter’’ means any vehicle combination designed and used specifically for the transport of assembled highway vehicles, including truck camper units. 

(2) MAXI-CUBE VEHICLE.—The term ‘‘maxi-cube vehicle’’ 

means a truck tractor combined with a semitrailer and a separable property-carrying unit designed to be loaded and unloaded through the semitrailer, with the length of the separable property-carrying unit being not more than 34 feet and 

the length of the vehicle combination being not more than 65 

feet. 

(3) TRUCK TRACTOR.—The term ‘‘truck tractor’’ means— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
120 

(A) a non-property-carrying power unit that operates in 

combination with a semitrailer or trailer; or 

(B) a power unit that carries as property only motor vehicles when operating in combination with a semitrailer in 

transporting motor vehicles. 

(4) DRIVEAWAY SADDLEMOUNT VEHICLE TRANSPORTER COM- BINATION.—The term ‘‘driveaway saddlemount vehicle transporter combination’’ means a vehicle combination designed and 

specifically used to tow up to 3 trucks or truck tractors, each 

connected by a saddle to the frame or fifth-wheel of the forward vehicle of the truck or truck tractor in front of it. Such 

combination may include one fullmount. 

(b) GENERAL LIMITATIONS.—(1) Except as provided in this section, a State may not prescribe or enforce a regulation of commerce 

that— 

(A) imposes a vehicle length limitation of less than 45 feet 

on a bus, of less than 48 feet on a semitrailer operating in a 

truck tractor-semitrailer combination, øor of less than 28 feet 

on a semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractorsemitrailer-trailer combination,¿ or, notwithstanding section 

31112, of less than 33 feet on a semitrailer or trailer operating 

in a truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination, on any segment of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and 

Defense Highways (except a segment exempted under subsection (f) of this section) and those classes of qualifying Federal-aid Primary System highways designated by the Secretary 

of Transportation under subsection (e) of this section; 

(B) imposes an overall length limitation on a commercial 

motor vehicle operating in a truck tractor-semitrailer or truck 

tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination; 

(C) has the effect of prohibiting the use of a semitrailer or 

trailer of the same dimensions as those that were in actual and 

lawful use in that State on December 1, 1982; 

(D) imposes a vehicle length limitation of not less than or 

more than 97 feet on all driveaway saddlemount vehicle transporter combinations; 

(E) has the effect of prohibiting the use of an existing 

semitrailer or trailer, of not more than 28.5 feet in length, in 

a truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination if the 

semitrailer or trailer was operating lawfully on December 1, 

1982, within a 65-foot overall length limit in any State; or 

(F) imposes a limitation of less than 46 feet on the distance 

from the kingpin to the center of the rear axle on trailers used 

exclusively or primarily in connection with motorsports competition events. 

(2) A length limitation prescribed or enforced by a State under 

paragraph (1)(A) of this subsection applies only to a semitrailer or 

trailer and not to a truck tractor. 

(c) MAXI-CUBE AND VEHICLE COMBINATION LIMITATIONS.—A 

State may not prohibit a maxi-cube vehicle or a commercial motor 

vehicle combination consisting of a truck tractor and 2 trailing 

units on any segment of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of 

Interstate and Defense Highways (except a segment exempted 

under subsection (f) of this section) and those classes of qualifying 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
121 

Federal-aid Primary System highways designated by the Secretary 

under subsection (e) of this section. 

(d) EXCLUSION OF SAFETY AND ENERGY CONSERVATION DE- VICES.—Length calculated under this section does not include a 

safety or energy conservation device the Secretary decides is necessary for safe and efficient operation of a commercial motor vehicle. However, such a device may not have by its design or use the 

ability to carry cargo. 

(e) QUALIFYING HIGHWAYS.—The Secretary by regulation shall 

designate as qualifying Federal-aid Primary System highways 

those highways of the Federal-aid Primary System in existence on 

June 1, 1991, that can accommodate safely the applicable vehicle 

lengths provided in this section. 

(f) EXEMPTIONS.—(1) If the chief executive officer of a State, after 

consulting under paragraph (2) of this subsection, decides a segment of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways is not capable of safely accommodating a commercial motor vehicle having a length described in subsection (b)(1)(A) 

of this section or the motor vehicle combination described in subsection (c) of this section, the chief executive officer may notify the 

Secretary of that decision and request the Secretary to exempt that 

segment from either or both provisions. 

(2) Before making a decision under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the chief executive officer shall consult with units of local 

government in the State in which the segment of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways is located 

and with the chief executive officer of any adjacent State that may 

be directly affected by the exemption. As part of the consultations, 

consideration shall be given to any potential alternative route that 

serves the area in which the segment is located and can safely accommodate a commercial motor vehicle having a length described 

in subsection (b)(1)(A) of this section or the motor vehicle combination described in subsection (c) of this section. 

(3) A chief executive officer’s notification under this subsection 

must include specific evidence of safety problems supporting the officer’s decision and the results of consultations about alternative 

routes. 

(4)(A) If the Secretary decides, on request of a chief executive officer or on the Secretary’s own initiative, a segment of the Dwight 

D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways is not 

capable of safely accommodating a commercial motor vehicle having a length described in subsection (b)(1)(A) of this section or the 

motor vehicle combination described in subsection (c) of this section, the Secretary shall exempt the segment from either or both 

of those provisions. Before making a decision under this paragraph, 

the Secretary shall consider any possible alternative route that 

serves the area in which the segment is located. 

(B) The Secretary shall make a decision about a specific segment 

not later than 120 days after the date of receipt of notification from 

a chief executive officer under paragraph (1) of this subsection or 

the date on which the Secretary initiates action under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, whichever is applicable. If the Secretary finds the decision will not be made in time, the Secretary 

immediately shall notify Congress, giving the reasons for the delay, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
122 

information about the resources assigned, and the projected date 

for the decision. 

(C) Before making a decision, the Secretary shall give an interested person notice and an opportunity for comment. If the Secretary exempts a segment under this subsection before the final 

regulations under subsection (e) of this section are prescribed, the 

Secretary shall include the exemption as part of the final regulations. If the Secretary exempts the segment after the final regulations are prescribed, the Secretary shall publish the exemption as 

an amendment to the final regulations. 

(g) ACCOMMODATING SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT.—In prescribing 

regulations to carry out this section, the Secretary may make decisions necessary to accommodate specialized equipment, including 

automobile and vessel transporters and maxi-cube vehicles. 

§ 31112. Property-carrying unit limitation 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 

(1) ‘‘property-carrying unit’’ means any part of a commercial 

motor vehicle combination (except the truck tractor) used to 

carry property, including a trailer, a semitrailer, or the property-carrying section of a single unit truck. 

(2) the length of the property-carrying units of a commercial 

motor vehicle combination is the length measured from the 

front of the first property-carrying unit to the rear of the last 

property-carrying unit. 

(b) GENERAL LIMITATIONS.—A State may not allow by any means 

the operation, on any segment of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways and those classes of qualifying Federal-aid Primary System highways designated by the Secretary of Transportation under section 31111(e) of this title, of any 

commercial motor vehicle combination (except a vehicle or load that 

cannot be dismantled easily or divided easily and that has been 

issued a special permit under applicable State law) with more than 

one property-carrying unit (not including the truck tractor) whose 

property-carrying units are more than— 

(1) the maximum combination trailer, semitrailer, or other 

type of length limitation allowed by law or regulation of that 

State before June 2, 1991; or 

(2) the length of the property-carrying units of those commercial motor vehicle combinations, by specific configuration, 

in actual, lawful operation on a regular or periodic basis (including continuing seasonal operation) in that State before 

June 2, 1991. 

(c) øSPECIAL RULES FOR WYOMING, OHIO, ALASKA, IOWA, AND NEBRASKA¿ SPECIAL RULES FOR WYOMING, OHIO, ALASKA, IOWA, NEBRASKA, AND KANSAS.—In addition to the vehicles allowed under 

subsection (b) of this section— 

(1) Wyoming may allow the operation of additional vehicle 

configurations not in actual operation on June 1, 1991, but authorized by State law not later than November 3, 1992, if the 

vehicle configurations comply with the single axle, tandem 

axle, and bridge formula limits in section 127(a) of title 23 and 

are not more than 117,000 pounds gross vehicle weight; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
123 

(2) Ohio may allow the operation of commercial motor vehicle combinations with 3 property-carrying units of 28.5 feet 

each (not including the truck tractor) not in actual operation 

on June 1, 1991, to be operated in Ohio on the 1-mile segment 

of Ohio State Route 7 that begins at and is south of exit 16 

of the Ohio Turnpike; 

(3) Alaska may allow the operation of commercial motor vehicle combinations that were not in actual operation on June 

1, 1991, but were in actual operation before July 6, 1991ø; 

and¿; 

(4) Iowa may allow the operation on Interstate Route 29 between Sioux City, Iowa, and the border between Iowa and 

South Dakota or on Interstate Route 129 between Sioux City, 

Iowa, and the border between Iowa and Nebraska of commercial motor vehicle combinations with trailer length, semitrailer 

length, and property-carrying unit length allowed by law or 

regulation and in actual lawful operation on a regular or periodic basis (including continued seasonal operation) in South 

Dakota or Nebraska, respectively, before June 2, 1991ø.¿; and 

(5) øNebraska may¿ Nebraska and Kansas may allow the operation of a truck tractor and 2 trailers or semitrailers not in 

actual lawful operation on a regular or periodic basis on June 

1, 1991, if the length of the property-carrying units does not 

exceed 81 feet 6 inches and such combination is used only to 

transport equipment utilized by custom harvesters under contract to agricultural producers to harvest one or more of wheat, 

soybeans, and milo during the harvest months for such crops, 

as defined by øthe State of Nebraska¿ the relevant state. (d) ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS.—(1) A commercial motor vehicle 

combination whose operation in a State is not prohibited under 

subsections (b) and (c) of this section may continue to operate in 

the State on highways described in subsection (b) only if at least 

in compliance with all State laws, regulations, limitations, and conditions, including routing-specific and configuration-specific designations and all other restrictions in force in the State on June 

1, 1991. However, subject to regulations prescribed by the Secretary under subsection (g)(2) of this section, the State may make 

minor adjustments of a temporary and emergency nature to route 

designations and vehicle operating restrictions in effect on June 1, 

1991, for specific safety purposes and road construction. 

(2) This section does not prevent a State from further restricting 

in any way or prohibiting the operation of any commercial motor 

vehicle combination subject to this section, except that a restriction 

or prohibition shall be consistent with this section and sections 

31113(a) and (b) and 31114 of this title. 

(3) A State making a minor adjustment of a temporary and emergency nature as authorized by paragraph (1) of this subsection or 

further restricting or prohibiting the operation of a commercial 

motor vehicle combination as authorized by paragraph (2) of this 

subsection shall advise the Secretary not later than 30 days after 

the action. The Secretary shall publish a notice of the action in the 

Federal Register. 

(4) Nebraska may continue to allow to be operated under paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section, the State of Nebraska may 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
124 

allow longer combination vehicles that were not in actual operation 

on June 1, 1991 to be operated within its boundaries to transport 

sugar beets from the field where such sugar beets are harvested to 

storage, market, factory or stockpile or from stockpile to storage, 

market or factory. This provision shall expire on February 28, 

1998. 

(e) LIST OF STATE LENGTH LIMITATIONS.—(1) Not later than February 16, 1992, each State shall submit to the Secretary for publication a complete list of State length limitations applicable to commercial motor vehicle combinations operating in the State on the 

highways described in subsection (b) of this section. The list shall 

indicate the applicable State laws and regulations associated with 

the length limitations. If a State does not submit the information 

as required, the Secretary shall complete and file the information 

for the State. 

(2) Not later than March 17, 1992, the Secretary shall publish an 

interim list in the Federal Register consisting of all information 

submitted under paragraph (1) of this subsection. The Secretary 

shall review for accuracy all information submitted by a State 

under paragraph (1) and shall solicit and consider public comment 

on the accuracy of the information. 

(3) A law or regulation may not be included on the list submitted 

by a State or published by the Secretary merely because it authorized, or could have authorized, by permit or otherwise, the operation of commercial motor vehicle combinations not in actual operation on a regular or periodic basis before June 2, 1991. 

(4) Except as revised under this paragraph or paragraph (5) of 

this subsection, the list shall be published as final in the Federal 

Register not later than June 15, 1992. In publishing the final list, 

the Secretary shall make any revisions necessary to correct inaccuracies identified under paragraph (2) of this subsection. After 

publication of the final list, commercial motor vehicle combinations 

prohibited under subsection (b) of this section may not operate on 

the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways and other Federal-aid Primary System highways designated 

by the Secretary except as published on the list. The list may be 

combined by the Secretary with the list required under section 

127(d) of title 23. 

(5) On the Secretary’s own motion or on request by any person 

(including a State), the Secretary shall review the list published 

under paragraph (4) of this subsection. If the Secretary decides 

there is reason to believe a mistake was made in the accuracy of 

the list, the Secretary shall begin a proceeding to decide whether 

a mistake was made. If the Secretary decides there was a mistake, 

the Secretary shall publish the correction. 

(f) LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—This section 

may not be construed— 

(1) to allow the operation on any segment of the Dwight D. 

Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways of a 

longer combination vehicle prohibited under section 127(d) of 

title 23; 

(2) to affect in any way the operation of a commercial motor 

vehicle having only one property-carrying unit; or 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
125 

(3) to affect in any way the operation in a State of a commercial motor vehicle with more than one property-carrying unit 

if the vehicle was in actual operation on a regular or periodic 

basis (including seasonal operation) in that State before June 

2, 1991, that was authorized under State law or regulation or 

lawful State permit. 

(g) REGULATIONS.—(1) In carrying out this section only, the Secretary shall define by regulation loads that cannot be dismantled 

easily or divided easily. 

(2) Not later than June 15, 1992, the Secretary shall prescribe 

regulations establishing criteria for a State to follow in making 

minor adjustments under subsection (d) of this section. 

* * * * * * * 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted 

describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which 

directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘Salaries and 

expenses’ specifying certain amounts for individual offices of the 

Office of the Secretary and official reception and representation expenses; specifying transfer authority among offices; allowing up to 

$2,500,000 in user fees to be credited to the account; and prohibiting the establishment of Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Research 

and technology’ which limits the availability of funds, changes the 

availability of funds, allows funds received from other entities to be 

credited to the account, and deems the title of the office. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘National 

Infrastructure Investments’ which limits the availability of funds, 

provides for the distribution of funds, specifies that funds are available only for certain activities, allows the use of funds for administrative costs, ensures equitable geographic distribution of funds, 

specifies amounts for grants, limits that amount that may be 

awarded to a single state, specifies an amount for the federal cost 

share, provides priority to projects that require a contribution of 

Federal funds, specifies a percentage for administration and oversight, minimum grants size and Federal cost share for rural 

projects, and specifies that projects must comply with certain requirements in the United States Code. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Financial management capital’ which provides funds to upgrade DOT’s 

financial systems and processes, and changes the availability of 

funds. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Cyber 

security initiatives’ which provides funds for information technology security upgrades, and changes the availability of funds. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Transportation planning, research, and development’ which provides 

funds for conducting transportation planning, research, systems deVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
126 

velopment, development activities and making grants, and changes 

the availability of funds. 

Language is included that limits operating costs and capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund for the Department of Transportation; provides that services shall be provided on a competitive 

basis, except for non-DOT entities; restricts the transfer for any 

funds to the Working Capital Fund with approval; and limits special assessments or reimbursable agreements levied against any 

program, project or activity funded in this Act to only those assessments or reimbursable agreements that are presented to and approved by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Minority 

business resource center’ which limits the amount of loans that can 

be subsidized, and provides funds for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘Small and 

disadvantaged business utilization and outreach’ specifying that 

funds may be used for business opportunities related to any mode 

of transportation, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Payments to air carriers’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation 

to consider subsidy requirements when determining service to a 

community, eliminates the requirement that carriers use at least 

15-passenger aircraft, prohibits funds for communities within a certain distance of a small hub airport without a cost-share, allows 

amounts to be made available from the Federal Aviation Administration, and allows the reimbursement of such amounts from overflight fees. 

Section 101 prohibits the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from approving assessments or reimbursable agreements 

pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal administrations in 

this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed 

the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification. 

Section 102 allows the Secretary or his designee to work with 

States and State legislators to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. 

Section 103 allows the Department to use the Working Capital 

Fund to provide transit benefits to Federal employees. 

Section 104 sets administrative requirements of the Department’s Credit Council. 

Section 105 authorizes the Working Capital Fund to provide partial or full payments in advance and accept reimbursement from all 

Federal agencies for transit benefits; directs a reasonable operating 

reserve; and limits the uses of the reserve. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Operations’ that specifies funds for certain activities; derives funds 

from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund; specifies amounts for certain activities; specifies transfer authorities among activities; requires various staffing plans by a certain date with financial penalties for late submissions; permits the use of funds to enter into 

a grant agreement with a nonprofit standard setting organization 

to develop aviation safety standards; prohibits the use of funds for 

new applicants of the second career training program; prohibits 

funds to plan, finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new aviation user fees not specifically authorized by law; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
127 

credits funds received from other entities for expenses incurred in 

the provision of agency services; specifies funds for the contract 

tower programs; and prohibits funds from certain activities coordinated through the Working Capital Fund. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Facilities and equipment’ that funds various activities from the 

Airport and Airway Trust Fund, limits the availability of funds, allows certain funds received for expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of air navigation facilities to be credited 

to the account, and that requires the Secretary of Transportation 

to transmit a comprehensive capital investment plan for the Federal Aviation Administration, with financial penalties for a late 

submission. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Research, engineering, and development’ that provides funds from 

the Airport and Airway Trust Fund; that limits the availability of 

funds; and that allows certain funds received for expenses incurred 

in research, engineering and development to be credited to the account. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Grants-in-aid for airports’ that provides funds from the Airport 

and Airway Trust Fund, changes the availability of funds, prohibits 

the availability of funds for certain activities, and limits the availability of funds for certain activities. 

Section 110 limits the number of technical workyears at the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to 600 in fiscal 

year 2014. 

Section 111 prohibits FAA from requiring airport sponsors to provide the agency ‘without cost’ building construction, maintenance, 

utilities and expenses, or space in sponsor-owned buildings, except 

in the case of certain specified exceptions. 

Section 112 allows reimbursement for fees collected and credited 

under 49 U.S.C. 45303. 

Section 113 allows reimbursement of funds for providing technical assistance to foreign aviation authorities to be credited to the 

operations account. 

Section 114 prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium pay 

except in those cases where the individual actually worked on a 

Sunday. 

Section 115 prohibits FAA from using funds to purchase store 

gift cards or gift certificates through a government-issued credit 

card. 

Section 116 requires approval from the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration of the Department of Transportation for retention 

bonuses for any FAA employee. 

Section 117 requires the Secretary to block the display of an 

owner or operator’s aircraft registration number in the Aircraft Situational Display to Industry program, upon the request of an 

owner or operator. 

Section 118 prohibits funds for more than 9 political appointees 

at the Federal Aviation Administration. 

Section 119 prohibits funds to increase fees pursuant to Section 

44721 of title 49, U.S.C. until the FAA submits a report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
128 

Section 119A prohibits funds to close a regional operations center 

or reduce services unless the Administrator notifies the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Limitation on administrative expenses’ that, contingent on 

enactment of authorization legislation, limits the amount to be 

paid, together with advances and reimbursements received, for the 

administrative expenses of the agency. In addition to this limitation, an amount is specified that is to be made available to the Appalachian Regional Commission for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Federal-aid highways’ that, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation, limits the obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction programs; allows the Secretary to charge, collect and spend fees for the costs of underwriting and servicing Federal credit instruments; and provides that 

such amounts are in addition to administrative expenses, and not 

subject to any obligation limitation or limitation on administrative 

expenses under section 608 of title 23, U.S.C., and available until 

expended. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Federal-aid highways’ that, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation, liquidates contract authority from the Highway Trust Fund. 

Section 120 distributes obligation authority among Federal-aid 

highways programs, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation. 

Section 121 credits funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the Federal-aid highways account. 

Section 122 provides requirements for any waiver of the Buy 

America Act. 

Section 123 requires Congressional notification before the Department provides credit assistance under section 603 and 604 of 

title 23, U.S.C. 

Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, ‘Motor carrier safety operations and programs’ 

that, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation, provides 

a limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract authorization; changes the availability of funds; and specifies amounts available for specific activities. 

Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, ‘Motor carrier safety grants’ that, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation, provides a limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract authorization and specifies 

amounts available for various programs. 

Section 130 provides that funds appropriated are subject to terms 

and conditions included in prior appropriations Acts regarding 

Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

Section 131 requires the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to send notices of certain violations such that the receipt of 

such notice is confirmed. 

Section 132 suspends enforcement of recent changes to the restart provisions of the hours of service regulation unless certain 

conditions are met. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
129 

Section 133 prohibits funds from being used to deny renewal of 

a hazardous materials safety permit unless certain conditions are 

met. 

Section 134 prohibits funds from being used to increase levels of 

minimum financial responsibility for motor carriers. 

Section 135 prohibits funds from being used for a wireless roadside inspection program unless certain conditions are met. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘Operations and research’ that provides funds for vehicle safety activities. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘Operations and research’ that, contingent on enactment of authorization legislation, provides a limitation on obligations and a liquidation of contract authorization from the Highway 

Trust Fund; specifies amounts for various programs; and makes 

available unobligated balances of prior year contract authority. 

Language is included under the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration ‘Highway traffic safety grants’ that, contingent on 

enactment of authorization legislation, provides a limitation on obligations; changes the availability of funds; provides a liquidation 

of contract authorization from the Highway Trust Fund; specifies 

the amounts for various programs; prohibits and limits funds for 

specific purposes; and requires certain Congressional notifications. 

Section 140 provides funding for travel and related expenses for 

state management reviews and highway safety core competency development training. 

Section 141 exempts obligation authority that was made available in previous public laws from limitations on obligations set in 

this Act. 

Section 142 prohibits funding for the National Highway Safety 

Advisory Committee. 

Section 143 prohibits funding for the national roadside survey. 

Section 144 prohibits funding for mandated global positioning 

system tracking. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Safety and operations’ that changes the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Railroad research and development’ that changes the availability 

of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program’ authorizing the Secretary to issue direct loans and loan guarantees 

under sections 501 through 504 of the Railroad Revitalization and 

Regulatory Reform Act and prohibits new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments in 2016 that use Federal funds for the credit 

risk premium. 

Language is included under the Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Operating subsidy grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation’ that provides funds to the Secretary of Transportation to 

make quarterly grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and changes the availability of funds; allows the Secretary to 

approve funding only after receiving and reviewing a grant request 

for each train route; ensures that each grant request is accompanied by a detailed financial analysis, revenue projection, and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
130 

capital expenditure projection; requires the Corporation to submit 

a number of reports electronically within 60 days of enactment, including a business plan, a five year financial plan, an annual budget; requires that the budget, business plan, and the 5–Year Financial Plan include annual information on maintenance, refurbishment, replacement, and expansion for Amtrak rolling stock consistent with the comprehensive fleet plan; requires monthly performance reports in electronic format, and that it describe work 

completed, changes to the business plan and progress against the 

2012 performance improvement plan milestones; requires that reports comply with requirements in Public Law 112–55; prohibits 

funds to support any route with a discounted fare of more than 50 

percent off the normal peak fare, unless the operating loss is the 

result of a discount covered by a State. 

Language is included under the Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Capital and debt service grants to the national railroad passenger 

corporation’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation to make 

grants on a reimbursable basis to the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation for the maintenance and repair of capital infrastructure and debt service and to meet the Americans with Disability 

Act; designates fund up to a certain amount as a working capital 

fund account; specifies a ceiling for funds to be used for operational 

costs subject to conditions; allows the Secretary to retain funds to 

be used for oversight; requires approval of funds only after receipt 

of a request justifying Federal support; limits the use of funds to 

subsidize operating losses; restricts the use of funds unless they 

have been approved by the Secretary or are contained in the Corporation’s business plan; allows the Secretary to retain an amount 

to be used by the Northeast Corridor Commission; and requires 

Amtrak to conduct business case analysis on certain capital investments, and specify that capital acquisitions are subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 

Section 150 allows FRA to receive and use cash or spare parts 

to repair and replace damaged automated track inspection cars and 

equipment in connection with the automated track inspection program. 

Section 151 limits overtime to $35,000 per employee; allows Amtrak’s president to waive this restriction for specific employees for 

safety or operational efficiency reasons; requires quarterly notification to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on 

waivers granted for overtime and specified information related to 

overtime; requires the president of Amtrak provide a report that 

includes specified information on overtime payments incurred for 

2015 and two prior years. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘Administrative expenses’ specifying amounts for certain activities, 

prohibiting a permanent office of transit security, and directing the 

submission of the annual report on new starts. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Transit formula grants’ that provides a limitation on obligations 

from the Highway Trust Fund, provides for the liquidation of contract authority, and changes the availability of funds. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
131 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘ 

Transit Research’ that specifies amounts made available for certain 

activities. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration 

‘Technical assistance and training’ that specifies amounts for certain activities. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Capital investment grants’ that changes the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Washington metropolitan area transit authority’ that changes the 

availability of funds, requires the Secretary to review projects before a grant is made, requires the Secretary to determine that 

WMATA has placed the highest priority on safety investments and 

has eliminated financial management issues, and allows the Secretary to waive the requirement for cellular phone service. 

Section 160 exempts previously made transit obligations from 

limitations on obligations. 

Section 161 allows funds appropriated for capital investment 

grants and bus and bus facilities not obligated by a certain date, 

plus other recoveries to be available for other projects under 49 

U.S.C. 5309. 

Section 162 allows for the transfer of prior year appropriations 

from older accounts to be merged into new accounts with similar, 

current activities. 

Section 163 prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project 

with a new starts share greater than 50 percent. 

Section 164 prohibits funds for a certain fixed guideway project 

in Houston, Texas. 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation that authorizes expenditures, contracts, and commitments as may be necessary. 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation ‘Operations and maintenance’ that provides 

funds derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Maritime 

security program’ that provides funds to preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Operations and training’ that provides specific funds for a national security multi-mission vessel design, training ship fuel assistance payments, maritime environment and technology assistance, Student 

Incentive Program payments, capital improvements at the United 

States Merchant Marine Academy, and the State Maritime Schools 

Schoolship Maintenance and Repair; directs allotment holders; and 

limits funds until the Secretary completes a plan detailing how 

funding will be expended at the Academy. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Maritime 

guaranteed loan (title XI) program account’ that provides for the 

transfer to ‘‘Operations and training.’’ 

Section 170 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD. 

Section 171 continues a provision regarding MARAD ship disposal. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
132 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Operational expenses’ which provides funding for operations. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Hazardous materials safety’ which funds 

hazardous and materials safety functions, limits the period of availability, allows up to $800,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 

5108(g) to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts, and credits to the appropriation for the account 

funds received from states, counties, other public authorities, and 

private sources for certain expenses. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Pipeline safety’ which specifies the amounts 

derived from the pipeline safety fund and the oil spill liability trust 

fund, limits the period of availability, and specifies a minimum 

funding level for the one-call state grant program. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Emergency preparedness grants’ which 

specifies the amount derived from the Emergency Preparedness 

Fund, limits the availability of some funds, allows up to four percent of funds made available for administrative costs, and prohibits 

funds from being obligated by anyone other than the Secretary or 

a designee of the Secretary. 

Language is included under Office of Inspector General, ‘Salaries 

and expenses’ that provides the Inspector General with all necessary authority to investigate allegations of fraud by any person 

or entity that is subject to regulation by the Department of Transportation, the authority to investigate unfair or deceptive practices 

and unfair methods of competition by domestic and foreign air carriers and ticket agents, and allows funds to be available from forfeiture proceedings. 

Language is included under Surface Transportation Board, ‘Sala- ries and expenses’ allowing the collection of $1,250,000 in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board, 

and providing that the sum appropriated from the general fund 

shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as such fees are received. 

Section 180 allows the Department of Transportation to use 

funds for aircraft, motor vehicles, liability insurance, uniforms, or 

allowances as authorized by law. 

Section 181 limits appropriations for services authorized by 5 

U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for an Executive Level IV. 

Section 182 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and expenses 

of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation, and prohibits political and Presidential personnel assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation. 

Section 183 prohibits recipients of funds made available in this 

Act from releasing personal information, including social security 

number, medical or disability information, and photographs from a 

driver’s license or motor vehicle record, without express consent of 

the person to whom such information pertains; and prohibits the 

withholding of funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state 

is in noncompliance with this provision. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
133 

Section 184 allows funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration from states, counties, municipalities, other 

public authorities, and private sources to be used for expenses incurred for training may be credited to each agency’s respective accounts. 

Section 185 prohibits funds in Title I of this Act from being 

issued for any loan, loan guarantee, line of credit or grant unless 

the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business 

days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full 

funding grant is announced by the department or its modal administrations. 

Section 186 allows funds received from rebates, refunds, and 

similar sources to be credited to Department of Transportation appropriations. 

Section 187 allows amounts from improper payments to a third 

party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the Department of 

Transportation to be available to cover expenses incurred in recovery of such payments. 

Section 188 stipulates that the Committees on Appropriations 

solely approve or deny any funds provided or limited in this Act 

that are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to 

be provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 189 prohibits the Surface Transportation Board from 

charging or collecting filing fees for late complaints in an amount 

in excess of the authorized amount under section 1914 of title 28, 

United States Code. 

Section 190 allows funds to modal administrations to be obligated to the Office of the Secretary for the costs related to assessments or reimbursable agreements only when the services provide 

a direct benefit to the applicable modal administration. 

Section 191 allows the use of the Working Capital Fund to carry 

out the Federal Transit Pass program. 

Section 192 prohibits funds for the Surface Transportation Board 

(STB) to take action on a high-speed rail project in California unless the STB considerers the project as a whole. 

Section 193 prohibits funds to facilitate scheduled air transportation to, or pass through, property confiscated by the Cuban Government. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Management and administration’ which designates 

funds for ‘Executive offices’; designates funds for ‘Administrative 

support offices;’ specifies funding for shared service agreements, 

the office of the chief financial officer, the office of the general 

counsel, the office of administration, the office of the chief human 

capital office, the office of field policy and management, the office 

of the chief procurement officer, the office of the departmental 

equal employment opportunity, the office of strategic planning and 

management, and the office of the chief information officer; provides flexibility to transfer any remaining funds to any office under 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
134 

the same heading or under the heading ‘Program office salaries 

and expenses’; limits official reception and representation expenses 

to $25,000; allows funds to be used for certain administrative and 

non-administrative expenses; and allows funds to be used for advertising and promotional activities that directly support program 

activities funded in this title. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Program office salaries and expenses’ which specifies 

funds for the office of public and indian housing, the office of community planning and development, the office of housing, the office 

of risk and regulatory affairs, the office of policy development and 

research, the office of fair housing and equal opportunity, and the 

office of lead hazard control and health homes. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which specifies 

funds for certain programs, activities and purposes and limits the 

use and availability of certain funds; specifies the methodology for 

allocation of renewal funding; directs the Secretary to provide renewal funding based on validated voucher system leasing and cost 

data for the prior year; prohibits funds to exceed a public housing 

agency’s authorized level of units under contract, except for those 

participating in the Moving to Work demonstration; directs the 

Secretary, to the extent necessary, to prorate each public housing 

agency’s (PHA) allocation; directs the Secretary to notify PHAs of 

their annual budget the later of 60 days after enactment of the Act 

or March 1, 2016; allows the Secretary to extend the notification 

period with the prior approval of the House and Senate appropriations committees; specifies the amounts available to the Secretary 

to allocate to PHAs that need additional funds and for fees; specifies the amount for additional rental subsidy due to unforeseen 

emergencies and portability; provides funding for public housing 

agencies with vouchers that were not in use during the previous 12 

month period in order to be available to meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13); provides funding for incremental vouchers 

for homeless veterans; provides funding for public housing agencies 

that despite taking reasonable measures, would otherwise be required to terminate assistance for families as a result of insufficient funding; and provides for adjustments in allocations for PHAs 

that participate in the Small Area Fair Market Rent demonstration. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which provides 

funds for tenant protection vouchers; sets certain conditions for the 

Secretary to provide such vouchers; provides funds for residents of 

multi-family properties that would not otherwise have been eligible 

for tenant-protection vouchers; sets eligibility requirements for 

multi-family properties to participate in the program; sets conditions for the reissuance of vouchers, and allows the Secretary to 

use unobligated and recaptured funds from prior years. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which provides 

funds for administrative and other expenses of public housing 

agencies to administer the section 8 tenant-based rental assistance 

program; sets an amount to be available to PHAs that need addiVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
135 

tional funds to administer their section 8 programs, including fees 

to administer tenant protection assistance, disaster related vouchers, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers and other special purpose vouchers; provides for the distribution of funds; provides for a uniform percentage decrease of amounts to be allocated 

if funds are not sufficient; establishes that ‘Moving to Work’ (MTW) 

agencies be funded pursuant to their MTW agreements; provides 

funds for section 811 mainstream vouchers; and specifies that the 

Secretary shall track special purpose vouchers. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing certificate fund’ which rescinds prior year 

funds and allows the Secretary to use recaptures to fund projectbased contracts and contract administrators. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Public housing capital fund’ which specifies the total 

amount available for certain activities; limits the availability of 

funds; limits the delegation of certain waiver authorities; specifies 

an amount for ongoing Public Housing Financial and Physical Assessment activities of the Real Estate Assessment Center; specifies 

an amount for emergency capital needs; specifies an amount for 

supportive services; specifies the amount for a Jobs-plus Pilot initiative and specifies that the initiative shall provide competitive 

grants; specifies that the Secretary may waive or specify alternative requirements; and specifies that the Secretary shall public 

notice of any waiver or alternative requirement; establishes a limitation on amounts that can be transferred; makes funds available 

for bonuses for high performing PHAs; and establishes requirements for notification of public housing agencies’ formula allocations. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Choice Neighborhoods Initiative’ which allows the 

Secretary to make competitive grants for neighborhood rehabilitation; changes the availability of funds; allows funds to be used for 

services, development, and housing; declares funds not for ‘‘public 

housing’’; requires a period of affordability; requires local planning 

and cost share; allows local governments, tribal entities, public 

housing authorities and non-profits to be grantees; allows for-profits to partner and apply with a public entity; requires grantees to 

partner with local organizations; establishes conditions for environmental review; requires grantees to create partnerships with other 

local organizations; requires the Secretary to consult with other 

federal agencies; and allows prior year program funds and HOPE 

VI funds to be used for this program. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Family self-sufficiency’ which allows the Secretary to 

waive or specify certain requirements, establishes entities eligible 

to compete for funding, allows the establishment of escrow funds, 

and allows the use of residual receipt accounts to hire coordinators. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Native American housing block grants’ which limits 

the availability of funds; specifies the formula for allocation; specifies amounts for training and technical assistance; specifies an 

amount to support the inspection of Indian housing units; specifies 

an amount to guarantee notes and obligations as defined in section 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
136 

502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; specifies that grantees are to be notified of their allocation within 60 days of enactment; and makes adjustments to certain recipient allocations under 

certain conditions without a regulation. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account’ which specifies the amount and availability of funds to subsidize total loan principal, specifies how to define the costs of modifying loans, and provides a dedicated amount for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS’ which 

limits availability of funds and sets forth certain requirements for 

the allocation of funds, renewal of contracts, and grantee notification. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Community development fund’ which limits the use 

and availability of certain funds; specifies the allocation of certain 

funds; prohibits grant recipients from selling, trading or transfer 

funds; prohibits the provision of funds to for-profit entities unless 

certain conditions are met; specifies the amount made available for 

grants to federally-recognized Indian tribes; prohibits funding for 

grants under the Economic Development Initiative, Neighborhood 

Initiatives, Rural Innovation Fund, and Section 107 of the Housing 

and Community Development Act of 1974; and requires grantee notification of formula allocations within 60 days of enactment. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Community development loan guarantees program 

account’ which limits the principal amount of loan guarantees, directs the Secretary to collect fees from borrowers adequate to result 

in credit subsidy cost of zero, and rescinds all unobligated balances 

of budget authority previously appropriated or recaptured under 

the account. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Home investment partnerships program’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds 

for certain purposes; specifies multiple oversight requirements from 

prior acts that are not effective for projects committed on or after 

August 23, 2013 and shall instead by governed by the Final Rule 

entitled ‘Home Investment Partnerships Program; Improving Performance and Accountability; Updating Property Standards’; transfers amounts allocated to the housing trust fund program to the 

home investment partnership program; and prohibits funds from 

being credited to the housing trust fund. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity 

program’ which specified funding amounts for certain programs, 

limits the period of availability, and specifies certain amounts for 

rural activities and organizations. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Homeless assistance grants’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds for certain 

purposes; specifies matching requirements; requires the Secretary 

to establish minimum performance thresholds for projects, proVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
137 

hibits the Secretary from funding continuum of care contract renewals unless certain requirements are met; requires the Secretary 

the prioritize funding to grant applicants that demonstrate a capacity to reallocate funding to higher performing projects; requires 

grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social service 

providers; allows certain funds to be administered by private nonprofit organizations; allows unobligated balances and recaptures 

from certain project-based rental assistance grants and shelter plus 

care renewals to be used; and requires notification of formula allocations within 60 days of enactment. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Project-based rental assistance’ which limits the 

availability of funds and specifies the allocation of certain funds for 

certain purposes; specifies a certain amount for contract administrators to administer certain programs; allows certain recaptured 

funds to be used for contracts or contract administrators; and allows the Secretary to recapture residual receipts from certain properties. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for the elderly’ which limits the availability 

of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; designates certain 

funds to be used only for certain grants; allows funds to be used 

for specified inspections or inspection-related activities; allows 

funds to be used to renew certain contracts; allows the Secretary 

to waive certain provisions governing contract terms; allows excess 

funds held in residual receipts accounts, after contract termination, 

to be deposited in this account, and limits the availability of these 

funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for persons with disabilities’ which limits 

the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; 

allows funds to be used for inspections or inspection-related activities; allows funds to be used to renew certain contracts; allows 

funds held in residual account, after contract termination, to be deposited in this account, and limits the availability of these funds; 

and allows these funds to be used for purposes under this heading 

in addition to those appropriated. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing counseling assistance’ that provides funds 

for described purposes, limits the availability of funds, specifies 

amounts to be used for specified purposes, requires the Secretary 

to make grants within a specified time frame, and allows multiyear 

agreements subject to the availability of annual appropriations. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Rental housing assistance’ that limits the availability of funds and allows the Secretary to use specified unobligated balances, including recaptures, carryover and other specified 

remaining funds for specified purposes. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Payment to manufactured housing fees trust fund’ 

that limits the availability of funds from specified sources; permits 

fees to be assessed, modified, and collected; permits temporary borrowing authority from the general fund of the Treasury; provides 

that general fund amounts from collections offset the appropriation 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
138 

so that the resulting appropriation is a specified amount; requires 

fees collected to be deposited into the Manufactured Housing Fees 

Trust Fund; allows fees to be used for necessary expenses; and allows the Secretary to use approved service providers. 

Language is included under the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, ‘Mutual mortgage insurance program account’ 

which limits new commitments to issue guarantees, limits the obligations to make direct loans, specifies funds for specific purposes, 

allows for additional contract expenses as guaranteed loan commitments exceed certain levels, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘General and special risk program account’ which 

sets a loan principal limitation on new commitments to guarantee 

loans, limits the obligations to make direct loans, specifies funds 

for specific purposes, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Government national mortgage association’ which 

limits new commitments to issue guarantees, provides funds for 

salaries and expenses, allows specified receipts to be credited as 

offsetting collections, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Policy development and research’ which limits the 

availability of funds, specifies authorized uses, and directs the submission of a spend plan. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Fair housing and equal opportunity’ which limits the 

availability of funds, authorizes the Secretary to assess and collect 

fees, places restrictions on the use of funds for lobbying activities, 

and provides funds for programs that support the assistance of persons with limited English proficiency. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Office of lead hazard control and healthy homes’ 

which limits the availability of funds, specifies the amount of funds 

for specific purposes, specifies the treatment of certain grants, and 

specifies a matching requirement for grants. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Information technology fund’ which limits the availability and purpose of funds, including funds transferred. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Office of Inspector General’ which specifies the use 

of funds and directs that the IG shall have independent authority 

over all personnel issues within the office. 

Section 201 relates to the division of financing adjustment factors. 

Section 202 prohibits available funds from being used to investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair Housing Act. 

Section 203 corrects an anomaly in the HOPWA formula that results in the loss of funds for certain states. 

Section 204 requires funds appropriated to be distributed on a 

competitive basis in accordance with the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989. 

Section 205 establishes the availability of funds subject to the 

Government Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
139 

Section 206 set requirements on the allocation of funds in excess 

of the budget estimates. 

Section 207 sets requirements regarding the expenditure of funds 

for corporations and agencies subject to the Government Corporation Control Act. 

Section 208 requires the Secretary to provide quarterly reports 

on uncommitted, unobligated and excess funds in each departmental program and activity. 

Section 209 requires that the Administration’s budget and the 

Department’s budget justifications for fiscal year 2016 shall be submitted in the identical account and sub-account structure provided 

in this Act. 

Section 210 exempts PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi and the County of Los Angeles from public housing resident representation requirement. 

Section 211 prohibits the IG from changing the basis on which 

the audit of GNMA is conducted. 

Section 212 authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use agreements 

from an obsolete project to a viable project, provided that no additional costs are incurred, and other conditions are met. 

Section 213 sets requirements for eligibility for Section 8 voucher 

assistance, and includes consideration for persons with disabilities. 

Section 214 requires the distribution of Native American housing 

block grant funds to the same Native Alaskan recipients as 2005. 

Section 215 authorizes the Secretary to insure mortgages under 

Section 255 of the National Housing Act. 

Section 216 instructs HUD on managing and disposing of any 

multifamily property that is owned by HUD. 

Section 217 allows commitment authority under the Section 108 

loan guarantee program to be used to guarantee notes or other obligations issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State. 

Section 218 instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 400 

units or fewer of public housing are exempt from asset management requirements. 

Section 219 restricts the Secretary from imposing any requirement or guideline relating to asset management that restricts or 

limits the use of capital funds for central office costs, up to the 

limit established in QHWRA. 

Section 220 requires that no employee of the Department shall 

be designated as an allotment holder unless the CFO determines 

that such allotment holder has received training. 

Section 221 sets requirements regarding Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication. 

Section 222 provides that funding for indemnities is limited to 

non-programmatic litigation and is restricted to the payment of attorney fees only. 

Section 223 allows the Disaster Housing Assistance Programs to 

be considered a program of the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development for the purpose of income verifications and matching. 

Section 224 requires HUD to take certain actions against owners 

receiving rental subsidies that do not maintain safe properties. 

Section 225 sets limitations on funds used for PHA salary and 

bonus levels. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
140 

Section 226 prohibits funds for a doctoral dissertation research 

program at HUD. 

Section 227 requires notification to the Committee on grant 

awards. 

Section 228 prohibits funds to require public housing agencies to 

conduct a Physical Needs Assessment. 

Section 229 prohibits funds for HUD financing of mortgages for 

properties that have been subject to eminent domain. 

Section 230 prohibits funds from being used to terminate the status of a unit of general local government as a metropolitan city 

with respect to grants. 

Section 231 allows funding for research, evaluation and statistical purposes that is unexpended to be reobligated for additional 

research. 

Section 232 prohibits the Secretary from requiring Energy Star 

standards or any other energy efficiency standards that exceed the 

requirements of applicable State and local building codes. Section 233 rescinds $7,000,000 in unobligated balances remaining from section 1497 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Protection act and section 2301 of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. 

Section 234 rescinds unobligated balances remaining from funds 

appropriated under the headings ‘‘Rural Housing and Economic Development’’, ‘‘Management and Administration’’, and ‘‘Program Office Salaries and Expenses’’. 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES

Language is included for the Access Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that limits funds for necessary expenses and allows for the 

credit to the appropriation of funds received for publications and 

training expenses. 

Language is included for the Federal Maritime Commission, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that provides funds for services authorized by 

5 U.S.C. 3109, the hire of passenger motor vehicles, uniforms and 

allowances; and limits funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language is included for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Office of Inspector General, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that 

provides funds for an independent, objective unit responsible for 

detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and violations of law; 

promotes economy, efficiency and effectiveness at Amtrak; allows 

the IG to enter into contracts; select, appoint or employ officers and 

employees to carry out its functions; and requires the IG to submit 

its budget request concurrently with the President’s budget and in 

a similar format. 

Language is included under National Transportation Safety 

Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that provides funds for hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 

3109, uniforms or allowances therefor, limits funds for official reception and representation expenses and allows funds to be used 

to pay for costs associated with a capital lease. 

Language is included in the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC), ‘Payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocaVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:45 May 28, 2015 Jkt 094510 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR129.XXX HR129

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
141 

tion of funds to certain activities; and specifies the terms and conditions surrounding NRC activities. 

Language is included for the United States Interagency Council 

on Homelessness, ‘Operating expenses’ that provides funds for salaries, travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, rental of conference 

rooms, and the employment of experts and consultants. 

TITLE IV—GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT

Section 401 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 consulting service expenditures of public 

record in procurement contracts. 

Section 404 prohibits Federal training not directly related to the 

performance of official duties. 

Section 405 specifies reprogramming procedures by subjecting 

the establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 406 provides that fifty percent of unobligated balances 

may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 407 prohibits funds from being used for any project that 

seeks to use the power of eminent domain unless eminent domain 

is employed only for a public use. 

Section 408 prohibits the transfer of funds made available in this 

Act to any instrumentality of the United States Government except 

as authorized by this Act or any other appropriations Act. 

Section 409 prohibits funds in this Act from being used to permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his or her past 

occupation after the completion of military service. 

Section 410 prohibits funds in this Act from being used unless 

the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 411 prohibits funds from being appropriated or made 

available to any person or entity that has been found to violate the 

Buy American Act. 

Section 412 prohibits funds for first-class airline accommodations 

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 U.S. law. 

Section 414 prohibits funds to issue a license or certificate for a 

commercial vessel that was docked or anchored within 7 miles of 

a port on property confiscated by the Cuban Government. 

Section 415 establishes a spending reduction account. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
142 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law for 

the period concerned (dollars in thousands): 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW AND EXPIRING AUTHORIZATIONS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program Last year of 

authorization 

Authorization 

Level 

Appropriations in last 

year of authorization 

Appropriations 

in this bill 

Title I—Department of Transportation 1/ 

Federal Aviation Administration: 

Operations .................................................................... 2015 $9,653,000 $9,740,700 $9,869,700 

Facilities and Equipment ............................................. 2015 $2,730,000 $2,600,000 $2,500,000 

Research, Engineering, and Development ................... 2015 $168,000 $156,750 $156,750 

Grant-in-Aid for Airports .............................................. 2015 $3,350,000 $3,350,000 $3,350,000 

Federal Highway Administration: 

Federal-aid Highways 2/ .............................................. 2015 $40,995,000 $40,995,000 $40,995,000 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration: 

Motor Carrier Safety Operations & Programs 2/ 3/ .... 2015 $259,000 $271,000 $259,000 

Motor Carrier Safety Grants 2/ .................................... 2015 $313,000 $313,000 $313,000 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: 

Operations and Research—General Fund .................. 2009 $157,400 $130,000 $150,000 

Operations and Research—Highway Trust Fund 2/ 4/ 2015 $118,500 $138,500 $125,000 

Highway Traffic Safety Grants 2/ ................................ 2015 $561,500 $561,500 $561,500 

Federal Transit Administration: 

Transit Formula Grants 2/ ........................................... 2015 $8,595,000 $8,595,000 $8,595,000 

Capital Investment Grants 2/ ...................................... 2015 $1,907,000 $2,120,000 $1,921,395 

Transit Research 2/ ..................................................... 2015 $70,000 $30,000 $26,000 

Transit Cooperative Research 2/ ................................. 2015 $7,000 $3,000 $0 

Technical Assistance and Training 2/ ......................... 2015 $7,000 $4,000 $3,000 

Human Resources and Training 2/ ............................. 2015 $5,000 $500 $0 

Administrative Expenses 2/ ......................................... 2015 $104,000 $105,933 $105,933 

Emergency Relief ......................................................... 2015 such sums $0 $0 

Federal Railroad Administration: 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to Amtrak ............... 2013 $1,625,000 $952,000 $850,000 

Operating Subsidy Grants to Amtrak .......................... 2013 $631,000 $466,000 $288,500 

Safety and Operations ................................................. 2013 $293,000 $178,596 $186,870 

Maritime Administration: 

Operations and Training 5/ ......................................... 2015 $148,400 $148,050 $167,800 

Ship Disposal 5/ .......................................................... 2015 $4,800 $4,000 $4,000 

Title XI 5/ ..................................................................... 2015 $73,100 $3,100 $3,135 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration: 

Pipeline Safety ............................................................. 2015 $109,252 $146,000 $145,870 

Hazardous Materials Safety 2/ .................................... 2015 $43,762 $52,000 $60,500 

Emergency Preparedness Grants ................................. 2015 $28,318 $28,318 $28,318 

Surface Transportation Board: 

Surface Transportation Board ...................................... 1998 $12,000 $13,853 $31,375 

Office of the Secretary: 

Small Communities Air Service Development Program 2015 $5,500 $5,500 $0 

National Infrastructure Investments ........................... – – – $0 $0 $100,000 

Payments to Air Carriers ............................................. 2015 $155,000 $155,000 $155,000 

1/ Includes accounts that have never had authorized appropriation amounts, such as Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants. 

2/ Authorization levels are annualized. The Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-159) 

extends Highway Trust Fund authorities through 5/31/2015. 

3/ The FY 2015 enacted level for FMCSA Motor Carrier Safety Operations & Programs includes $12 million of 

prior year unobligated contract authority made available by the FY 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-235). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
143 

4/ The FY 2015 enacted level for NHTSA Operations and Research includes $20 million of prior year unobligated contract authority made available by the FY 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations 

Act (P.L. 113-235). 

5/ Reflects authorized amounts associated with maintaining national security aspects of the merchant marine per P.L. 113-291. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
144 

Title II—Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Rental Assistance: 

Section 8 Voucher Renewals and Administrative Expenses ..................................................................... 1994 8,446,173 5,458,106 19,681,000 

Public Housing Capital Fund ....................................... 2003 3,000,000 2,712,555 1,681,000 

Public Housing Operating Fund ................................... 2003 2,900,000 3,576,600 4,440,000 

Native American Housing Block Grants ............................... 2013 Such sums as 

necessary 

616,001 650,000 

Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund .................................. 2012 Such sums as 

necessary 

6,000 8,000 

Housing Opportunity for Persons with Aids ......................... 1994 156,300 156,000 332,000 

Community Development Fund ............................................. 1994 4,168,000 4,877,389 3,060,000 

Community Development Loan Guarantee 1/ ....................... 1994 Not Applicable Not Applicable 0 

Home Investment Partnerships Program 2/ ......................... 1994 2,173,612 1,275,000 900,000 

Choice Neighborhoods Initiatives ......................................... 2012 SSAN 120,000 

Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program .................. 2001 Such sums as 

necessary 

48,000 50,000 

Homeless Assistance ............................................................ 2011 Such sums as 

necessary 

1,901,190 2,185,000 

Housing for the Elderly ......................................................... 2003 Such sums as 

necessary 

783,286 414,000 

Housing for Persons with Disablities ................................... 2015 300,000 135,000 152,000 

FHA General and Special Risk Program Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans ............................... 1995 – – – [20,885,072] [30,000,000] 

Limitation on Direct Loans .......................................... 1995 – – – [220,000] [5,000] 

Administrative Expenses .............................................. 1995 – – – 197,470 

GNMA Mortgage Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans ............................... 1996 [110,000,000] [110,000,000] [500,000,000] 

Administrative Expenses .............................................. 1996 – – – 9,101 23,000 

Policy Development and Research ........................................ 1994 36,470 35,000 52,500 

Fair Housing Activities, Fair Housing Program .................... 1994 26,000 20,481 65,300 

Lead Hazard Reduction Program .......................................... 1994 250,000 150,000 75,000 

Salaries and Expenses .......................................................... 1994 1,029,496 916,963 1,340,900 

1/ The Community Development Loan Guarantee program authorization only limits commitment authority. 

2/ Appropriations in FY 16 bill includes amounts transferred from the Housing Trust Fund to the Home Investment Partnerships Program account. 

Title III—Related Agencies 

Access Board ............................................................... 2003 5,401 5,401 7,548 

National Transportation Safety Board ......................... 2008 96,625 91,000 103,981 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

Pursuant to section 3(j)(2) of H. Res. 5 (113th Congress), no provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of 

Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified 

in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not direct any rule making. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocations under section 302(b) of the Budget Act: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
145 

BUDGET IMPACT OF FY 2016 TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Transportation, 

Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies 

Mandatory ...................................................................................... n.a. n.a. 0 1 0 

Discretionary .................................................................................. 55,270 119,018 55,270 118,802 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections prepared 

by the Congressional Budget Office of outlays associated with the 

budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2016 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 40,646 

2017 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 34,132 

2018 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 13,625 

2019 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5,770 

2020 and future years .................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7,096 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the amounts of financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows: 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2016 .......................... n.a. n.a. 32,245 2 30,391 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
146 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 034 here HR129.001
147 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 035 here HR129.002
148 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 036 here HR129.003
149 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 037 here HR129.004
150 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 038 here HR129.005
151 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 039 here HR129.006
152 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 040 here HR129.007
153 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 041 here 93770.001
154 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 042 here 93770.002
155 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 043 here 93770.003
156 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 044 here 93770.004
157 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 045 here 93770.005
158 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 046 here 93770.006
159 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 047 here 93770.007
160 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 048 here 93770.008
161 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 049 here 93770.009
162 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 050 here 93770.010
163 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 051 here 93770.011
164 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 052 here 93770.012
165 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 053 here 93770.013
166 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 054 here 93770.014
167 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 055 here 93770.015
168 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 056 here 93770.016
169 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 057 here 93770.017
170 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 058 here 93770.018
171 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 059 here 93770.019
172 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 060 here 93770.020
(173) 

MINORITY VIEWS OF NITA M. LOWEY AND DAVID PRICE 

The impact of the Republican majority’s policy of self-imposed 

austerity is on full display in the Fiscal Year 2016 appropriations 

bill for the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban 

Development and Related Agencies. The overall budget allocation 

for this year is woefully inadequate, even after Chairman Rogers 

increased this Subcommittee’s allocation by $1.5 billion, which is 

more than half of the Committee’s total increase in allocations. The 

reality is that once you factor in declining FHA receipts, increased 

Section 8 renewal costs, and other inflationary adjustments, this 

bill is actually $1.5 billion below last year’s funding level. Simply 

put, this bill would provide for fewer services and capital investments than last year. 

The programs under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee are 

critical to our nation’s economic and social well-being—providing 

necessary funding to improve housing and transportation options, 

creating infrastructure jobs for hardworking American families, 

and ensuring safe and adequate transportation networks for goods, 

commuters, and travelers. 

Yet, the challenges facing our nation’s most basic infrastructure 

are daunting, and will only worsen should this bill become law. 

Today, one out of every nine bridges in this country is structurally 

deficient and in need of repair or replacement; Americans spend 

the equivalent of one work week sitting in congestion; and, the capital backlog for our transit systems is nearly $78 billion while the 

backlog for public housing stock approaches $25 billion. 

The President requested a robust increase for this bill in Fiscal 

Year 2016, calling on Congress to provide the critical investments 

necessary to accelerate and sustain economic growth. Unfortunately, the bill adopted by the majority takes a giant step backward in addressing our infrastructure needs. 

In transportation, the bill levies deep cuts to capital programs. Amtrak’s overall funding level was reduced by $251 million or 18 

percent below last year and there is no funding for expansion of 

intercity passenger rail or installation of safety mechanisms. We 

are further deeply dismayed that the majority did not include any 

funding for Positive Train Control (PTC), which the National 

Transportation Safety Board has said could have prevented the 

May 12 Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia. 

The Federal Transit Administration’s capital investment grant 

program was slashed by 8 percent below last year and 41 percent 

below the President’s request. And the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) enormously popular National Infrastructure Investments program, also known as TIGER, was reduced by $400 million below last year and $1.15 billion below the President’s request. 

Since its inception during the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the TIGER program’s application pool has far exceeded 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
174 

its capacity. It remains the one discretionary program that is designed to advance major multi-modal, multi-jurisdictional surface 

transportation projects of national and regional significance. 

Finally, the bill cuts the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) capital program by $355 million below the request and $100 million below last year. Funding at these levels will hamper FAA’s 

ability to maintain and improve aging facilities and slow down 

progress on the development of the agency’s NextGen program. 

The majority rejected amendments that would have funded each 

of these important capital and safety investment programs at the 

President’s requested level. 

With a shortage of resources to truly support capital needs, the 

bill relies on the inclusion of several policy riders to provide the impetus for passage. Controversial riders on truck length and weight 

have no place in this bill, particularly at a time when the authorizers are working on a reauthorization proposal where the issues 

can be thoroughly debated. In addition, the bill continues to delay 

full implementation of DOT’s hours of service rule by including unmanageable additional study requirements. These modifications are 

a calculated effort by the trucking industry to put their bottom line 

above driver safety. 

The bill also attempts to undermine President Obama’s new policy related to the United States’ relationship with Cuba by preventing scheduled air service and cruise ship travel to Cuban ports 

of entry. These provisions all bring further peril to a bill that is already overburdened with an inadequate allocation, yet the Majority 

also rejected amendments to eliminate these controversial policy 

riders. 

With only a token amount of $20 million for the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Choice Neighborhoods 

Initiative, the bill includes insufficient funding for the capital 

needs of public housing. The bill slashes Choice Neighborhoods by 

$230 million, or 92 percent, below the President’s request, denying 

resources to transform clusters of poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed income neighborhoods and preventing the children who 

live there from having the opportunities that all Americans deserve. 

The bill contains $1.68 billion for the Public Housing Capital 

Fund, which is a $194 million cut from last year. If enacted, this 

level would be about the same as the funding level in 1989. Given 

that new maintenance needs accrue at $3.4 billion per year, this 

level of funding would cover less than half of the need while doing 

nothing to address the $25 billion backlog of deferred maintenance. 

The Housing for the Elderly and Housing for the Disabled programs have been transformed into purely rental renewal programs. 

Despite growing need in each of these programs, this bill does not 

provide the resources needed to keep the supply of these units in 

line with demand. This bill will do nothing to increase access to 

safe, decent and affordable housing for the elderly or the disabled. 

While the HOME program might seem to be funded sufficiently, 

we are concerned about how it is paid for. On the surface, HOME 

and the Housing Trust Fund appear to both be affordable housing 

programs, but the Housing Trust Fund targets the lowest of the 

low income while HOME focuses on low- to moderate- income 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
175 

households. We have a lack of supply of affordable housing at all 

income levels, and we are concerned that by taking money dedicated for the Housing Trust Fund, this bill will perpetuate another 

gap in the spectrum of affordable housing. 

Significantly cutting Lead Hazard Control will slow progress on 

eliminating household toxins. This successful program has resulted 

in lower lead poisoning rates and better educational and behavioral 

outcomes for children. The Freddie Gray tragedy in Baltimore, 

where more than 93,000 children have been added to Maryland’s 

lead registries over the last twenty years, has shined a light on 

problems related to lead poisoning. Now is not the time to make 

reductions. 

And while HUD’s Information Technology Fund might not rise to 

the same level of importance as some of the other programs we’ve 

mentioned, it does underscore just how underfunded this bill is. If 

the committee mark is enacted into law, HUD will neither have 

functioning computers and email nor systems to process mortgages 

and rental payments. At the same time, this Committee has asked 

HUD to modernize and streamline information technology systems, 

yet this bill provides no funding for that purpose. 

We are already just barely maintaining our infrastructure, and 

looking ahead, our infrastructure needs will only increase. Secretary Foxx’s testimony from February included highlights from 

the DOT’s ‘‘Beyond Traffic’’ study which focused on the trends and 

challenges facing our country over the next 30 years. Our nation’s 

transportation systems will need to accommodate a population that 

grows by 70 million people and freight volumes that will increase 

by 45 percent to 29 billion tons. DOT estimates that more than 

$163 billion in annual investments will be needed to improve the 

condition and performance of our nation’s highway and transit systems. 

The demands are similar on the housing side. A 2014 report by 

the National Low Income Housing Coalition indicates there is a 

shortage of 4.4 million affordable rental units for extremely low-income households. HUD indicates that 1.5 million elderly headed 

households either pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent 

or live in inadequate housing. Among persons with disabilities, 

1.31 million were similarly situated. The Housing Trust Fund was 

created to provide stable, long-term funding to address the needs 

of extremely low-income families. We are concerned that 

repurposing funds intended for the Housing Trust Fund will exacerbate the affordable housing crisis in this and future fiscal years. 

In an address to Congress in February of 1955, President Eisenhower stated: 

Our unity as a nation is sustained by free communication of thought and by easy transportation of people and 

goods. The ceaseless flow of information throughout the 

Republic is matched by individual and commercial movement over a vast system of interconnected highways crisscrossing the country and joining at our national borders 

with friendly neighbors to the north and south. 

Together, the united forces of our communication and 

transportation systems are dynamic elements in the very 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
176 

name we bear-United States. Without them, we would be 

a mere alliance of many separate parts. 

We agree with President Eisenhower’s sentiment. However, this 

bill and the budgetary levels that underpin it undermine the continued viability of our nation’s infrastructure. For centuries, our 

country’s economic competiveness has been built upon a world-class 

infrastructure that enabled innovation and ingenuity to flourish. 

This bill hastens our infrastructure’s decay and threatens our economic vitality. 

This bill clearly illustrates the folly of the Majority’s almost exclusive focus on domestic appropriations for deficit reduction, while 

leaving the main drivers of the deficit unaddressed. This does not 

work as fiscal policy, and it decimates the investments a great 

country must make. While one could rearrange the funding levels 

in this bill to address one or more of the key areas mentioned earlier, there is no way to sufficiently address all of the funding needs 

in the bill under the given allocation. 

We think the solution to our budgetary problems is clear. For 

years, the budget has been balanced on the back of discretionary 

spending, yet the increases are largely on the mandatory side. We 

can move to a policy of prosperity if we reach a sensible budget 

deal like we did a few years ago. We need a comprehensive, multiyear budget agreement and we need it soon. Anything less will 

mean another year of decay and deferred maintenance for our communities and stalled economic prosperity. 

We remain hopeful that this bill can be improved as it goes 

through the appropriations process. We look forward to working 

with the Chairman as we move forward and are hopeful that a new 

agreement on spending levels can give this bill and America’s infrastructure the resources they deserve. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

DAVID E. PRICE. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING