21–982 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 109–153 

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, AND HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006 

JUNE 24, 2005.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. KNOLLENBERG, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3058] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accomopanying bill making appropriations for 

the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and 

Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Operating plan and reprogramming procedures ..................................... ........ 2 

Relationship with budget offices ............................................................... ........ 3 

The effect of guaranteed spending ............................................................ ........ 3 

Tabular summary ....................................................................................... ........ 4 

Committee hearings ................................................................................... ........ 4 

Program, project, and activity ................................................................... ........ 4 

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

Title II—Department of the Treasury ...................................................... 47 66 

Title III—Department of Housing and Urban Development .................. 63 81 

Title IV—The Judiciary ............................................................................. 109 111 

Title V—District of Columbia .................................................................... 116 117 

Title VI—Executive Office of the President and Funds: 

Appropriated to the President ........................................................... 149 133 

Title VII—Independent Agencies: 

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board ....... 160 142 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ............................................. 160 142 

Election Assistance Commission ........................................................ 161 143 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ............................................ 161 144 

2 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Federal Election Commission ............................................................. 161 144 

Federal Labor Relations Authority .................................................... 162 145 

Federal Maritime Commission ........................................................... 162 145 

General Services Administration ....................................................... 163 146 

Merit Systems Protection Board ........................................................ 175 153 

Morris K. Udall Foundation ............................................................... 175 153 

National Archives and Records Administration ............................... 176 154 

National Credit Union Administration ............................................. 178 156 

National Transportation Safety Board .............................................. 178 157 

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation ......................................... 179 158 

Office of Government Ethics .............................................................. 179 158 

Office of Personnel Management ....................................................... 180 159 

Office of Special Counsel .................................................................... 183 162 

Selective Service System .................................................................... 184 163 

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness ...................... 185 163 

United States Postal Service .............................................................. 185 164 

United States Tax Court .................................................................... 186 165 

Title VIII—General Provisions—This Act ................................................ 186 165 

Title IX—General Provisions: Departments, Agencies, and Corporations ......................................................................................................... 194 167 

House of Representatives Report Requirements: ........ 170 

Constitutional authority ..................................................................... ........ 170 

Appropriations not authorized by law ............................................... ........ 170 

Transfers of funds ............................................................................... ........ 173 

Statement of general performance goals and objectives .................. ........ 175 

Compliance with rule XIII, clause 3(e) (Ramseyer rule) ................. ........ 176 

Changes in the application of existing law ....................................... ........ 180 

Comparison with the budget resolution ............................................ ........ 200 

Five-year outlay projections ............................................................... ........ 200 

Financial assistance to state and local governments ....................... ........ 200 

Rescissions ........................................................................................... ........ 202 

Full Committee votes .......................................................................... ........ 203 

Tabular summary of the bill .............................................................. ........ 209 

OPERATING PLAN AND REPROGRAMMING PROCEDURES

The Committee continues to have a particular interest in being 

informed of reprogrammings which, although they may not change 

either the total amount available in an account or any of the purposes for which the appropriation is legally available, represent a 

significant departure from budget plans presented to the Committee in an agency’s budget justifications and supporting documents, the basis of this appropriations Act. 

Consequently, the Committee directs the departments, agencies, 

boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded at or in excess 

of $100,000,000 in this bill, to consult with the Committee prior to 

each change from the approved budget levels in excess of $500,000 

between programs, activities, object classifications or elements unless otherwise provided for in the Committee report accompanying 

this bill. For agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded at less than $100,000,000 in this bill, the reprogramming threshold shall be $250,000 between programs, activities, initiatives object classifications or elements unless otherwise provided 

for in the Committee report accompanying this bill. Additionally, 

the Committee expects to be promptly notified of all reprogramming actions which involve less than the above-mentioned 

amounts. If such actions would have the effect of significantly 

3 

changing an agency’s funding requirements in future years, or if 

programs or projects specifically cited in the Committee’s reports 

are affected by the reprogramming, the reprogramming must be 

approved by the Committee regardless of the amount proposed to 

be moved. Furthermore, the Committee wishes to be consulted regarding reorganizations of offices, programs, and activities prior to 

the planned implementation of such reorganizations. 

The Committee also directs that the Departments of Transportation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development, as well as 

the Judiciary, the General Services Administration, and the Office 

of Personnel Management, shall submit operating plans, signed by 

the respective secretary, administrator, or agency head, for the 

Committee’s review within 60 days of the bill’s enactment. 

RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES

Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its inquiries and requests for information and assistance through the 

budget offices of the various departments, agencies, and commissions. The Committee has often pointed to the natural affinity and 

relationship between these organizations and the Committee which 

makes such a relationship workable. The Committee reiterates its 

longstanding position that while the Committee reserves the right 

to call upon all offices in the departments, agencies, and commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and these 

entities must normally be through the budget offices. The Committee appreciates all the assistance received from each of the departments, agencies, and commissions during the past year. The 

workload generated by the budget process is large and growing, 

and therefore, a positive, responsive relationship between the Committee and the budget offices is absolutely essential to the appropriations process. 

THE EFFECT OF GUARANTEED SPENDING

Over the objections of the Appropriations and Budget Committee, 

in 1998 the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) amended the Budget Enforcement Act to provide two new additional spending categories or ‘‘firewalls’’, the highway category and 

the mass transit category. The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21) provided a 

similar treatment for certain aviation programs. Although using 

different procedures, each of these Acts produced the same results: 

they significantly raised spending, and they have had the effect of 

prohibiting the Appropriations Committee from reducing those 

spending levels in the annual appropriations process. As the Committee noted during deliberations on these bills, the Acts essentially created mandatory spending programs within the discretionary caps. This undermines Congressional flexibility to fund 

other equally important programs not protected by funding guarantees and to address emerging priorities, such as homeland security 

and overseas military requirements, within projected budget totals. 

The reorganization of the Committee in the 108th Congress posed 

additional challenges in this regard, because funding guarantees 

for selected transportation programs compete in the budget process 

against funding for non-transportation agencies such as the DeVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
4 

partment of Housing and Urban Development, Office of National 

Drug Control Policy, enforcement of anti-terrorism and money 

laundering activities in the Treasury Department, the Internal 

Revenue Service, and the General Services Administration as well 

as the Judiciary. As in past years, the Committee has done all in 

its power, considering this environment, to produce a balanced bill 

providing adequately for all modes of transportation as well as all 

non-transportation programs under the jurisdiction of this bill. 

Although the funding guarantees in AIR–21 were extended in the 

Vision-100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act last year, the 

guarantees of TEA–21 expired on September 30, 2003. The Committee’s recommendations were developed based on the very generous funding levels in H.R. 3, the Transportation Equity Act, A 

Legacy for Users. As reauthorization of our surface transportation 

programs continues to be debated during the current session of 

Congress, the Committee wants to make clear that the continued 

use of spending guarantees to ‘‘wall-off’’ parts of the discretionary 

budget for particular constituencies could cause both transportation 

and non-transportation programs across the government to be 

under more severe budget pressure, in order to keep the overall 

budget in balance. The effect of maintaining and enforcing these 

guarantees would leave its mark on non-covered programs and activities in this bill, since they must compete for leftover funding. 

The Committee continues to believe that funding guarantees skew 

transportation priorities inappropriately, by providing increases to 

highway, transit, and airport spending while leaving safety-related 

operations in the FAA and FRA, as well as critical housing financial, and judicial programs, to scramble for the remaining resources. 

TABULAR SUMMARY

A table summarizing the amounts provided for fiscal year 2005 

and the amounts recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2006 compared with the budget estimates is included at the end of this report. 

COMMITTEE HEARINGS

The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the programs and projects provided for in this bill. Pursuant to House 

rules, each of these hearings was open to the public. The Committee received testimony from cabinet officers, agency heads, inspectors general, and other officials of the executive branch in 

areas under the bill’s jurisdiction. In addition, the Committee has 

considered written material submitted for the hearing record by 

Members of Congress, private citizens, local government entities, 

and private organizations. The bill recommendations for fiscal year 

2006 have been developed after careful consideration of all the information available to the Committee. 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

During fiscal year 2006, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–177), as 

amended, with respect to appropriations contained in the accompanying bill, the terms ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ shall mean 

5 

any item for which a dollar amount is contained in an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and 

joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. This 

definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 

(obligational) authority is provided, as well as to capital investment 

grants, Federal Transit Administration. In addition, the percentage 

reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration shall be applied equally to each ‘‘budget item’’ that is listed 

under said accounts in the budget justifications submitted to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as modified by 

subsequent appropriations Acts and accompanying committee reports, conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the 

committee of conference. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $86,536,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 87,046,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 84,913,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥1,623,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥2,133,000 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill provides $84,913,000 for the salaries and expenses of the 

various offices comprising the office of the secretary. The following 

table compares the fiscal year 2005 enacted level to the fiscal year 

2006 budget estimate and the Committee’s recommendation by office: 

Fiscal year 2005 enacted 1Fiscal year 2006 estimate House recommended 

Immediate office of the secretary ............................................ $2,202,000 $2,198,000 $2,198,000 

Office of the deputy secretary .................................................. 699,000 698,000 698,000 

Office of the executive secretariat ........................................... 1,444,000 1,442,000 1,442,000 

Office of the under secretary of transportation for policy ...... 12,526,000 11,680,000 11,680,000 

Board of contract appeals ........................................................ 698,000 697,000 697,000 

Official of small and disadvantaged business utilization ...... 1,268,000 1,265,000 1,265,000 

Office of the chief information officer ..................................... 11,301,000 11,895,000 11,895,000 

Office of the assistant secretary for governmental affairs ..... 2,297,000 2,293,000 2,052,000 

Office of the general counsel ................................................... 15,272,000 15,183,000 15,183,000 

Office of the assistant secretary for budget and programs ... 8,504,000 9,485,000 7,593,000 

Office of the assistant secretary for administration ............... 23,249,000 23,139,000 23,139,000 

Office of public affairs ............................................................. 1,914,000 1,910,000 1,910,000 

Office of intelligence and security ........................................... 2,037,000 2,033,000 2,033,000 

Office of emergency transportation .......................................... 3,125,000 3,128,000 3,128,000 

Total ............................................................................. $86,536,000 $87,046,000 $84,913,000 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

Funding for individual offices.—The Committee’s recommendations include individual funding for all of the offices within the office of the secretary, as has been done in past years, rather than 

6 

consolidating them as proposed in the budget request. In each instance, the recommendation provides a small funding increase over 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels to fund the estimated fiscal year 

2006 civilian pay increase, inflation, and other mandatory increases as requested, unless otherwise noted in the sections that 

follow. 

Office of the general counsel.—The Committee recommends 

$15,183,000 for the office of the general counsel in fiscal year 2006. 

This level should fully fund 104 full time equivalent staff years 

(FTEs) as described in the budget justification, which includes 

$150,000 as requested for one additional FTE for the office of emergency transportation’s litigation caseload and three additional 

FTEs for which no new funding was requested. 

Office of the assistant secretary for governmental affairs.—The 

Committee recommends $2,052,000 for the office of governmental 

affairs, which represents a cut in funding below the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level. 

When there is a legislative issue of importance to the department, the Committee expects the office of the secretary to contact 

the majority and minority staff of both the House and the Senate 

Committees on Appropriations. 

Additionally, the annual appropriations bill for the Department 

of Transportation directs the department to notify the Committee 

no less than three full business days before any grant totaling 

$1,000,000 is announced. In fiscal year 2005, due to the fact that 

funding for some programs was released incrementally as the result of enactment of a series of extension acts, the Committee was 

not notified prior to the announcement of dozens of grants where 

the incremental amount being released at the time was less than 

$1,000,000, even though the total amount of the grant was over 

$1,000,000. Although the department may feel as though it did not 

violate the letter of the law on grant announcements, it most certainly violated the spirit of this provision. The bill once again includes a provision that prohibits the Secretary of Transportation 

from issuing funds for any grant unless the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations have been notified not less than 

three full business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 

or more is announced by the department or its modal administrations. In addition, due to the possibility that certain programs may 

again face incremental funding in fiscal year 2006, the Committee 

directs the department to consider grants based on their full-year 

funding level, not just the incremental amount being released, 

when complying with this grant announcement provision. 

Office of the assistant secretary for budget and programs.—The 

Committee’s recommendation of $7,593,000 for fiscal year 2006 is 

20% below the request and 11% below the fiscal year 2005 enacted 

level. As part of this reduction, the request for two additional FTEs 

for oversight of the department’s credit programs is denied due to 

inadequate justification. The Committee also denies the department’s request to hire contract support for these credit programs. 

Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its inquiries and requests for information and assistance through the 

budget offices of the various modal administrations. The Committee has often pointed to the natural affinity and relationship beVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
7 

tween these offices and the Committee which makes such a relationship workable. The Committee reiterates its longstanding position that, while the Committee reserves the right to call upon all 

offices within the department, the primary communication between 

the Committee and the department must normally be through the 

budget offices. As such, the Committee expects to have uninhibited 

access to the budget officers in the modal administrations, especially when questions arise or when additional information is needed pertaining to the budget justifications. The Committee will not 

tolerate continued interference by the office of the secretary in 

these matters. The Committee appreciates all the assistance received from each of the offices within the department and the 

modal administrations during the past year. The workload generated by the budget process is large and growing, and therefore, 

a positive, responsive relationship between the Committee and the 

budget offices is absolutely essential to the appropriations process. 

Congressional budget justifications.—The past few years, the 

Committee has urged the department to improve the quality of the 

budget submissions. However, once again, there were significant 

inconsistencies in the quality and type of information provided in 

the department’s budget documents. The Committee expects the office of the assistant secretary for budget and programs to take a 

stronger role in ensuring that the same quality of information is 

supplied by each of the modal administrations within the department. Similarly, the Committee has had numerous discussions 

with departmental staff regarding the type of information and the 

level of detail that should be provided in the Congressional justification materials. In fact, in last year’s report, the Committee directed the department to include the same level of detail that was 

provided in the Congressional justifications presented in fiscal year 

2003. Yet, many of the budget documents submitted for fiscal year 

2006 did not adhere to that standard. Therefore, the Committee 

once again directs the department to submit its fiscal year 2007 

Congressional justification materials at the same level of detail 

provided in the Congressional justifications presented in fiscal year 

2003. Further, 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 detailed justification for the incremental funding increases 

and additional FTEs being requested above the enacted level, by 

program, activity, or program element. 

Operating plan.—The Committee directs the department to submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2006, signed by the secretary 

for review by the Committees on Appropriations of both the House 

and Senate 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 

or referenced in the House and Senate appropriations reports, and 

the statement of the managers. 

Form M.—The Committee is concerned that the Department of 

Transportation allowed the motor carriers financial and operating 

statistics survey (Form M data) to lapse in March of 2005 despite 

direction to the contrary in the statement of managers accomVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
8 

panying the Transportation, Treasury, Independent Agencies, and 

General Government Appropriations Act, 2005. The fiscal year 

2005 statement of managers denied the request to transfer responsibility and funding for the Form M data from the Bureau of 

Transportation Statistics (BTS) to FMCSA but it was not the Conferees intent to let the collection and reporting of survey data 

lapse. In fact, the report accompanying the fiscal year 2005 Senate 

transportation appropriations bill stated, ‘‘these activities should 

remain within the province of the BTS, which receives sufficient 

funding to continue these activities.’’ Collection of this data is important because it provides safety-related information on motor carriers and is widely used by the industry. The Secretary of Transportation is directed to immediately resume the motor carrier financial and operating statistics survey. The secretary is directed to 

provide a report within 30 days of the bill’s enactment to the Committees on Appropriations of both the House and Senate that identifies the agency responsible for the survey and the funds to be allocated to this priority during fiscal year 2006. 

Bill language.—Language prohibiting funding for the assistant 

secretary for public affairs position has been retained from last 

year. Also, the bill continues language that permits up to 

$2,500,000 of fees to be credited to the office of the secretary for 

salaries and expenses. 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $8,630,400 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 8,550,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 8,550,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥80,400 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

The office of civil rights is responsible for advising the secretary 

on civil rights and equal opportunity matters and ensuring full implementation of civil rights opportunity precepts in all of the department’s official actions and programs. This office is responsible 

for enforcing laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination in 

federally operated and federally assisted transportation programs. 

This office also handles all civil rights cases related to department 

of Transportation employees. The recommendation provides 

$8,550,000 for the office of civil rights, the same as the budget request. 

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $19,840,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 9,030,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 40,613,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +20,773,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +31,583,000 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

This appropriation finances those research activities and studies 

concerned with planning, analysis, and information development 

needed to support the secretary’s responsibilities in the formulation 

of national transportation policies. It also finances the staff necessary to conduct these efforts. The overall program is carried out 

9 

primarily through contracts with other federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private 

firms. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,613,000 for 

transportation planning, research and development, an increase of 

$20,773,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and 

$31,583,000 above the budget request. Within the funds provided, 

the Committee directs the secretary to provide $10,000,000 to support the orderly discontinuation of Amtrak’s mail and express service; and $20,000,000 to be held in reserve, which may be transferred to the Surface Transportation Board in order to carry out directed service should Amtrak cease operations. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ($129,002,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... ............................ Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (120,014,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. (¥8,988,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ (+120,014,000) 1Proposed without limitation. 

The working capital fund (WCF) was created to provide common 

administrative services to the various modes and outside entities 

that desire those services for economy and efficiency. The fund is 

financed through negotiated agreements with the department’s operating administrations and other governmental elements requiring 

the center’s capabilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $120,014,000 on the 

working capital fund. The budget request proposed a limitless program level for the fund in fiscal year 2006. The Committee’s recommendation is appropriate considering the funding levels of the 

operations and administrative accounts. 

Modal usage of WCF.—Consistent with past practice, the Committee directs the department, in its fiscal year 2007 Congressional 

justifications for each of the modal administrations, to account for 

increases or decreases in WCF billings based on planned usage requested or anticipated by the modes rather than anticipated by 

WCF managers. 

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

Appropriation Limitation on guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................... $892,800 ($18,367,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................... 900,000 (18,367,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................... 900,000 (18,367,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................. +7,200 (.........) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ ............................ (.........) 

The minority business resource center of the office of small and 

disadvantaged business utilization provides assistance in obtaining 

short-term working capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The program enables qualified 

businesses to obtain loans at prime interest rates for transportation-related projects. 

10 

The recommendation fully funds the budget request of $500,000 to cover the subsidy costs for the loans, not to exceed $18,367,000, 

and $400,000 for administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan program. 

MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $2,976,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 3,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +24,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................ 1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

This appropriation provides contractual support to assist minority business firms, entrepreneurs, and venture groups in securing 

contracts and subcontracts arising out of projects that involve federal spending. It also provides grants and contract assistance that 

serves DOT-wide goals. The Committee has provided $3,000,000 for 

this program, $24,000 above the fiscal year 2005 funding level and 

equal to the budget request. 

NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $67,456,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 100,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +32,544,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

This appropriation finances fiscal year 2006 costs for the new Department of Transportation headquarters building, which would 

consolidate all of the department’s headquarters operating administration functions (except the Federal Aviation Administration) from 

various locations around the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area 

into a leased building within the central employment area of the 

District of Columbia. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes $100,000,000 in fiscal 

year 2006 for the new headquarters building, $32,544,000 above 

the fiscal year 2005 funding level and equal to the budget request. 

The Committee commends the department for its efforts to adequately answer all of the questions raised regarding the funding of 

this building. 

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $51,584,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 54,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +2,416,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +54,000,000 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

The Essential Air Service (EAS) program was originally created 

by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a temporary measure to 

continue air service to communities that had received federally 

mandated air service prior to deregulation. The program currently 

11 

provides subsidies to air carriers serving small communities that 

meet certain criteria. 

The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 1996 

(Public Law 104–264) authorized the collection of user fees for services provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to aircraft that neither take off from, nor land in the United States, commonly known as overflight fees. In addition, the Act permanently 

appropriated these fees for authorized expenses of the FAA and 

stipulated that the first $50,000,000 of annual fee collections must 

be used to finance the EAS program. In the event of a shortfall in 

fees, the law requires FAA to make up the difference from other 

funds available to the agency. 

The fiscal year 2006 budget proposes to fund the EAS program 

at a total of $50,000,000, solely from new overflight fee collections 

credited to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The Committee 

finds the budget proposal unrealistic considering that in fiscal year 

2005 the department came to the Committee seeking additional 

funding for the EAS program as several communities were in jeopardy of losing air service. 

The Committee recommends a total program level of EAS in fiscal year 2006 of $104,000,000, roughly a $2,000,000 increase above 

the level provided in fiscal year 2005. This funding consists of an 

appropriation of $54,000,000 and $50,000,000 to be derived from 

new overflight fee collections. 

The Committee includes language to ensure prompt availability 

of funds for obligation to air carriers providing service under the 

EAS program. The language removes an unintended penalty 

whereby if $50,000,000 is made immediately available by the FAA 

to the EAS program at the beginning of each fiscal year, the FAA 

must take that amount from its appropriations, without the ability 

to credit back amounts transferred from the FAA once sufficient 

overflight fees are available. Without this language, the result 

would be a permanent reduction in the appropriations to the FAA. 

The Committee has also included language that allows the secretary to take into consideration the subsidy requirements of carriers when selecting between carriers competing to provide service 

to a community. 

The bill includes a provision (sec. 182) prohibiting the use of 

funds to implement the essential air service local participation program. 

The Committee is concerned that the Department of Transportation has yet to implement the code-sharing pilot program required under section 406 of the Vision 100—Century of Aviation 

Reauthorization Act (49 Stat. 41731 note; 117 Stat. 2545). The implementation of this pilot program will increase the number of viable transportation options available to small communities by giving 

communities more options and fostering competition among nonaligned commuter carriers. The Committee feels that this pilot program has the potential to improve air service in rural communities, 

leading to decreased dependency on Essential Air Service and other 

government subsidies. The Committee strongly recommends that 

the Department implement this pilot program. 

12 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for the 

safety and development of civil aviation and the evolution of a national system of airports. The Federal Government’s regulatory role 

in civil aviation began with the creation of an Aeronautics Branch 

within the department of Commerce pursuant to the Air Commerce 

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

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

were subsumed into a new, independent agency named the Civil 

Aeronautics Authority. 

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

agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency and the Civil Aeronautics 

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

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

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

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

Commercial Space Transportation from the Office of the Secretary, 

and decreased in December 2001 with the transfer of civil aviation 

security activities to the new Transportation Security Administration. 

OPERATIONS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $7,712,800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 8,201,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 8,192,920,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +480,120,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥8,077,000 

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

as well as the administration of an aviation medical research program; (5) administration of the acquisition, 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. 

13 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $8,192,920,000 for FAA operations, 

an increase of $480,120,000 (6.2 percent) above the level provided 

in fiscal year 2005, and $8,077,000 below the budget request. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes $150,000,000 for 

competitive sourcing for flight service stations transition costs. 

A comparison of the fiscal year 2006 budget estimate to the Committee recommendation by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget activity FY06 estimate FY06 recommended 

Air traffic organization ................................................................................................ $6,647,305,000 $6,424,229,000 

Research and acquisition ............................................................................................ (1) 222,171,000 

Flight Service Stations A–76 ....................................................................................... 150,000,000 150,000,000 

Aviation safety ............................................................................................................. 941,742,000 951,042,000 

Commercial space transportation ............................................................................... 11,759,000 11,759,000 

Financial services ........................................................................................................ (2) 50,583,000 

Human resources ......................................................................................................... (2) 69,943,000 

Region and center operations ..................................................................................... (2) 150,744,000 

Staff offices ................................................................................................................. 450,191,000 140,337,000 

Information services .................................................................................................... (2) 36,612,000 

Account-wide adjustments .......................................................................................... ¥14,500,000 

Total ............................................................................................................... 8,200,997,000 8,192,920,000 

1 Estimate includes $222,171,000 under ‘‘Air traffic organization’’. 

2 Estimate includes such funds under ‘‘Staff offices’’, as follows: Financial services, $50,983,000; Human resources, $69,943,000; Region 

and center operations coordination, $150,744,000; Office of information services, $36,612,000. 

TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET

The bill derives $11,769,000,000 of the total appropriation from 

the airport and airway trust fund. The balance of the appropriation 

($3,206,920,000) will be drawn from the general fund of the Treasury. Under these provisions, 79.3 percent of the FAA’s operating 

costs will be borne by air travelers and industries using those services. The remaining 21.6 percent will be borne by the general taxpayer, regardless of whether they directly utilize FAA services. 

STATE OF THE AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND

According to Administration estimates, fiscal year 2006 will continue the recent trend where necessary outlays for FAA programs 

outstrip the revenues from aviation users deposited into the airport 

and airway trust fund. The following table compares trust fund 

revenue to trust fund outlays for the past three fiscal years. As the 

table indicates, under current estimates the Federal Government is 

not only spending all the revenues coming into the trust fund, it 

is going beyond that, and spending down the cash balance. The Administration estimates that, at the end of fiscal year 2006, the uncommitted cash balance in the trust fund will be approximately 

$1,195,000,000. This represents a drop of 51 percent from the figure two years before. 

Fiscal year 2004 Fiscal year 2005 Fiscal year 2006 

Trust fund revenue 1 ................................................................. $9,687,000,000 $11,092,000,000 $11,921,000,000 

Trust fund outlays .................................................................... 10,415,000,000 11,165,000,000 12,660,000,000 

Difference .................................................................................. ¥728,000,000 ¥73,000,000 ¥739,000,000 

1 Includes excise taxes, offsetting collections, and interest on trust fund cash balance. 

It is imperative for the agency to lower its operating costs and 

find ways to be more efficient in all its operations. For several 

14 

years, the Committee has indicated that improvement was needed 

in the area of personnel costs. Although the Committee did not receive timely information on the average full-time equivalent (FTE) 

workyear cost for fiscal year 2006, the fiscal year 2005 level was 

$130,957. FAA’s workyear costs have historically been among the 

highest of all federal agencies, and increased 22 percent over the 

four year period covering fiscal years 2001 through 2005. Average 

sick leave costs historically have been 20 percent higher than the 

government average, raising the agency’s staffing costs. The current average yearly sick leave consumed is 11.23 days per FAA employee. In addition, special pays will cost the agency $364,015,000 

in fiscal year 2006, an increase of 3 percent over the previous year. 

Given the severe budget constraints facing the nation, the Committee directs FAA to continue focusing on ways to reduce sick 

leave, to improve productivity and lessen the need for additional 

staffing resources in future years. 

The Committee notes that the agency has made some progress 

in the area of the memoranda of understanding (MOU) entered into 

with different bargaining units at the regional, local and national 

level, outside the national collective bargaining agreement. FAA 

has begun to track the number of MOUs in a recently established 

database, and has implemented a process to accept new or renegotiate existing MOUs. The FAA indicates it will renegotiate those 

that infringe on management’s reserved rights under federal labor 

laws, are too costly, or make no business sense. Currently, there 

are 3,238 MOUs in the database. In fiscal year 2005, 37 new MOUs 

were signed, and 49 are pending review. Given the number of total, 

new, and pending MOUs and their potential implications to the 

agency, the Committee directs the Inspector General to provide a 

follow-up to its September 12, 2003 report on FAA management 

and controls over MOUs. 

AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

The bill provides $6,424,229,000 for air traffic services, a reduction of $223,076,000 from the budget request. These resources 

would be managed by FAA’s air traffic organization. Recommended 

adjustments to the budget estimate are listed and described below: 

Amount 

Contract tower base program ............................................................... +$3,200,000 

Contract tower cost-sharing program .................................................. +395,000 

Restoration of Research and Acquisitions office ................................. ¥222,171,000 

Management of MOUs and MOAs ....................................................... ¥500,000 

BTS aviation statistics .......................................................................... ¥4,000,000 

Contract tower program.—The bill includes $90,500,000, an increase of $3,200,000 above the budget estimate, to continue the 

contract tower base program. The President’s budget inflated the 

program and did not reflect the estimate for new contracts being 

negotiated during fiscal year 2006, or costs to continue operations 

at an estimated 15 new towers entering the program during fiscal 

year 2006. 

In addition, the bill provides $7,500,000, an increase of $395,000 

above the budget estimate, to continue the contract tower costsharing program. The Committee continues to believe this is a valuable program that provides safety benefits to small communities. 

Communities in this program as of May 22, 2005 are shown below: 

15 

Airport name State 

King Salmon .............................................................................................................................................................. AK 

Fayetteville ................................................................................................................................................................ AR 

Springdale ................................................................................................................................................................. AR 

Laughlin/Bullhead City .............................................................................................................................................. AZ 

Hawthorne ................................................................................................................................................................. CA 

Waterbury/Oxford ....................................................................................................................................................... CT 

Macon ........................................................................................................................................................................ GA 

Bloomington .............................................................................................................................................................. IN 

Columbus Municipal ................................................................................................................................................. IN 

Gary Regional ............................................................................................................................................................ IN 

Muncie/Delaware County ........................................................................................................................................... IN 

Garden City ............................................................................................................................................................... KS 

Manhattan ................................................................................................................................................................. KS 

Barkley regional (Paducah) ....................................................................................................................................... KY 

Worcester ................................................................................................................................................................... MA 

Sawyer ....................................................................................................................................................................... MI 

Jefferson City ............................................................................................................................................................. MO 

Joplin Regional .......................................................................................................................................................... MO 

Concord ..................................................................................................................................................................... NC 

Kinston ...................................................................................................................................................................... NC 

Smith Reynolds (Winston-Salem) .............................................................................................................................. NC 

Hickory Regional ........................................................................................................................................................ NC 

Lebanon Municipal .................................................................................................................................................... NH 

Lea County/Hobbs ..................................................................................................................................................... NM 

Elko ............................................................................................................................................................................ NV 

Oneida County ........................................................................................................................................................... NY 

Stillwater ................................................................................................................................................................... OK 

Latrobe ...................................................................................................................................................................... PA 

Williamsport/Lycoming County .................................................................................................................................. PA 

Greenville Donaldson Center ..................................................................................................................................... SC 

Grand Strand/Myrtle Beach ....................................................................................................................................... SC 

McKeller-Sipes (Jackson) ........................................................................................................................................... TN 

Walla Walla Regional ................................................................................................................................................ WA 

Morgantown ............................................................................................................................................................... WV 

Restoration of research and acquisition office.—The Committee 

recommendation restores funding for a separate office of research 

and acquisition. The President’s budget proposed to transfer this 

funding to the air traffic organization. Inasmuch as not all research 

and acquisition staffing is related to air traffic services activities, 

and in recognition that there are separate appropriations for these 

important activities, the Committee maintains the traditional 

budget structure. 

Management of MOUs and MOAs.—Recognizing that the improvements in the MOU process and oversight are likely to result 

in reduced operating costs, the Committee assumes cost savings of 

$500,000 from this effort. 

Controller staffing.—According to FAA, the agency expects that 

over the next 10 years, 73 percent of its 15,000 controllers will become eligible to retire. Consistent with its 10 year staffing plan, 

the FAA budget assumes hiring of 1,249 new controllers. This hiring will be offset by the estimated loss of 654 controllers. The bill 

includes $24,875,000 for salaries, benefits, training, and ancillary 

support costs associated with a net increase of 595 in controller 

work force. 

The Committee agrees with FAA that a one for one replacement 

of retiring controllers is not prudent, as it would not assume productivity improvements from procedural changes, facility consolidation, or even new technology. The Committee believes the businesslike mindset of the air traffic organization, as well as the unusual 

flexibility provided to the agency through personnel and procureVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
16 

ment reform, will make such productivity improvements a reality 

and lessen the need for additional personnel. In addition, many 

controllers working traffic today are certified to work traffic, but 

are not yet certified professional controllers (CPC). FAA data indicates that new controllers are sent to an operational facility within 

four months of initial qualification training, not three years. FAA 

also has issued regulations to waive the mandatory retirement age 

of 56 for controllers. The Committee believes that this is a good 

hedge against the retirement surge in future years. Further, the 

FAA expects to complete an analysis in December of staffing needs 

for each facility based on its size, complexity and traffic volume. 

This important analysis will provide a more accurate estimate of 

needs. 

Airway facilities technical workforce.—The bill provides a total of 

$5,400,000, consistent with the budget request, to hire and train 

258 additional maintenance technicians. A recent arbitration ruling 

upheld the contractual requirement that FAA maintain a minimum 

level (6,100) of technical staff (systems specialists, electronics technicians, and computer specialists) for maintenance of the air traffic 

control equipment. This staffing level is contained in the Professional Airways System Specialists (PASS) Union Contract signed in 

January 2000. 

Bureau of transportation statistics studies.—The Committee denies the $4,000,000 requested for aviation statistical studies to be 

conducted by bureau of transportation statistics. It is not clear to 

the Committee how these studies will be relevant to FAA’s mission. 

New York/New Jersey airspace redesign.—No funds made available for national airspace redesign may be used to prepare the environmental impact statement for the redesign of the New York/ 

New Jersey/Philadelphia regional airspace, or to conduct any work 

as part of the review of the redesign project conducted under the 

National Environmental Policy Act and related laws, as long as the 

FAA fails to consider noise mitigation. 

COMPETITIVE SOURCING FOR FLIGHT SERVICE STATIONS

The bill provides $150,000,000 for competitive sourcing for flight 

service stations, consistent with the budget request. 

AVIATION SAFETY

The bill provides $951,042,000 for aviation safety, an increase of 

$47,760,666 above the fiscal year 2005 level and $9,300,000 above 

the budget request. Recommended adjustments to the budget are 

described below. 

Amount 

Additional safety inspectors and engineers ......................................... +$8,000,000 

Safety and security analytics ................................................................ +1,000,000 

Professional Aerial Application support system .................................. +50,000 

Certification of upset training program ............................................... +250,000 

Aviation safety inspectors.—The Committee provides $15,103,000 

for aviation safety personnel, an increase of $8,000,000 over the 

budget estimate. The budget assumes the office of aviation safety 

will attrit 151 full time equivalents (FTEs) during fiscal year 2005. 

The Committee understands that actual attrition appears to be 125 

to 170 FTEs and that the Air Transportation Oversight System 

17 

(ATOS) may affect the number of inspectors required to ensure 

safety. 

The Committee notes that loss of certification staff has negatively impacted the domestic aviation industry’s ability to bring 

new products to the marketplace, and in turn affect global leadership and competitiveness. Therefore, the Committee directs that 

$4,000,000 of the $8,000,000 additional provided will result in a 

total FTE level in the office of aircraft certification of 1,189. The 

remaining $4,000,000 above the request shall be available to increase inspectors in the office of flight standards. 

Funds provided for the offices of aircraft certification and flight 

standards shall not be reprogrammed for any other purpose within 

or outside of the aviation safety office, including hiring other types 

of personnel within aviation safety. Further, this is designated as 

a special Congressional item of interest. The Committee directs the 

Secretary to provide a summary by March 1, 2006 regarding the 

use of the funds provided, including, but not limited to the total 

FTE in the offices of aircraft certification and flight standards, 

total employees, vacancies, positions under active recruitment to 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

The Committee directs the FAA to issue a report on the publication and implementation of final regulations implementing organizational designation authority to increase efficiency within the office of aircraft certification. 

Safety inspections of air carriers.—In 1998, the FAA began implementation of the Air Transportation Oversight Systems (ATOS). 

Under this system, FAA inspectors are to use data analysis to focus 

their inspections on areas that pose the greatest safety risks and 

to shift the focus of those inspections in response to changing conditions within air carrier operations. In 1999, FAA began to transition the remaining air carriers to the ATOS system. In 2002, the 

Inspector General reported that ATOS program was conceptually 

sound, and suggested improvements, each of which the FAA implemented. The IG issued a second report on June 3, 2005 that again 

stated that the program was conceptually sound. However, it identified opportunities to fully implement the program to enhance 

FAA’s ability to perform safety oversight of air carriers in transition. The IG stated that implementation of its recommendations 

will make a safe aviation system even stronger, and the FAA has 

agreed to implement the recommendations. This Committee directs 

the FAA to provide a report of the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriation by March 1, 2006 on the status of implementing 

the IG’s recommendations. 

Safety and security analytics project.—The recommendation includes $1,000,000 to initiate the safety and security analytics 

project. Current software is available to analyze electronic text 

found in descriptions of accidents, incidents, pilot and controller reports, and other databases to determine trends, patterns, and 

anomalies earlier than using other methods. This technology will 

help FAA meet its long-term goal of reducing the fatal accident 

rate among commercial air carriers by focusing on long-term trends 

rather than specific cases. 

Professional Aerial Application Support System.—The recommendation includes $50,000 for the National Agricultural AviaVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
18 

tion Research and Education Foundation’s Professional Aerial Application Support System. 

Certification of upset recovery training.—The Committee recommends $250,000 for FAA to evaluate and validate state of the 

art methods of conducting enhanced upset recovery training using 

centrifuge based flight simulator technology. Funds are to conduct 

human factors experiments at the Civil Aeormedical Institute to 

verify the benefits of this technology. 

Flight attendant fatigue.—The Committee looks forward to receiving the flight attendant fatigue study, as required the fiscal 

year 2005 House report 108–671, and will give due consideration 

to the report’s recommendations. 

Detroit Metropolitan air traffic control tower.—In September 

2004, mold contamination was discovered in various locations of 

the Detroit Metropolitan Air Traffic Control Tower during a safety 

inspection. The Committee urges the FAA to conduct thorough and 

complete remediation of the mold found in the air traffic control 

tower based on standard industry practice. The Committee directs 

the FAA to consider the safety and health of the employees that 

work in the tower as a priority during any remediation efforts. 

RESEARCH AND ACQUISITION

The Committee recommends $222,171,000 for the office of research and acquisition, the same as the budget estimate, and 

$2,385,483 above the fiscal year 2005 level. 

COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

The Committee recommends $11,759,000 for the office of commercial space transportation, consistent with the budget request, 

and an increase of $248,827 above fiscal year 2005. 

STAFF OFFICES

The Committee recommends $448,219,000 for staff offices, a reduction of $1,972,000 from the budget request. Adjustments to the 

budget are explained below. 

Office Adjustment Recommended 

Financial services ........................................................................................................ ¥$400,000 $50,583,000 

Other staff offices ....................................................................................................... ¥1,572,000 140,337,000 

Financial services.—The Committee recommends $50,583,000, a 

reduction of $400,000 from the budget request. The Committee recommendation does not include the requested funding for eight additional staff in the office of budget, the office has 17 vacant positions. The FAA states that 8 of the vacant positions are being 

transferred to Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and six positions are currently under recruitment. Therefore, the Committee will reevaluate 

its recommendation if the vacancy status in the near future warrants. 

Human resource management.—The Committee recommends 

$69,493,000, consistent with the budget estimate. 

Region and center operations.—The Committee recommends 

$150,774,000, consistent with the budget estimate. 

Information services.—The Committee recommends $36,612,000, 

consistent with the budget estimate. 

19 

Other staff offices.—The Committee recommends $140,237,000 

for other staff offices. The Committee recommendation does not include the requested funding for eight new employees for the office 

of chief counsel and one new employee for the security and hazmat 

office, as the current vacant positions are 10 and 38, respectively. 

Further, the FAA states the security and hazmat office is under 

tight hiring restrictions and plans to do limited hiring in the 4th 

quarter of fiscal year 2005. The Committee recommendation does 

not provide funding for four new employees in the Administrator’s 

office. Although the office has just one vacancy, the budget documents did not provide any justification of need for this request. The 

Committee is willing to reconsider this with adequate and timely 

justification. The Committee provides an additional $100,000 for a 

new FTE in the office of government and industry affairs, for a 

total funding level of $1,396,000. 

ACCOUNT-WIDE ADJUSTMENTS

Personnel compensation and benefits.—The recommendation includes a reduction of $8,000,000 in agency-wide personnel compensation and benefits costs due to budget constraints. 

Unfilled executive positions.—The Committee recommends a reduction of $5,000,000, reflecting the unfilled roster of 19 executive 

positions in the agency, including 15 which were not under active 

recruitment. Past hearing records indicate that, at any given time, 

the agency is likely to have between 10 and 20 unfilled executive 

positions. For an agency with 176 executive positions, this level of 

openings may not be problematic. However, it does indicate excess 

costs are being budgeted for positions that are not likely to be filled 

in the entirety of the fiscal year. 

Working capital fund costs.—The recommendation allows 

$23,879,000 for working capital fund costs, a reduction of 

$1,500,000 below the budget estimate. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Manned auxiliary flight service stations.—The bill includes the 

limitation requested in the President’s budget prohibiting funds 

from being used to operate a manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous United States. The FAA budget includes no 

funding to operate such stations during fiscal year 2006. 

Second career training program.—Once again this year, the bill 

includes a prohibition on 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. 

Sunday premium pay.—The bill retains a provision begun in fiscal year 1995 which prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium pay except in those cases where the individual actually 

worked on a Sunday. The statute governing Sunday premium pay 

(5 U.S.C. 5546(a)) is very clear: ‘‘An employee who performs work 

during a regularly scheduled 8–hour period of service which is not 

overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title a part of 

which is performed on Sunday is entitled to . . . premium pay at 

a rate equal to 25 percent of his rate of basic pay.’’ Disregarding 

the plain meaning of the statute and previous Comptroller General 

decisions, however, in Armitage v. United States, the Federal CirVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
20 

cuit Court held in 1993 that employees need not actually perform 

work on a Sunday to receive premium pay. The FAA was required 

immediately to provide back pay totaling $37,000,000 for time 

scheduled but not actually worked between November 1986 and 

July 1993. Without this provision, the FAA would be liable for significant unfunded liabilities, to be financed by the agency’s annual 

operating budget. This provision is identical to that in effect for fiscal years 1995 through 2005. 

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. 

Nonprofit safety standard setting organization.—The Committee 

retains a provision that allows the use of funds to enter into an 

agreement with a nonprofit standard setting organization to develop safety standards. 

Aeronautical charting and cartography.—The bill maintains the 

provision which prohibits funds in this Act from being used to conduct aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities 

through the working capital fund (WCF). Public Law 106–181 authorized the transfer of these activities from the Department of 

Commerce to the FAA, a move which the Committee supported. 

The Committee believes this work should continue to be conducted 

by the FAA, and not administratively delegated to the WCF. 

Store gift cards and gift certificates.—The bill maintains the limitation in effect since fiscal year 2004 prohibiting FAA from using 

funds to purchase store gift cards or gift certificates through a government-issued credit card. This provision responds to abuses documented by the U.S. Government Accountability Office last year. 

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $2,519,680,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 2,448,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,053,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +533,320,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +605,000,000 

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 $3,053,000,000 

for this program, an increase of $533,320,000 (21 percent) above 

the level provided for fiscal year 2005 and 605,000,000 above the 

budget estimate. The bill provides that of the total amount recommended, $2,618,000,000 is available for obligation until September 30, 2008, and $435,000,000 (the amount for personnel and 

related expenses) is available until September 30, 2006. These obligation availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts. 

21 

ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

The bill includes $234,310,000 for engineering development, test, 

and evaluation activities. 

Advanced technology development and prototyping.—The Committee recommends $41,460,000, to be distributed as follows: 

Amount 

Runway incursion .................................................................................. $7,100,000 

Aviation system capacity improvement ............................................... 6,500,000 

Separation standards ............................................................................ 2,500,000 

GA/vertical flight technology ................................................................ 1,500,000 

Operational concept validation ............................................................. 3,000,000 

NAS requirements ................................................................................. 800,000 

Safer skies .............................................................................................. 3,400,000 

NAS safety assessment ......................................................................... 1,500,000 

GPS anti-jam technologies .................................................................... 1,000,000 

Wake turbulence .................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Airspace management laboratory ......................................................... 7,000,000 

Lithium technologies to mitigate ASR ................................................. 1,000,000 

Airport-related research ........................................................................ 1,000,000 

Wind profiling and weather research Juneau ..................................... 3,160,000 

Total ............................................................................................. 41,460,000 

Airport-related research.—Of the funds provided, $1,000,000 is 

for FAA to enter into cooperative agreements with non-profit research entities to conduct research to develop safer, more durable, 

more cost-effective airfield pavements. 

GPS anti-jam technology.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to continue the GPS anti-jam program to reduce 

or remove GPS system vulnerabilities. 

San Francisco International Airport.—The Committee commends 

the Federal Aviation Administration for working cooperatively with 

San Francisco International Airport (SFO), airlines, pilots, and air 

traffic controllers to address policy and safety issues related to implementation of a precision runway monitoring/simultaneous offset 

instrument approach (PRM/SOIA) procedure that has resulted in 

additional capacity when weather conditions warrant. 

Safe flight 21.—The Committee recommends $42,950,000, an increase of $10,000,000 above the budget request. The additional 

funds are to augment ADS-B funding: $500,000 is for certification 

of a NAS-wide system; $6,000,000 is needed for installation of 20 

pre-production 1090 ground-based stations in the contiguous 

United States; and $330,000 is for technical program support. 

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

The Committee recommends $1,588,286,000 for programs and activities designed to establish, replace, modify, or otherwise improve 

air traffic control facilities and equipment. 

Terminal automation modernization program.—The Committee 

has provided a total of $64,300,000 for the terminal automation 

modernization program, $25,000,000 over the budget request. Of 

the funds provided, an increase of $10,000,000 is for FAA to continue to provide updated software to the busiest facilities in the 

National Airspace System (NAS), and $15,000,000 is provided to 

replace aging equipment at Minneapolis and St. Louis. The budget 

request included replacement at Chicago and Denver; however, 

Minneapolis and St. Louis are two other large, critical sites identiVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
22 

fied by the DOT IG where current displays used by controllers are 

suffering from significant reliability problems. 

The Committee remains concerned that FAA has not yet provided reliable cost estimates and timetables for completing Standard Terminal Automation Replacement (STARS) program as directed. Delays and indecision with STARS are now directly impacting the NAS. FAA has deferred action on replacing aging displays 

at the 4 large critical sites addressed above for too long. According 

to a recent report by the Inspector General, these aging displays 

could have serious safety implications. 

The Committee is disappointed that FAA will not make a decision regarding how to complete terminal modernization this summer as expected. Rather, FAA will approve only a handful of sites 

and, once again, defer important decisions about many facilities 

that manage aircraft in terminal airspace. Assuming FAA can take 

action to replace aging displays at large sites as directed by the 

Committee and that STARS deployments continue at medium sites, 

questions and options then focus squarely on the small sites. 

Beyond fiscal year 2006, decisions need to be made about the 

best way to address these smaller sites. All of FAA’s smaller sites— 

which number over 100—have a shortcoming with respect to aging 

displays, not the automation platform. While the display problems 

are not yet approaching the levels experienced by the larger sites, 

decisions about what to do cannot be postponed indefinitely. The 

Committee urges FAA to make a decision about these sites that is 

based on an open, transparent, and competitive process. 

Terminal air traffic control facilities replacement.—The Committee recommends $130,000,000 for the replacement of aged air 

traffic control towers. 

Instrument landing system establishment.—The recommendation 

includes $30,000,000 for establishment of instrument landing systems (ILSs) nationwide. 

Voice recorder replacement program.—The Committee recommends $7,000,000, an increase of $1,500,000 above the budget 

estimate. 

GPS approaches.—The Committee understands that the fiscal 

year 2006 budget request for the wide area augmentation system 

includes funds for the development of additional approaches and 

flight procedures at the nation’s non-part 139 certified airports. 

The Committee supports this effort, and has provided $110,000,000 

for WAAS, an increase of $10,000,000 above the budget request. 

Additional funds are provided to publish WAAS approaches at airports without an existing ILS approach. 

Integrated control and monitoring system.—The Committee recommends $3,500,000 for continued procurement and installation of 

the integrated control and monitoring system (ICMS). FAA is currently using ICMS in Denver, Seattle, Newark, Minneapolis, Salt 

Lake City, and Phoenix. This system would offer significant benefits to other operational evolution plan (OEP) airports as well as 

others with substantial landing aids and lighting systems. The 

Committee expects the agency to obligate these funds within six 

months of enactment, and to install such systems at airports with 

the highest need. 

Transponder landing system.—The recommendation includes 

$20,000,000 for the transponder landing system (TLS). 

23 

Distance Measuring Equipment. The Committee recommends 

$4,000,000 for distance measuring equipment, an increase of 

$2,800,000 over the budget request. 

Loran-C.—The Committee recommendation includes $25,000,000 

for continued modernization of the Loran-C navigation system. The 

Committee directs that none of these funds be reprogrammed except through the Congressional reprogramming process. 

Houston area air traffic system (HAATS).—The Committee recommends $10,200,000, the same as the budget estimate for 

HAATS. 

Approach lighting system improvement program.—The recommendation includes $25,000,000 for the approach lighting system improvement program (ALSIP). 

Medium-intensity approach lighting system replacement 

(MALSR).—The Committee provides $5,000,000 for the MALSR nationwide program, and recommends that FAA continue to procure 

the latest MALSR equipment that has been approved for use in the 

national airspace system and in support of small business initiatives. 

NON-AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

The Committee recommends $138,100,000 for programs to replace, modify, or otherwise improve facilities and equipment not directly related to the provision of air traffic control services in the 

national airspace system (NAS). 

MISSION SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $266,703,100 for mission support 

activities. 

Frequency and spectrum engineering.—The Committee recommendation includes $8,600,000 for frequency and spectrum engineering, and increase of $2,500,000 over the budget request. The 

additional funds are for the NAS interference, detection, location, 

and mitigation (IDLM) project. This project will enable FAA to 

more effectively identify radio signals interfering with air traffic 

control functions and resolve them quickly. Over the past few 

years, FAA has recorded an average of over 1,500 interference 

events per year. 

Center for advanced systems development.—The recommendation 

provides $86,000,000 for the center for advanced systems development, an increase of $16,400,000 above the budget estimate, and 

equal to the fiscal year 2005 level. 

PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $435,000,000 for personnel and related expenses. This appropriation finances the installation and 

commissioning of new equipment and modernization of FAA facilities. 

BILL LANGUAGE

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

24 

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $129,880,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 130,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 130,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +120,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides funding for long-term research, engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic control system and to raise the level of aviation safety, as authorized 

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

and development needed to establish or modify federal air regulations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $130,000,000, an increase of 

$120,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as 

the President’s budget request. 

A table showing the fiscal year 2005 enacted level, the fiscal year 

2006 budget estimate, and the Committee recommendation follows: 

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT 

Program Fiscal year 2006 estimate 

Committee recommended 

Improve Commercial Aviation Safety .......................................................................... $88,932 $88,932 

Fire research and safety .................................................................................... 6,244 6,244 

Propulsion and fuel systems .............................................................................. 4,049 4,049 

Advanced materials/structural safety ................................................................ 2,613 2,613 

Atmospheric hazards/digital system safety ....................................................... 3,441 3,441 

Aging aircraft ..................................................................................................... 19,007 19,007 

Aircraft catastrophic failure prevention ............................................................. 3,340 3,340 

Flightdeck safety/systems integration ................................................................ 8,181 8,181 

Aviation safety risk analysis .............................................................................. 4,932 4,932 

ATC/AF human factors ........................................................................................ 9,654 9,654 

Aeromedical research ......................................................................................... 6,889 6,889 

Weather research ................................................................................................ 20,582 20,582 

Improve Efficiency of the ATC System ........................................................................ 20,396 20,396 

Joint program and development office .............................................................. 18,100 18,100 

Wake turbulence ................................................................................................. 2,296 2,296 

Reduce Environmental Impacts: ......................................................................... 16,008 16,008 

Environment and energy ..................................................................................... 16,008 16,008 

Mission Support ........................................................................................................... 4,664 4,664 

System planning and resource mgmt ................................................................ 1,271 1,271 

Technical laboratory facilities ............................................................................ 3,393 3,393 

Total ........................................................................................................... 130,000 130,000

Joint Planning and Development Office.—The bill includes 

$18,100,000, as requested, for FAA’s contribution to the multiagency Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO). This office 

involves the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and Homeland 

Security, FAA, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in developing a national plan for the transformation of air 

transportation. This plan is expected to establish a vision for the 

future air transportation system, set national aerospace goals, and 

provide a forum to engage industry and customer input. It is an adVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
25 

visory committee as defined in the Federal Advisory Committee 

Act. 

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obliga- tions 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................... $2,800,000,000 ($3,472,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................... 3,300,000,000 (3,000,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................... 3,600,000,000 (3,600,000,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................. +800,000,000 (+128,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ +300,000,000 (+600,000,000) 

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. This funding provides for liquidation of obligation incurred pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on obligations for grants-inaid for airport planning and development, noise compatibility and 

planning, the military airport program, reliever airports, airport 

program administration, and other authorized activities. This is 

$300,000,000 above the amount requested in the President’s budget 

and $800,000,000 above the level enacted for fiscal year 2005. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

The bill includes a limitation on obligations of $3,600,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2006. This is $600,000,000 above the President’s budget 

request and $128,000,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. 

DISCRETIONARY GRANTS

Within the overall obligation limitation in this bill, funding of 

$973,112,398 is available for discretionary grants to airports. 

ADMINISTRATION

The bill provides that, within the overall obligation limitation, $81,346,000 is available for administration of the airports program 

by the FAA. This level includes $10,000,000 for the airport cooperative research pilot program, as requested. 

Letter of Intent.—The Committee understands that the Panama 

City-Bay County International Airport Authority has applied for a 

letter of intent (LOI) for the construction of a new airport. According to the authority, two-thirds of the cost of this proposed project 

will be funded from non-federal sources. The committee encourages 

the FAA to promptly consider this application. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Runway incursion prevention systems and devices.—Consistent 

with the provisions of Public Law 106–181 and the fiscal year 2004 

and 2005 Appropriations Acts, the bill allows funds under this limiVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
26 

tation to be used for airports to procure and install runway incursion prevention systems and devices. 

Small community air service pilot program.—The bill specifies that $20,000,000 of the total amount limited is available to continue the small community air service pilot program. This is the 

same funding level as enacted since fiscal year 2002. 

The Committee recommendation includes a rescission of contract 

authorization of $469,000,000. The rescission is from contract authority in fiscal year 2005 that ‘‘popped-up’’ above the obligation 

limitation available for that fiscal year. Therefore, this rescission 

has no effect on any grants-in-aid program. The proposed rescission 

is a result of section 107 of AIR–21 (P.L. 106–181). This section 

specified that, in the event appropriations for the facilities and 

equipment program were less than authorized in a given fiscal 

year, additional contract authorization would automatically be 

made available for the grants-in-aid for airports program. The 

Committee understands that the legislative committees intended to 

provide flexibility in meeting the funding guarantees, by allowing 

the Appropriations Committees to meet the guarantee by providing 

a single, combined total of funding for the F&E and grants-in-aid 

programs rather than hitting the precise authorized amounts for 

each as specified in the authorization Act. Because the Appropriations Committees are not provided an allocation of budget authority for the grants-in-aid program, section 107 provided automatic 

budget authority for this purpose. The Committee continues to disagree with the Congressional Budget Offices’ scoring of this provision. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Section 101. The Committee retains a provision requiring FAA to 

accept landing systems, lighting systems, and associated equipment 

procured by airports, subject to certain criteria. 

Section 102. The Committee retains, with modification, a provision limiting the number of technical workyears at the Center for 

Advanced Aviation Systems Development. The modification raises 

the limitation from 350 in fiscal year 2005 to 375 in fiscal year 

2006. 

Section 103. 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 104. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting funds 

to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules at Teterboro 

Airport, Teterboro, New Jersey. 

Section 105. The Committee continues a provision extending the 

current terms and conditions of FAA’s aviation insurance program, 

commonly known as the ‘‘war risk insurance’’ program, for one additional year, from December 31, 2005 to December 31, 2006. Although the underlying program is authorized until March 2008, 

certain provisions including premium price caps were set to expire 

at the end of this calendar year. The Committee recommendation 

preserves the status quo under this program, a savings of 

$80,000,000 from the budget estimate. Savings accrue because the 

bill’s provisions result in additional revenue from insurance preVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
27 

miums, which were assumed to be zero in the budget estimate for 

fiscal year 2006. 

Section 106. The bill retains a provision the prohibits funds for 

engineering work related to an additional runway at Louis Armstrong International Airport in New Orleans, Louisiana. 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides financial 

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

States Code and other supporting legislation provide authority for 

the various activities of the FHWA. Funding is provided by contract authority, with program levels established by annual limitations on obligations set in Appropriations Acts. 

The most recent long-term surface transportation authorization 

act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA–21), 

expired on September 30, 2003. Since that time, Congress has 

passed several short-term extension bills that have provided additional contract authority for the FHWA. The current extension will 

expire on June 30, 2005. Because reauthorization actions have not 

yet been completed, the Committee has provided funding levels 

consistent with the House-passed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (TEA–LU), even though the actual structure of the federal 

highway program in fiscal year 2006 is unknown at this time. 

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... ($343,728,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... (367,638,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (359,529,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. (+15,801,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ (¥8,109,000) 1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

This limitation controls spending for the salaries and expenses of 

the FHWA required to conduct and administer the federal-aid highway program and most other federal highway programs. The Committee recommends a limitation of $359,529,000. This 

level is sufficient to fund six additional full time equivalent staff 

years (FTEs) to oversee major projects, for an overall agency total 

of 2,430 FTEs. The recommended level assumes the following adjustment to the budget request: 

Reduce funding for adjustments to agency operations funding ......... ¥$8,109,000 

Reductions from the budget request.—The Committee reduces 

funding for the line item identified in the budget request as being 

for increased administrative funding in support of oversight and 

stewardship activities (¥$8,109,000) due to inadequate justification. The Committee is willing to reconsider this reduction should 

the FHWA provide adequate documentation to support this funding 

increase. 

Staff for oversight of major projects.—The Committee provides $603,000 for 6 FTEs for oversight of major projects as requested by 

the administration. The Inspector General has recommended, and 

the Committee agrees, that the FHWA needs to have better overVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
28 

sight of its program, specifically the major projects. Major projects, 

with a total cost of $10,000,000 or more, have a history of significant cost overruns and schedule slippage, as seen again recently 

with reports on quality of work issues relating to water leaks in the 

Interstate 93 tunnels of the central artery project in Boston and 

poor analysis and inadequate disclosure of cost estimates relating 

to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in California. 

LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

This limitation controls spending for the transportation research 

and technology contract programs of the FHWA. In prior years, it 

has included a number of contract programs including intelligent 

transportation systems, surface transportation research, technology 

deployment, training and education, and university transportation 

research. 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $462,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 485,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +22,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +485,000,000 

1 An unspecified amount for fiscal year 2006 is assumed within the federal-aid obligation limitation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation includes an obligation limitation for transportation research of $485,000,000, which is consistent with the 

House-passed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, 

TEA–LU. Because reauthorization actions have not yet been completed, the Committee has not provided a break out of the transportation research program by activities since this pending legislation is likely to change the structure of the existing program. Even 

so, the Committee provides a limitation on the research program 

as has been past practice. 

BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS

Under the obligation limitation of the FHWA and within the sublimitation for transportation research, the Committee provides 

$33,000,000 for the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS). As 

stated previously, due to the lack of a surface transportation authorization act for fiscal year 2006, the Committee has funded programs at a level that is consistent with the House-passed reauthorization legislation, TEA–LU. Also, since passage of the Norman Y. 

Mineta Research and Special Programs Improvement Act, Public 

Law 108–426, on November 30, 2004, BTS is a part of the Research 

and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) within the department. Accordingly, additional information regarding BTS is included in the RITA section of this report. 

29 

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obligation 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ............. $35,000,000,000 1 ($34,422,400,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ........... 35,000,000,000 (34,700,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill ........................ 36,000,000,000 (36,287,100,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ...... +1,000,000,000 (+1,864,700,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 .... +1,000,000,000 (+1,587,100,000) 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

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

and responsibility for maintenance, repair and new construction of 

roads. State highway departments have the authority to initiate 

federal-aid projects subject to FHWA approval of plans, specifications, and cost estimates. The federal government provides financial support for construction and repair through matching grants, 

the terms of which vary with the type of road. 

There are almost four million miles of public roads in the United 

States and approximately 577,000 bridges. The federal government 

provides grants to states to assist in financing the construction and 

preservation of about 958,000 miles (24 percent) of these roads, 

which represents an extensive Interstate system plus key feeder 

and collector routes. Highways eligible for federal aid carry about 

85 percent of total U.S. highway traffic. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation of $36,000,000,000. This is the required amount to pay the outstanding obligations of the various highway programs at levels provided in this Act and prior appropriations Acts. 

The Committee has included bill language, as requested by the 

administration, that allows the secretary to charge and collect fees 

from the applicant for a direct loan, guaranteed loan, or line of 

credit to cover the cost of the financial and legal analyses performed on behalf of the department. The fees so collected are not 

subject to any obligation limitation or the limitation on administrative expenses set for the TIFIA program under section 188 of title 

23, United States Code. 

The bill includes language limiting fiscal year 2006 federal-aid 

highways obligations to $36,287,100,000, an increase of 

$1,864,700,000 from the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and an increase of $1,587,100,000 from the fiscal year 2006 budget request. 

The Committee sets, through the annual appropriations process, 

an overall limitation on the total contract authority that can be obligated under the federal-aid highway program in a given year. The 

Committee also provides direction and other guidance regarding 

some of the programs that operate under this overall limitation. 

With regard to fiscal year 2006, the Committee finds itself in a position where the existing authorizing legislation has expired and no 

30 

program authority extends into the coming fiscal year, yet the 

House has passed its version of a multi-year surface transportation 

reauthorization bill. However, many of the details regarding the 

scope and structure of the federal highway program are likely to 

be reshaped by the pending actions of the House and Senate conferees. Therefore, to the extent feasible, the Committee has honored the overall funding levels set by TEA–LU but has remained 

silent regarding the underlying program structure since these details are unknown at this time. 

For years, federal-aid highways funds have been made available 

to the states through a mix of apportioned programs, which are distributed using a formula provided in law, and allocated programs, 

which are distributed based on criteria set in law and allow for 

some discretion on the part of the secretary in selecting recipients. 

As stated previously, the structure of the federal-aid highway program for fiscal year 2006 is unknown at this time due to the lack 

of authorizing legislation. However, many of the apportioned programs that currently exist are likely to continue and, therefore, the 

descriptions of major highway programs that follow are based on 

current law: 

National highway system.—The ISTEA of 1991 authorized—and 

the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 subsequently established—the National Highway System (NHS). This 

163,000-mile road system serving major population centers, international border crossings, intermodal transportation facilities and 

major travel destinations, is the culmination of years of effort by 

many organizations, both public and private, to identify routes of 

national significance. It includes all Interstate routes, other urban 

and rural principal arterials, the defense strategic highway network, and major strategic highway connectors, and is estimated to 

carry up to 76 percent of commercial truck traffic and 44 percent 

of all vehicular traffic. A state may choose to transfer up to 50 percent of its NHS funds to the surface transportation program category. If the secretary approves, 100 percent may be transferred. 

The federal share of the NHS is 80 percent, with an availability period of four years. 

Interstate maintenance.—The 46,567-mile Dwight D. Eisenhower 

National System of Interstate and Defense Highways retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program finances projects to 

rehabilitate, restore, resurface and reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges, interchanges, and over-crossings 

along existing Interstate routes is also an eligible activity if it does 

not add capacity other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lanes. 

All remaining federal funding to complete the initial construction 

of the Interstate system has been provided through previous highway legislation. TEA–21 and the extension acts provide flexibility 

to states in fully utilizing remaining unobligated balances of prior 

Interstate construction authorizations. States with no remaining 

work to complete the Interstate system may transfer any surplus 

Interstate construction funds to their Interstate maintenance program. States with remaining completion work on Interstate gaps or 

open-to-traffic segments may relinquish Interstate construction 

fund eligibility for the work and transfer the federal share of the 

cost to their Interstate maintenance program. 

31 

Surface transportation program.—The surface transportation program (STP) is a flexible program that may be used by the states 

and localities for any roads (including NHS) that are not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors. These roads are 

collectively referred to as federal-aid highways. Bridge projects paid 

with STP funds are not restricted to federal-aid highways but may 

be on any public road. Transit capital projects are also eligible 

under this program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented by the transfer of funds from other programs and by minimum guarantee funds under TEA–21 and the extension acts, 

which may be used as if they were STP funds. Once distributed to 

the states, STP funds must be used according to the following percentages: 10 percent for safety construction; 10 percent for transportation enhancement; 50 percent divided among areas of over 

200,000 population and remaining areas of the state; and, 30 percent for any area of the state. Areas of 5,000 population or less are 

guaranteed an amount based on previous funding, and 15 percent 

of the amounts reserved for these areas may be spent on rural 

minor collectors. The federal share for the STP program is 80 percent with a 4-year availability period. 

Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program.—This program 

provides assistance for bridges on public roads including a discretionary set-aside for high cost bridges and for the seismic retrofit 

of bridges. Fifty percent of a state’s bridge funds may be transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the amount of any such transfer 

is deducted from national bridge needs used in the program’s apportionment formula for the following year. 

Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program.— 

The congestion mitigation and air quality improvement (CMAQ) 

program provides funds to states to improve air quality in non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide range of transportation 

activities are eligible, provided DOT, after consultation with EPA, 

determines they are likely to help meet national ambient air quality standards. TEA–21 provides greater flexibility to engage publicprivate partnerships, and expands and clarifies eligibilities to include programs to reduce extreme cold starts, maintenance areas, 

and particulate matter (PM–10) nonattainment and maintenance 

areas. If a state has no non-attainment or maintenance areas, the 

funds may be used as if they were STP funds. 

On-road and off-road demonstration projects may be appropriate 

candidates for funding under the CMAQ program. Both sectors are 

critical for satisfying the purposes of the CMAQ program, including 

reducing regional emissions and verifying new mobile source control techniques. 

Federal lands highways.—This program provides funding 

through four major categories—Indian reservation roads, parkways 

and park roads, public lands highways (which incorporates the previous forest highways category), and federally-owned public roads 

providing access to or within the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

TEA–21 also established a new program for improving deficient 

bridges on Indian reservation roads. 

Minimum guarantee.—Under TEA–21 and the extension acts, 

after the computation of funds for major federal-aid programs, additional funds are distributed to ensure that each state receives an 

additional amount based on equity considerations. This minimum 

32 

guarantee provision ensures that each state will have a return of 

90.5 percent on its share of contributions to the highway account 

of the Highway Trust Fund. To achieve the minimum guarantee 

each fiscal year, $2.8 billion nationally is available to the states as 

though they are STP funds (except that requirements related to 

set-asides for transportation enhancements, safety, and sub-state 

allocations do not apply), and any remaining amounts are distributed among core highway programs. 

Appalachian development highway system.—This program makes 

funds available to construct highways and access roads under section 201 of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. 

Under TEA–21 and the extension acts, funding is authorized at 

$450,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999–2004; is available until 

expended; and distributed based on the latest available cost-to-complete estimate. 

Emergency relief.—This program provides for the repair and reconstruction of federal-aid highways and federally-owned roads 

which have suffered serious damage as the result of natural disasters or catastrophic failures. Emergency relief (ER) funds can be 

used only for emergency repairs to restore essential highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage resulting from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or to protect the remaining facility 

and make permanent repairs. If ER funds are exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation may borrow funds from other highway 

programs. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

Section 110. The Committee includes a provision that distributes 

obligation authority among federal-aid highways programs. 

Section 111. The Committee continues a provision that credits 

funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the 

federal-aid highways account. 

Section 112. The Committee continues a provision allowing Nevada and Arizona to reimburse debt service payment on the Bypass 

Bridge at Hoover Dam project with future apportionments, in accordance with title 23, United States Code. 

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The primary mission of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is to improve the safety of commercial vehicle 

operations on our nation’s highways. To accomplish this mission, 

the FMCSA is focused on reducing the number and severity of 

large truck crashes. Agency resources and activities contribute to 

ensuring safety in commercial vehicle operations through enforcement, including the use of stronger enforcement measures against 

safety violators; expedited safety regulation; technology innovation; 

improvements in information systems; training; and improvements 

to commercial driver’s license testing, record keeping, and sanctions. To accomplish these activities, the FMCSA works closely 

with federal, state, and local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier industry, highway safety organizations, and individual citizens. 

In addition, the FMCSA has the responsibility to ensure that Mexican commercial vehicles, entering the U.S. in accordance with the 

33 

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), meet all U.S. 

hazardous material and safety regulations. 

The FMCSA’s scope was expanded in fiscal year 2003 by the 

U.S.A. Patriot Act (P.L. 107–56), which called for new security 

measures. In addition, beginning in fiscal year 2002, Appropriations Acts (P.L. 107–87, P.L. 108–7, P.L. 108–199, and P.L. 108– 

447) have funded border enforcement and safety related activities 

associated with implementation of NAFTA, and activities associated with permitting of hazardous materials. 

Since the most recent long-term surface transportation authorization act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century 

(TEA–21), expired on September 30, 2003, Congress has passed 

several short-term extension bills that have provided additional 

contract authority for the FMCSA. The current extension will expire on June 30, 2005. Because reauthorization actions have not 

yet been completed, the Committee has provided funding levels 

consistent with the House-passed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (TEA–LU). 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................... $257,547,000 1 ($255,487,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................... 233,000,000 (233,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................... 215,000,000 (215,000,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................. ¥42,547,000 (¥40,487,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ ¥18,000,000 (¥18,000,000) 1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

This limitation controls spending for salaries and operating expenses and for motor carrier research by the FMCSA. In recent 

years, the Committee has provided funding for a few grant programs under this administrative account because no flexibility existed to fund these priorities elsewhere. However, consistent with 

TEA–LU, the Committee is providing a limitation solely on the administrative expenses of the agency, including research and technology activities, in fiscal year 2006. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $215,000,000 in liquidating cash for 

the operations and research activities of the FMCSA. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 

$215,000,000 for the operating expenses of and motor carrier safety 

research by the FMCSA. This is a level consistent with the Housepassed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, TEA–LU. 

This funding level represents a reduction of $40,487,000 below the 

34 

fiscal year 2005 enacted level. However, the fiscal year 2005 level 

included funding for several grant programs that are not being continued in this account in fiscal year 2006 because it is expected 

that these grant programs will be funded under the national motor 

carrier safety program in the next surface transportation authorization. 

The recommended level assumes the following adjustments from the $205,051,000 that was identified in the FMCSA’s budget justification as being the fiscal year 2005 enacted level for operations 

and programs, excluding grant programs: 

Adjustments to base ........................................................................... +$5,682,000 

New quality assurance and regulatory evaluation programs ......... +1,800,000 

Promote transportation specialists in field to GS–13 ...................... +838,000 

Additional funding to address backlog of enforcement cases ......... +500,000 

Increased funding to research and technology programs ................ +941,000 

Increased funding for information management activities ............. +1,188,000 

Undistributed reduction ..................................................................... ¥1,000,000 

A discussion of program funding levels follow: 

Adjustments to base.—The Committee provides an increase of $5,682,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level for required pay 

raises, GSA rent, working capital fund adjustments, and inflation, 

as was requested in the budget submission. 

Quality assurance and regulatory evaluation programs.—The 

Committee provides $1,800,000 for three additional federal full 

time equivalent staff years (FTEs) and the associated contract support for a new quality assurance program and a new regulatory 

evaluation program. 

Field transportation specialists.—Consistent with the budget re- quest, the Committee provides an additional $838,000 to promote 

a large number of transportation specialists in the field to GS–13 

commensurate with the level of responsibility that these program 

managers are performing. 

Backlog of enforcement cases.—The FMCSA requested a $500,000 

increase to address the agency’s backlog of enforcement cases. The 

Committee provides this funding as requested. 

Research and technology.—The Committee provides $9,500,000 

for research and technology, a reduction of $1,453,000 below the 

budget request and an increase of $941,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 level. 

New entrant program.—This Committee provided funding for this 

program for the first time in fiscal year 2004 and, in a little over 

one year, over 40 states have implemented a state new entrant program. Consistent with this success, the Committee continues the 

program structure that limits federal responsibility to program 

oversight and to respond to the rare case where a state does not 

have the authority or ability to implement the program by managing third party contracts. Therefore, the Committee denies the 

request for the additional $13,700,000 and the 20 additional FTEs 

to implement an expanded federal role in the new entrant program. 

Information management.—The Committee provides $42,370,000 

for information management, an increase of $1,188,000 over last 

year, but $3,334,000 below the budget request. 

Education and outreach.—The Committee does not support the 

FMCSA’s proposed reduction to the agency’s outreach and education programs. As such, the Committee directs that no less than 

35 

$2,500,000 of the funds provided be used for outreach and education. Within the funding provided, $500,000 is provided to continue a program to increase the commercial motor vehicle safety 

belt usage rate; $100,000 is provided to continue the ‘‘safety is good 

business’’ program; $150,000 is provided to continue the motorcoach transportation service selection, and $250,000 is provided for 

the household goods outreach program. This funding level also includes $100,000 for the ‘‘share the road safely’’ program that had 

previously been funded under the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA). In addition, the Committee directs the 

NHTSA to return to the FMCSA the one FTE that had been detailed from FMCSA to help oversee the program. 

For each of these initiatives and all other outreach initiatives, 

the FMCSA must first develop a goal, message, and coherent and 

explicit program strategy that clearly and directly link FMCSA’s 

outreach and education program initiatives to each program’s goal. 

The FMCSA shall provide information regarding the goals and 

strategies to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

by February 10, 2006. The Committee encourages the FMCSA to 

combine its outreach efforts with other interactions it has with 

motor carrier companies, such as security sensitivity visits, compliance reviews, and safety audits. Consistent with last year, the Committee provides $375,000 for 

FMCSA’s telephone hotline. 

Commercial vehicle analysis reporting system.—The Committee 

directs that up to $6,800,000 of the funds provided shall be available for the FMCSA to make grants to, or enter into contracts with, 

states, local government, or other persons for the commercial vehicle analysis reporting system. 

Undistributed reduction.—An undistributed reduction of 

$1,000,000 is also included to control the growth of the agency’s administrative expenses and to keep the fiscal year 2006 funding 

level within the levels set by TEA–LU. All other requested increases not specifically cited in this report as being approved are 

denied. 

NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obliga- tions 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................... $190,000,000 1 ($188,480,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................... 232,000,000 (232,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................... 286,000,000 (286,000,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................. +96,000,000 (+97,520,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ +54,000,000 (+54,000,000) 1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

The FMCSA’s national motor carrier safety program (NMCSP) 

was authorized by TEA–21, amended by the Motor Carrier Safety 

Improvement Act of 1999, and continued into 2004 and 2005 by a 

series of short-term extension acts. Under the previous authorizing 

legislation, this program consisted of two major areas: the motor 

36 

carrier safety assistance program (MCSAP) and the information 

systems and strategic safety initiatives (ISSSI) program. MCSAP 

provides grants and project funding to states to develop and implement national programs for the uniform enforcement of federal and 

state rules and regulations concerning motor carrier safety. The 

major objective of this program is to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving commercial motor vehicles. Grants are 

made to qualified states for the development of programs to enforce 

the federal motor carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The 

basic program is targeted at roadside vehicle safety inspections of 

both interstate and intrastate commercial motor vehicle traffic. 

ISSSI provides funds to develop and enhance data-related motor 

carrier programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $286,000,000 in liquidating cash for 

this program. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 

$286,000,000 for the national motor carrier safety program. This is 

a level consistent with the House-passed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, TEA–LU, and is $97,520,000 greater than 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 

Because reauthorization actions have not yet been completed, the 

Committee has not provided a break out of the various motor carrier safety grant programs that would be covered by this obligation 

limitation since this pending legislation is likely to change the 

structure of the existing program. Even so, the Committee provides 

a limitation on the total amount of contract authority that can be 

obligated in fiscal year 2006, regardless of the form these grant 

programs take. 

Under TEA–LU, the Secretary has the discretion to deduct up to 

$15,000,000 of the funds made available for motor carrier safety 

grants and use it for audits of new entrant motor carriers. The interim final rule for the new entrant safety assurance process was 

published on May 13, 2002, with an effective date of January 2003. 

This rule requires all new entrants to pass a safety audit within 

the first 18 months of operations in order to receive permanent 

DOT registration. The Committee notes the positive results that 

have been gained so far by these audits. Therefore, should a reauthorization bill get signed into law that provides this discretionary 

authority to the secretary, the Committee strongly urges the department to use this authority to fund the new entrant program to 

the full extent allowable. 

In addition, the secretary is encouraged to use the funding designated for high priority activities and projects under section 

31104(f)(2)(A) of title 49, United States Code, to supplement the 

new entrant audit program as necessary to ensure that this program is sufficiently funded to conduct all of the required audits. 

Furthermore, although it is the intent of the Congress that this 

program be a grant program to the states, the secretary may withhold such funds from a state or local government that is unable to 

37 

use government employees to conduct new entrant motor carrier 

audits and may instead use contract audits in those jurisdictions. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 120. The Committee continues a provision subjecting 

funds appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions of section 350 of Public Law 107–87, including a requirement that the 

secretary submit a report on Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

was established as a separate organizational entity in the Department of Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the National 

Highway Safety Bureau, which previously had administered traffic 

and highway safety functions as an organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration. 

The majority of NHTSA’s programs are currently authorized 

under extensions to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 

Century (TEA–21). In the absence of a long-term surface transportation reauthorization, the Committee recommends funding 

NHTSA programs under the levels prescribed in the House-passed 

version of H.R. 3, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users. 

Budget justifications.—The Committee directs NHTSA in its fiscal year 2007 budget justification to provide information on all proposed changes from the prior year, including the rationale as to 

why particular programs are proposed for reductions or elimination. Additionally, to the maximum extent possible, NHTSA 

should include enacted fiscal year funding data along with request 

data so that the Committee can make appropriate comparisons. 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $231,122,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 231,367,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 231,367,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +245,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

1 Includes transfer of funds from FHWA. 

The Committee provides a total of $231,367,000 for operations 

and research, to be distributed as follows: 

Amount 

Salaries and benefits ....................................................................................................................................... $71,852,000 

Travel ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,336,000 

Operating expenses .......................................................................................................................................... 25,698,000 

Contract programs: 

Safety performance (rulemaking) ............................................................................................................ 11,518,000 

Safety assurance (enforcement) ............................................................................................................. 18,351,000 

Highway safety programs ........................................................................................................................ 46,345,000 

Research and analysis ............................................................................................................................ 72,086,000 

General administration ............................................................................................................................ 681,000 

Grant administration reimbursements ............................................................................................................. ¥16,500,000 

Total .................................................................................................................................................... 231,367,000 

38 

The recommendation makes the following adjustments to the 

budget request: 

Reduce transfer of funding for grant administration ...................... +$765,000 

Deny funding for harmonization of vehicle safety standards ......... ¥200,000 

Reduce funding for hydrogen fuel cell program ............................... ¥850,000 

Reduce travel ...................................................................................... ¥70,000 

Increase funding for the National EMS Information System ......... +355,000 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Administrative grant reimbursements.—The Committee recommends $16,500,000 for transfers for grant administration, which 

is $324,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and $765,000 below the 

request. The Committee does not believe a 6.4 percent increase, as 

proposed by NHTSA, is necessary in this tight budget climate and 

believes investing limited resources directly to improve highway 

safety is a much higher priority. 

Harmonization of vehicle safety standards and workforce planning and development.—Due to budget constraints, funding is not 

provided for the harmonization of vehicle safety standards initiative. 

HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS

Emergency medical services (EMS).—The Committee is aware 

that national databases exist that support police and fire services; 

however, there has been no similar national repository for EMS 

data. EMS systems vary in their ability to collect and use patient 

and EMS systems data to improve emergency medical response and 

patient care in post-crash events. Therefore, the Committee supported the inclusion of additional funds in fiscal year 2005 to support a National EMS Resource Center to assist state and local EMS 

systems in data collection and analysis. The Resource and Technical Assistance Center will provide technical assistance, including 

site visits, to state emergency medical services offices and local 

EMS agencies in converting to the National EMS Information System (NEMSIS). The next steps in NEMSIS development will be the 

full implementation of a national EMS database, full operation of 

a NEMSIS Technical Assistance Center, and eventual support of 

state data collection systems. The Committee has provided an additional $355,000 over the budget request to support continuation 

costs of the NEMSIS Technical Assistance Center. The Committee 

encourages NHSTA to continue towards full implementation of 

NEMSIS, which will provide data entry and reporting capabilities 

at the local EMS level, data collection and reporting capabilities at 

the state level, and a national EMS database to be housed at 

NHTSA with a Technical Assistance Center to assist EMS systems 

in data collection and use. One of the ultimate goals of NEMSIS 

is to reduce post-crash death and disability by developing a better 

understanding of current EMS response and performance in order 

that scarce resources can be best directed towards critical training, 

equipment, planning and other needs that can best improve patient 

outcomes. 

Next generation enhanced 9–1–1.—The Committee encourages 

NHTSA to develop a pilot project of ‘‘Next Generation’’ Enhanced 

9–1–1 (E9–1–1) activities, as defined by the ENHANCE 911 Act of 

2004. In particular, the Committee is interested in Internet ProVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
39 

tocol (IP) based E9–1–1 demonstration projects. The Committee expects that any demonstration would comply with industry standards as adopted by the National Emergency Number Association’s 

Future Path Plan and Next Generation E9–1–1 capabilities. 

RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

Vehicle Identification Numbers.—The Committee is aware that 

NHTSA and several states have been discussing collecting vehicle 

identification numbers (VIN) at crash sites. Such data would be extremely valuable to determine what safety technologies were on the 

vehicles involved in a crash and understand how those countermeasures performed. Therefore, the Committee strongly encourages 

NHTSA and state governments to collect and report these data in 

order to inform future crash avoidance and automobile safety technology development. 

Data collection and analysis.—The Committee supports NHTSA’s 

data collection and analysis activities, particularly as they relate to 

using sound science as the basis for any regulatory action. The 

Committee is concerned, however, that NHTSA may be duplicating 

effort in the multiple databases it maintains. Therefore, the Committee directs NHTSA to conduct a comprehensive review of data 

collection activities and report back to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate by March 31, 

2006 with respect to the specific types of data collected in each of 

its data collection and analysis programs and any opportunities to 

consolidate these data into a system or systems that require less 

annual operating support yet retain critical safety information. 

National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey.—The Committee provides $10,000,000 for the NMVCCS, which is an increase 

of $3,056,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The Committee strongly supports efforts to identify the factors that contributed to automobile accidents so that research and development activities for crash avoidance and crash survivability technologies can 

proceed quickly. The Committee urges NHTSA to move forward as 

expeditiously as possible in order to speed potential life-saving 

technologies to market. 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ............................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... $152,367,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ..................................................... +152,367,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................... +152,367,000 

The Committee recommends a total of $152,367,000 for operations and research funding from the general fund. The administration proposed to fund these programs through the highway trust 

fund, and therefore requested no general funds. 

40 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ($227,551,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... (227,367,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (75,000,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ..................................................... (¥149,820,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................... (¥152,551,000) 

1 Includes transfer from FHWA. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $75,000,000 from the highway trust 

fund for authorized activities associated with operations and research. 

NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ($3,571,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... (4,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (4,000,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ..................................................... (+429,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................... ............................

The National Driver Register facilitates the interstate exchange 

of driver licenses due to concerns regarding problem drivers whose 

licenses to drive have been suspended or revoked for cause. The 

Committee recommends $4,000,000 from the highway trust fund 

for operations and research activities associated with the national 

driver register, of which $3,075,000 is for program activities and 

$925,000 is for salaries and benefits. 

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................... $225,000,000 ($223,200,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................... 465,000,000 (465,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................... 551,000,000 (551,000,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................. +326,000,000 (+327,800,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ +86,000,000 (+86,000,000) 

TEA–LU reauthorizes three state grant programs: the highway 

safety program, the alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures 

grant program, and the occupant protection incentive grant proVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
41 

gram, and authorizes for the first time an additional four state 

grant programs: state traffic safety information systems improvement grants, high visibility enforcement grants, child safety and 

booster seat grants and motorcyclist safety grants. The Committee 

recommends $551,000,000 in liquidating cash, which is the same as 

the amount authorized in the House-passed version of TEA–LU. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

As in past years, the bill includes language limiting the obligations to be incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants 

programs. These obligations are currently set in extensions to 

TEA–21. For fiscal year 2006, the Committee has provided limitations on obligations at the level prescribed in the House-passed 

version of TEA–LU. The bill includes separate obligation limitations with the following funding allocations: 

Highway safety programs .................................................................. ($229,000,000) 

Occupant protection incentive grants ............................................... (136,000,000) 

Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures ...................................... (129,000,000) 

State traffic safety information systems improvements .................. (30,000,000) 

High visibility enforcement ............................................................... (15,000,000) 

Child safety and booster seat grants ................................................ (6,000,000) 

Motorcyclist safety .............................................................................. (6,000,000) 

The fiscal year 2006 budget submission reflected NHTSA’s reauthorization proposal, which restructures the highway safety grant 

programs into a consolidated program, funded at the combined 

level of TEA–21 sections 402, 410, 405, 411, 2003(b), and 163 and 

157 of title 23 of the United States Code. The Committee has provided funding as envisioned in the House-passed version of TEA– 

LU. 

Bill language.—The bill maintains language that prohibits the 

use of funds for construction, rehabilitation, and remodeling costs 

or for office furnishings or fixtures for state, local, or private buildings or structures. Language is also continued that limits the 

amount available for technical assistance to $500,000 under section 

410. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION—NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 130. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

states to use funds provided under section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., 

to produce and place highway safety public service messages in television, radio, cinema, print media, and on the internet. The provision provides that any state that uses funds for such purposes 

must submit a report to the Secretary, who in turn is directed to 

submit the reports to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The provision allocates $10,000,000 for national paid 

media to support national safety belt mobilizations under section 

405 and $20,000,000 under section 410 to include: $6,000,000 to 

support state impaired driving mobilization enforcement efforts 

and $14,000,000 for paid media to support national law enforcement mobilizations on impaired driving. 

42 

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is responsible for 

planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve safe 

operating and mechanical practices in the railroad industry, as well 

as managing the high-speed ground transportation program. 

Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) 

and other financial assistance programs serving to rehabilitate and 

improve the railroad industry’s physical plant are also administered by FRA. 

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $138,651,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 145,949,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 145,949,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +7,298,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The safety and operations account provides support for FRA’s 

rail safety and passenger and freight program activities. Funding 

also supports salaries and expenses and other operating costs related to FRA staff and programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

A total of $145,949,000 is recommended for safety and operations, which is a $7,298,000 increase above the fiscal year 2005 

enacted level. Of this total, $13,856,000 is available until expended. 

Push-pull operations.—The Committee is concerned about the 

safety of passenger rail operations with the use of cab cars as the 

forward car in the push-pull mode or self-propelled locomotives 

with passenger seating (MU locomotives), particularly after the 

tragic and deadly Metrolink train derailment in Glendale, California in January. Previous studies have noted that occupants of 

the relatively exposed cab car, including the engineer, are vulnerable to serious injury or fatality in the event of a collision with either a road vehicle at a grade crossing or with another train. Current railroad requirements must be reassessed to ensure the safety 

of passengers occupying the leading car. In light of these concerns, 

the Committee directs FRA to conduct a definitive study regarding 

the use of cab cars during the push-pull mode or in MU locomotives 

as compared to standard passenger locomotives as leading vehicles 

in passenger trains, to include a review of the following: the relative frequency and severity of accidents, with special emphasis 

placed on the differences associated with derailments; the efficacy 

of crashworthiness features; and a review of the FRA’s Emergency 

Order No. 20 and its effectiveness in increasing passenger safety. 

FRA should report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than June 1, 2006. 

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $35,737,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 46,325,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 26,325,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥9,412,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥20,000,000 

43 

The railroad research and development appropriation finances 

FRA contract research activities. The objectives of this program are 

to reduce the frequency and severity of railroad accidents and to 

provide technical support for rail safety rulemaking and enforcement activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,325,000, a reduction of $20,000,000 below the request as a result of denying 

funds without prejudice for the Nationwide Differential GPS program. 

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

TEA–21 established the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing loan and loan guarantee program. The aggregate 

unpaid principal amounts of the obligations may not exceed 

$3,500,000,000 at any one time. Not less than $1,000,000,000 is reserved for projects primarily benefiting freight railroads other than 

class I carriers. The funding may be used: (1) to acquire, improve, 

or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, including 

track, components of track, bridges, yards, buildings, or shops; (2) 

to refinance existing debt; or (3) to develop and establish new intermodal or railroad facilities. No Federal appropriation is required, 

since a non-Federal infrastructure partner may contribute the subsidy amount required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the form 

of a credit risk premium. Once received, statutorily established investigation charges are immediately available for appraisals and 

necessary determinations and findings. 

The Committee continues 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 2006. 

NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $19,493,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,165,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥19,493,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $10,165,000 for the next generation 

high-speed rail program, which is $10,165,000 above the budget request and $9,328,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The 

Committee points out to the administration that this program provides value beyond passenger rail, and disputes the notion that 

until the future of passenger rail service is decided, no funding 

should be spent on high-speed rail planning or research and development. Total funding is allocated as follows: 

Train control systems: North American joint PTC project ............................................. $7,000,000 

Grade crossing and innovative structures ........................................ 2,165,000 

Corridor planning ............................................................................... 1,000,000 

Total .......................................................................................... 10,165,000 

44 

Train control systems.—The Committee is encouraged by the 

promise of positive train control technologies and the impact they 

can have on reducing rail accidents—particularly accidents that are 

caused by human error. Accordingly, the Committee recommends 

$7,000,000 to continue the North American joint PTC project, and 

encourages FRA to implement field demonstrations that validate 

the use of PTC technologies. 

GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

(AMTRAK)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,207,264,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 360,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 550,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥657,264,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +190,000,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $550,000,000 for grants to Amtrak 

in fiscal year 2006, which represents an increase of $190,000,000 

over the budget request. The administration asked for 

$360,000,000, but reserved the entire sum for transfer to the Surface Transportation Board to carry out directed service for commuter rail operations in the event Amtrak is forced to cease operations, thereby providing no funding for Amtrak operations on the 

grounds that passenger rail service in the United States requires 

reform. While the Committee agrees that reform is critical, it is 

also equally important to sustain passenger rail service in geographic regions where this service is viable. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation specifically prohibits Federal funding for 

the eighteen Amtrak routes that operate at subsidy levels of greater than or equal to $30 per passenger, based on fully-allocated profit/loss data that excludes depreciation and interest. The Committee 

notes that the 24 routes that remain eligible for Federal funding 

under the recommendation (those requiring less than a $30 subsidy 

per passenger) represented more than 80 percent of Amtrak’s passengers in fiscal year 2004. 

Capital grants.—The Committee is concerned that, whenever 

Amtrak has faced fiscal crises, it has chosen to defer critical maintenance and capital investments rather than scale back other areas 

to fund these needs. Accordingly, the Committee includes bill language providing $50,000,000 to the Secretary of Transportation to 

make repairs to the Northeast Corridor. The Secretary is directed 

to consult with Amtrak to determine which capital projects are the 

most critical to further efforts to bring the Northeast Corridor into 

a state of good repair. 

Monthly reporting requirements.—The Committee directs Amtrak 

to continue submitting monthly performance reports containing the 

same information as has been presented throughout fiscal year 

2005. 

Annual operating plan.—The Committee expects that Amtrak 

will submit its annual operations report as required by 49 USC 

24315. 

45 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION—FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

Section 140. The Committee includes an administrative provision 

permitting FRA, in conjunction with Operation Lifesaver, to conduct public awareness activities with respect to grade crossing safety. 

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. 

Much of the funding for the Federal Transit Administration is 

provided by annual limitations on obligations provided in appropriations Acts. However, direct appropriations are required for specific portions of programs. 

Authorization for the programs funded by the Federal Transit 

Administration is contained in the Transportation Equity Act for 

the 21st Century (TEA–21). TEA–21 also amended the Budget Enforcement Act (which expired on September 30, 2003) by creating 

the mass transit budget category which funds transit formula 

grants, transit capital projects, Federal Transit Administration administrative expenses, transit planning and research, and university transportation center expenses. The seventh extension of TEA– 

21 will expire on June 30, 2005. Because the conference of the surface transportation reauthorization legislation has not yet concluded, the Committee’s recommendation continues the account 

and program structure of TEA–21 and prior year appropriations 

Act, but meets the overall funding level contained in H.R. 3 as 

passed by the House of Representatives on March 10, 2005. 

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation (general fund) Limitation on obligations (trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 .................................. $9,704,000 $67,704,000 $77,367,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 .................................. 83,500,000 0 83,500,000 

Recommended in the bill .... 12,000,000 68,000,000 80,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ......................... +2,328,000 +296,000 +2,624,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 ......................... ¥71,500,000 +68,000,000 ¥3,500,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $80,000,000 for FTA’s salaries and expenses, an increase of $2,624,000 over the 

fiscal year 2005 funding level and $3,500,000 below the budget reVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
46 

quest. The recommendation is comprised of an appropriation of 

$12,000,000 from the general fund and $68,000,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway 

trust fund. Funds for the National Transit Database are assumed 

under ‘‘Forumla grants’’ as proposed in the budget request. 

The administrator is authorized to transfer funding between offices. Any transfers totaling more than three percent of the initial 

appropriation from this account must be approved by the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations. No new positions have 

been approved. 

E-gov.—The Committee denies funding for e-gov initiatives based 

in the office of the secretary for lack of adequate justification. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes funds for only those 

information technology initiatives that directly support FTA and its 

grant applications. No funds are provided for transfer to another 

agency in support of other e-gov initiatives. 

Budget justifications.—It is important for the department and 

the Congress to have the ability to analyze the needs of FTA on 

an office-by-office basis consistent with other DOT agencies. The 

Committee directs FTA to submit its fiscal year 2006 congressional 

budget justification for administrative expenses itemized by office, 

with material detailing salaries and expenses, staffing increases, 

and programmatic initiatives of each office. The initiatives for each 

should be clearly stated, and include a justification for each new 

position or full-time equivalent, should FTA seek any next year. In 

addition, FTA is directed to continue providing a breakout of staff 

resources spent per new fixed guideway project in the fiscal year 

2006 budget request. 

Transit security.—The Committee reiterates its direction as stated in House Report 108–671 regarding transit security. The Committee’s position remains that the Department of Homeland Security is the lead agency on transportation security. As stated on the 

TSA website: ‘‘All new improvements will be coordinated with the 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) which has overall 

responsibility for transportation security among all modes of transportation, including rail and transit lines.’’ As such, the Committee 

recommends the same number of FTE for the security office as provided in fiscal year 2005. 

Project management oversight activities.—The Committee directs 

that FTA continue reporting monthly to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations on the status of each project with a 

full funding grant agreement. 

To further support oversight activities, the bill continues a provision requiring FTA to reimburse the Department of Transportation 

Office of Inspector General $2,000,000 for costs associated with audits and investigations of transit-related issues, including reviews 

of new fixed guideway systems. This reimbursement must come 

from funds available for the execution of contracts. Over the past 

several years, the IG has provided critical oversight of numerous 

major transit projects and FTA activities, which the Committee has 

found invaluable. The Committee directs the Inspector General will 

continue such oversight activities in fiscal year 2006. 

Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).—TEA–21, as amended, 

requires that the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation 

47 

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 2006; (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 also directs 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. 

FORMULA GRANTS

Appropriation (general fund) Limitation on obligations 

(trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ................. $499,990,000 $3,499,928,000 $3,999,918,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 1 ............... 0 6,315,000,000 6,315,000,000 

Recommended in the 

bill ............................. 662,550,000 3,754,450,000 4,417,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ............ +162,560,000 +162,560,000 +417,082,000 

Budget request, 

fiscal year 2006 ........ +662,550,000 ¥2,380,550,000 ¥1,718,000,000 

1The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts 

titled ‘‘Formula Grants and Research’’ and ‘‘Major Capital Investment Grants.’’ The Committee recommendation instead provides for separate accounts. 

Formula grants to states and local agencies funded under the 

Federal Transit Administration fall into four categories: urbanized 

area formula grants; clean fuels formula grants; formula grants 

and loans for special needs of elderly individuals and individuals 

with disabilities; and formula grants for other than urbanized 

areas. In addition, set asides of formula funds are directed to a 

grant program for intercity bus operators to finance Americans 

with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility costs and the Alaska Railroad for improvements to its passenger operations. 

48 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The accompanying bill provides $4,417,000,000 for transit formula grants. The recommended level is comprised of an appropriation of $662,550,000 from the general fund and $3,754,450,000 

from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the 

highway trust fund. 

Major project alternatives analysis and preliminary engineering 

and design.—Funds in the bill can be used, among other activities, 

for alternatives analysis and preliminary engineering and design 

(PE&D) of new rail systems, extensions, or busways. The Committee continues to assert that local project sponsors of new rail 

systems, extensions, or busways must use these formula funds (or 

those provided under section 5303 metropolitan planning) for alternatives analysis and preliminary engineering and design activities 

rather than seek section 5309 discretionary set-asides. Moreover, 

the Committee expects FTA, when evaluating the local financial 

commitment of a given project, to consider the extent to which the 

project’s sponsors have used these formula grant apportionments 

for alternatives analysis and PE&D activities of proposed new systems. 

UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

Appropriation (general fund) Limitation on obligations (trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 .................................. $744,000 $5,208,000 $5,952,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 1 ................................ 0 0 0 

Recommended in the bill .... 1,200,000 6,800,000 8,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ......................... +456,000 +1,592,000 +2,048,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 ......................... +1,200,000 +6,800,000 +8,000,000 

1The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts 

titled ‘‘Formula Grants and Research’’ and ‘‘Major Capital Investment Grants.’’ The Committee recommendation instead provides for separate accounts. 

Grants for university transportation research are awarded to 

non-profit institutions of higher learning by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) using funds appropriated 

to FTA. This program focuses on the transfer of knowledge relevant 

to national, state, and local transit issues, and builds the professional capacity of the transportation workforce. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The accompanying bill provides a total of $8,000,000 for university transportation research. The recommended program level is 

comprised of an appropriation of $1,200,000 from the general fund 

and $6,800,000 from a limitation on obligations from the mass 

transit account of the highway trust fund. 

49 

TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH

Appropriation (general fund) Limitation on obligations (trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 .................................. $15,872,000 $111,104,000 $126,976,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 1 ................................ 0 0 0 

Recommended in the bill .... 24,049,000 136,276,000 160,325,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ......................... +8,177,000 +25,172,000 +33,349,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 ......................... +24,049,000 +136,276,000 +160,325,000 

1The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts 

titled ‘‘Formula Grants and Research’’ and ‘‘Major Capital Investment Grants.’’ The Committee recommendation instead provides for separate accounts. 

The transit planning and research program provides financial assistance to states for statewide planning and other technical assistance activities, planning support for metropolitan areas, nonurbanized areas, research, development and demonstration projects, fellowships for training in the public transportation field, university 

research, and human resource development. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The accompanying bill provides $160,325,000 for transit planning 

and research. The recommended level is comprised of an appropriation of $24,049,000 from the general fund and $136,276,000 from 

limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the 

highway trust fund. Of the funds provided, the Committee expects 

$103,325,000 to go toward planning activities and assistance and 

$57,000,000 to research and development initiatives. 

TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $6,744,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 690,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,209,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +465,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +6,520,000,000 

This account provides the portion of funds for each of FTA’s programs derived from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway 

Trust Fund. For fiscal year 2006, the Committee has provided 

$7,209,700,000 for liquidation of contract authorization. 

50 

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

Appropriation (general fund) Limitation on obligations (trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 .................................. $414,014,000 $2,898,100,000 $3,312,114,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 1 ................................ 872,800,000 689,700,000 1,562,500,000 

Recommended in the bill .... 546,251,000 3,095,424,000 3,641,675,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ......................... +132,237,000 +197,324,000 +329,561,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 ......................... ¥326,549,000 +2,405,724,000 +2,079,175,000 

1The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts 

title ‘‘Formula Grants and Research’’ and ‘‘Major Capital Investment Grants.’’ The Committee recommendation instead provides for separate accounts. 

The transit capital investment program provides capital assistance for three primary activities: new and replacement buses and 

facilities; modernizing existing rail systems; and new fixed guideway systems. Eligible recipients for capital investment funds are 

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 established under state law. Buses 

and bus facilities funds are allocated on a discretionary basis, as 

are new starts funds. Fixed guideway modernization funds are allocated by statutory formula to urbanized areas with rail systems 

that have been in operation for at least seven years. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The accompanying bill provides a total of $3,641,675,000 to be available for capital investment grants, of which $546,251,000 is 

from the general fund and $3,095,424,000 from a limitation on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund. 

Funds provided for capital investment grants shall be distributed 

as follows: 

Amount 

Bus and bus facilities ............................................................................ $693,335,000 

Fixed guideway modernization ............................................................. 1,386,670,000 

New starts .............................................................................................. 1,561,670,000 

Total ................................................................................................. 3,641,675,000 

Parallel electric hybrid buses.—The Committee is strongly supportive of efforts to encourage local transit authorities to adopt 

clean bus technology such as the parallel electric-diesel hybrid system into their fleets. The Committee notes that the FTA has been 

unable to meet its target of increasing the number of low emission 

buses by two percent per year in three of the last four years for 

which data is available. Because of the significantly lower emissions and potentially reduced operating expenses of parallel electric 

diesel hybrids systems, and the benefits those outcomes would realize, the Committee will be looking for ways to increase incentives 

to help local transit authorities adopt this technology more rapidly 

than the current two percent per year target. The Committee expects the FTA to provide a report by March 1, 2006 on how best 

51 

to increase the rate of introducing new low emission technology, including parallel electric-diesel hybrids. 

New starts rating and evaluation process.—Transit use is important in a number of the nation’s major urban centers. However, 

many cities have built or are building systems that are overpriced 

or underutilized. The Committee has encouraged FTA to continually and consistently improve the evaluation and decision-making 

process for the new starts process. All parties involved, including 

FTA, the Congress, and local transit agencies, need to be able to 

assess projects based on a capable ratings and evaluation system, 

and the FTA needs to be more adept at weeding out projects that 

do not relieve the most congestion, move the most people and have 

the greatest cost-benefit ratio. The Committee is encouraged by the 

recent proposed changes to the new starts program earlier this 

year. The proposed change to the cost effectiveness rating and the 

adjustment of the cost effectiveness breakpoints shows an effort by 

FTA to manage the exploding expectations for new starts funding. 

As local communities develop their own preferred transportation 

alternatives, the Committee continues its insistance that these 

communities use Federal standards and procedures in their local 

analysis if they are to seek federal transportation funding through 

the new starts program. Further, FTA shall not approve the entry 

of any project into preliminary engineering if the project’s alternatives analysis does not clearly espouse the federal new starts criteria and standards, by showing that the project will attract and 

move more riders, at lower cost, than other transportation alternatives. 

New starts report.—The Committee is satisfied with the timely 

submission of FTA’s fiscal year 2006 annual report on new starts 

projects. To ensure that this report continues to be submitted on 

time, the Committee has continued bill language included in fiscal 

year 2006 that requires FTA to submit its annual new starts report 

with the initial submission of the President’s budget request. 

The Committee directs FTA not to reallocate funds provided in 

prior year appropriations Acts for the Department of Transportation as follows: 

Bus and Bus Facilities: 

Lawrence Transit System Transfer Center, KS (Fiscal year 

2003) 

Minneapolis Downtown Circulator, MN (Fiscal year 2003) 

Minneapolis, 63rd Ave. Park and Ride, MN (Fiscal year 

2003) 

Northwest Corridor Busway, MN (Fiscal year 2003) 

Jefferson Transit Facilities, WA (Fiscal year 2003) 

Attleboro Intermodal Mixed-Use Garage Facility (Fiscal year 

2003) 

Tompkins Consolidated Transit Center, NY (Fiscal year 

2002) 

Jamaica Intermodal Facilities, NY (Fiscal year 2002) 

Macon Terminal Intermodal Station, GA (Fiscal year 2003) 

Intermodal/Inland Port Terminal, SC (Fiscal year 2003) 

New Starts: 

Northstar Corridor, MN (Fiscal year 2003) 

Dulles Corridor Project, VA (Fiscal year 2002) 

Lowell, MA—Nashua, NH Commuter Rail (Fiscal year 2003) 

52 

JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS

Appropriation 

(general fund) 

Limitation on obligations (trust fund) Total funding 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .. $15,500,000 $108,500,000 $124,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 1 ........................................ 0 0 0 

Recommended in the bill ............ 26,250,000 148,750,000 175,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 .......................................... +10,750,000 +40,250,000 +51,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 .......................................... +26,250,000 +148,750,000 +175,000,000 

1The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts 

titled ‘‘Formula Grants and Research’’ and ‘‘Major Capital Investment Grants.’’ The Committee recommendation instead provides for separate accounts. 

The purpose of the job access and reverse commute grant program is to develop services designed to transport welfare recipients 

and low income individuals to and from jobs and to develop transportation services for residents of urban centers and rural and suburban areas to suburban employment opportunities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

For fiscal year 2006, the job access and reverse commute (JARC) 

grants program is funded at a total level of $175,000,000, with 

$26,250,000 derived from the general fund and $148,750,000 derived from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

Section 150. The Committee continues the provision that exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on obligations. 

Section 151. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

unobligated funds for projects under ‘‘Capital Investment Grants’’ 

in prior year appropriations Acts to be used in this fiscal year. 

Section 152. 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. 

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $15,773,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 16,284,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +511,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +8,284,000 

The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (the Corporation) is a wholly owned Government corporation established by 

the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954. The corporation is 

responsible for the operation, maintenance, and development of the 

United States portion of the St. Lawrence Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie, including the two Seaway locks located in 

Massena, NY and vessel traffic control in areas of the St. Lawrence 

River and Lake Ontario. The mission of the corporation is to serve 

53 

the United States intermodal and international transportation system by improving the operation and maintenance of a safe, secure, 

reliable, efficient, and environmentally responsible deep-draft waterway. The corporation’s major priorities include: safety, reliability, trade development, management accountability, and bi-national collaboration with its Canadian counterpart. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $16,284,000 

to fund the operations and maintenance of the corporation, 

$8,284,000 above the budget request and $511,000 above the fiscal 

year 2005 enacted level. Appropriations from the harbor maintenance trust fund and revenues from non-federal sources finance the 

operation and maintenance of the Seaway for which the corporation 

is responsible. The Committee denies the request to re-establish 

tolls on the U.S. portion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway. Bill language to authorize the toll provision was not provided to the Committee in time to review or identify ramifications of the toll proposal. In addition, the Seaway provided insufficient justification to 

support the provision and did not address the Committees concerns 

regarding ‘‘double-taxation and other factors affecting the industry 

on the Seaway.’’ 

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, 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 assure 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 schools 

help provide skilled U.S. merchant marine officers. 

MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $97,910,400 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 156,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +58,089,600 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $156,000,000 for the Maritime Security Program (MSP), consistent with the budget request. This recVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
54 

ommendation provides funding directly to MARAD and assumes 

that MARAD will continue to administer the program with support 

and consultation of the Department of Defense. The purpose of the 

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. flag ship operators engaged in 

U.S.-foreign trade. Participating operators are required to keep the 

vessels in active commercial service and are required to provide 

intermodal sealift support to the Department of Defense in times 

of war or national emergency. The Committee’s recommendation 

provides funding consistent with the National Defense Authorization Act, which increased the authorization for ships under the 

MSP from 47 to 60, and the payment per ship from $2,100,000 to 

$2,600,000 per year. In January, MARAD awarded 60 MSP operating agreements for the most commercially viable and militarily 

useful ships. The recommendation will provide the necessary resources for the operation of the MSP at the authorized level 

through fiscal year 2006. 

OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $108,602,176 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 113,650,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 112,336,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,733,824 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,314,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $112,336,000 to 

fund programs under the operations and training account of 

MARAD, an increase of $3,733,824 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and $1,314,000 below the budget request. Funds provided for this account are to be distributed as follows: 

Activity 

(all figures in $000’s) FY06 Request House recommended 

U.S. Merchant Marine Academy: 

Salary and Benefits ........................................................................................................ $23,750 $23,750 

Midshipmen Program ...................................................................................................... 7,032 7,032 

Instructional Program ..................................................................................................... 5,746 5,746 

Program Direction and Administration ........................................................................... 2,945 2,945 

Maintenance, Repair, & Operating Requirements ......................................................... 7,381 7,381 

Capital Improvements .................................................................................................... 17,000 17,000 

Subtotal, USMMA ........................................................................................................ 63,854 63,854 

State Maritime Schools: 

Student Incentive Payments ........................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

Direct Scholarship Payments .......................................................................................... 1,200 1,800 

Scholarship Maintenance and Repair ............................................................................ 8,211 8,211 

Subtotal, State Maritime Academies ......................................................................... 10,611 11,211 

MARAD Operations: 

Base Operations ............................................................................................................. 34,029 34,029 

Information technology, electronic government ............................................................. 5,062 3,149 

GSA Space Increase ........................................................................................................ 93 93

55 

Activity 

(all figures in $000’s) FY06 Request House recommended 

Subtotal, MARAD Operations ...................................................................................... 39,185 37,271 

Subtotal, Operations and Training ............................................................................ 113,650 112,336 

Under the United States Merchant Marine Academy, the Committee recommendation includes $63,854,000 for the operation and 

maintenance of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA), 

consistent with the budget request. The $8,387,000 increase from 

the fiscal year 2005 level is to fund infrastructure improvements, 

technological improvements, and simulation techniques that will efficiently provide the training necessary to meet current and future 

standards imposed by Federal and other organizational entities, 

and to ensure continued academic accreditation. 

Under the State Maritime Schools, the Committee recommendation includes $11,211,000 for the six State Maritime Schools (SMS), 

an increase of $600,000 over the budget request. These additional 

funds are provided for cadet training and facilities to result in 

$300,000 per school in direct scholarship payments. 

The Committee provides $37,271,000 for MARAD operations, a 

reduction of $1,914,000 from the budget request. Within the operations total, the Committee provides the fiscal year 2005 level of 

$3,050,000 for IT related activities and $99,000 for electronic government, consistent with the level provided in fiscal year 2005. 

This is below the request level due to lack of sufficient justification. 

The Committee will reconsider the funding level if it receives adequate justification in a timely manner. The Committee notes that 

it never received adequate justification last year regarding 

MARAD’s IT funding request. 

SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $21,443,072 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 21,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥443,072 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

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 is required by law to 

dispose of its obsolete inventory by the end of 2006; however, 

MARAD has acknowledged that it will not meet this statutory 

deadline. There are currently 124 vessels located in three fleet sites 

in the NDRF awaiting disposal. In fiscal year 2004, MARAD removed fifteen ships for disposal and projects that it will remove another 15 in 2005 and 13 in 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). The list includes a nuclear ship, the SAVANNAH, which 

contains remnants of a nuclear reactor. 

56 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $21,000,000 for ship disposal, consistent with the budget request and $443,072 below the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level. Within the funds provided for ship disposal, the 

Committee provides $3,000,000 to decommission the SAVANNAH. 

In a March 2005 report, GAO identified management weaknesses 

in MARAD’s ship disposal program. The report stated that MARAD 

lacked the vision needed to sustain a long-term effort, and that its 

managers are not in a position to make sound decisions concerning 

the ship disposal program. The Committee requires MARAD to 

strengthen the management of the ship disposal program, including the development of a comprehensive integrated approach. The 

Committee continues to encourage MARAD to pursue various disposal options, including international disposal. Further, the Committee notes the recent increased competitiveness of domestic 

scrapping operations and encourages MARAD to promote aggressive competition among the domestic scrapping industry and international disposal facilities for funds appropriated for disposal. 

MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI) PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,725,888 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 3,526,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,526,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥1,199,888 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The maritime guaranteed loan account 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 transferred by reimbursement to operations and training 

to be obligated and outlayed. 

As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this account includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan guarantee 

commitments made in 1992 and beyond (including modifications of 

direct loans or loan guarantees that resulted from obligations or 

commitments in any year), as well as administrative expenses of 

this program. The subsidy amounts are estimated on a net present 

value basis; the administrative expenses are estimated on a cash 

basis. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,526,000, consistent with the 

budget request. This is $1,199,888 below the fiscal year 2005 level. 

SHIP CONSTRUCTION

(RESCISSION)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ¥$1,979,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥2,071,280 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥92,280 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥2,071,280 

57 

The Committee rescinds $2,071,280 from the ship construction 

account. This account is currently inactive except for determinations regarding the use of vessels built under the program, final 

settlement of open contracts, and closing of financial accounts. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $74,400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ¥74,400,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥148,800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +74,400,000 

The fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 108– 

136) authorized the National Defense Tank Vessel Construction 

Program to provide financial assistance for the construction of five 

privately owned product tank vessels to be available for national 

defense purposes in time of war or national emergency. The purpose of the program is to revitalize commercial tank ship construction in the U.S. The Department of Defense has stated that a critical deficiency exists for U.S. flag tankers capable of carrying multiple petroleum cargoes. Vessels constructed under this program 

will operate as part of the Maritime security fleet. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides no new funding for this program. Further, it does not rescind funding provided in fiscal year 2005, nor 

does it repeal Subtitle D, National Defense Tank Vessel Construction Assistance, of Title XXXV of the Maritime Security Act of 

2003, Public Law 108–136, as proposed in the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Section 160. 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 covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. 

Section 161. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

obligations incurred during the current year from construction 

funds in excess of the appropriations contained in this Act or in 

any prior appropriations Act. 

PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), which was established as an administration within the 

Department of Transportation effective November 30, 2004, pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs Improvement Act (Public Law 108–246), is responsible for the department’s pipeline safety program and oversight of hazardous materials transportation safety operations. As part of its mission, the 

agency is dedicated to safety by working toward the elimination of 

transportation-related deaths and injuries in hazardous materials 

and pipeline transportation, and by promoting transportation solutions that enhance communities and protect the natural environment. 

58 

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

This appropriation finances the program support costs for the 

PHMSA. This includes policy development, counsel, budget, financial management, civil rights, management, administration and 

agency-wide expenses. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $17,027,000 for these costs, of which 

$645,000 is to be provided from the Pipeline Safety Fund. 

Administrative support.—A total of six new positions are requested in fiscal year 2006 to provide accounting, financial support 

and administrative support—two human resources positions; two 

positions for personnel security and continuity of operations; one 

administrative support position to oversee real estate, space, telecommunications, property, and other administrative services; and 

one accounting position. The Committee approves all six of these 

positions and half-year funding has been provided. 

Information technology activities.—The PHMSA requests a 

$198,000 increase in its information technology program to support 

information exchange, such as electronic communications, filing 

pipeline incident reports, and online applications for exemptions 

from hazardous materials regulations. The Committee provides this 

funding as requested. 

Administrative costs for new positions.—Consistent with the new 

positions that have been provided, $129,000 is provided for associated administrative costs. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

The PHMSA oversees the safety of the more than 800,000 daily 

shipments of hazardous materials in the United States and uses 

risk management principles and security threat assessments to understand, communicate, and reduce dangers inherent in hazardous 

materials transportation. The agency formulates, issues and revises 

hazardous materials regulations which cover hazardous materials 

definitions and classifications, hazard communications, shipper and 

carrier operations, training and security requirements, and packaging and container specifications. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill includes $26,183,000 to continue the agency’s hazardous 

materials safety functions. 

Spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste shipments.— 

The budget requests four new positions to support the legal challenges regarding shipments of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to Skull Valley, Utah. The Committee approves two 

of these positions and the associated half-year costs. 

Hazardous materials regulations compliance.—The PHMSA is requesting three new positions to help ensure compliance with current hazmat regulations. The Committee approves two of these positions and half-year funding associated with these positions has 

been provided. 

59 

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

(Pipeline safety fund) (Oil spill liability 

trust fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 

2005 1 ................................ $54,331,000 $14,880,000 $69,211,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 

2006 .................................. 54,165,000 19,000,000 73,165,000 

Recommended in the bill .... 57,860,000 15,000,000 72,860,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal 

year 2005 ......................... +3,529,000 +120,000 +3,649,000 

Budget request, fiscal 

year 2006 ......................... +3,695,000 ¥4,000,000 ¥305,000 

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage prevention, education and training, enforcement of regulations and standards, research and development, grants for states pipeline safety programs, 

and emergency planning and response to accidents. The pipeline 

safety program is responsible for a national regulatory program to 

protect the public against the risks to life and property in the 

transportation of natural gas, petroleum and other hazardous materials by pipeline. The enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 

also expanded the role of the pipeline safety program in environmental protection and resulted in a new emphasis on spill prevention and containment of oil and hazardous substances from pipelines. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill includes $72,860,000 to continue pipeline safety operations, research and development, and state grants-in-aid in fiscal 

year 2006. The bill specifies that of the total appropriation, 

$15,000,000 shall be derived from the oil spill liability trust fund 

and $57,860,000 shall be from the pipeline safety fund. 

State one-call grants.—The Committee directs that no less than 

$1,000,000 of the funds provided is for the one-call grants program, 

as was directed in fiscal year 2005. 

Pipeline safety staffing.—The staff levels of the office of pipeline 

safety (OPS) have increased dramatically over the past few fiscal 

years and again the agency is requesting a significant staffing increase for 2006, asking that eight new positions be added. The 

Committee approves five of these additional positions—two new 

pipeline inspectors for Houston, Texas, where over 50% of the 

major pipeline operators are headquartered; one new inspector to 

work on integrity management program compliance; and two new 

state program managers to evaluate state pipeline programs. All 

other proposed positions are denied. 

State pipeline safety grants.—The OPS requests funding to assist 

state pipeline agencies to increase inspection and enforcement activities required by the Pipeline Safety Integrity Act. Funding totaling $185,000 is provided for this purpose. 

60 

Oil spill liability trust fund.—The Committee continues to be 

concerned with the significant increases in the request of funds 

from the oil spill liability trust fund. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 

requires that these trust funds be used exclusively for oil spill prevention and response activities, and the Committee strongly encourages the OPS to allocate oversight activities between the hazardous liquid and gas pipelines and to factor the oil spill liability 

trust fund into the allocation formula that determines the hazardous liquid pipeline user fee assessment to accurately reflect the 

amount and type of oversight activities being conducted by the office consistent with the trust fund. Last year, the Committee directed that the fiscal year 2006 budget justification should adequately address this issue by containing an itemization of how 

these funds are being allocated within the OPS. That information 

was not included. Without this information, the Committee cannot 

support the administration’s request to increase the level of funding drawn from the oil spill liability trust fund from $15,000,000 

to $19,000,000. Furthermore, the Committee is once again directing 

the agency to include an itemization of how funds from the oil spill 

liability trust fund are being allocated within the OPS in the fiscal 

year 2007 budget justification. 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

(Emergency preparedness fund) 

(Emergency preparedness grant 

program) 

Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ...................................................... 1 $198,000 ($14,300,000) $14,498,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................... 200,000 ............................ 200,000 

Recommended in the bill ............................................................... 200,000 (14,300,000) 14,500,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ............................................. +2,000 ............................ +2,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 .......................................... ............................ (+14,300,000) +14,300,000

1 Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent. 

The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 

1990 (HMTUSA) requires the 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 $200,000, the same amount as requested, for activities related to emergency response training curriculum development and updates, as authorized by section 

117(A)(i)(3)(B) of HMTUSA. The Committee has provided an obligation limitation of $14,300,000 for the emergency preparedness 

grant program. 

RESEARCH AND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION

The Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) 

was established as an administration within the Department of 

Transportation effective November 30, 2004, pursuant to the NorVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
61 

man Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs Improvement Act, 

Public Law 108–426. The mission of RITA is to provide strategic 

clarity to the department’s multi-modal and intermodal research efforts, while coordinating the multifaceted research agenda of the 

department. 

RITA coordinates, facilitates, and reviews research and development programs and activities through: advancement and research 

and development of innovative technologies, including intelligent 

transportation systems; comprehensive transportation statistics research, analysis, and reporting; education and training in transportation and transportation-related fields, including the University 

Transportation Centers; and activities of the Volpe National Transportation Center. 

Also included within RITA is the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), which is funded by an allocation from Federal Highway Administration’s federal-aid highway account. BTS compiles, 

analyzes, and makes accessible information on the nation’s transportation systems; collects information on intermodal transportation and other areas as needed; and enhances the quality and effectiveness of the statistical programs of the Department of Transportation through research, the development of guidelines, and the 

promotion of improvements in data acquisition and use. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $4,310,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 6,274,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,326,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +16,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,948,000 

1FY 2005 amount represents the transfer of resources from the Office of the Secretary of Transportation ($975,000) and the Research and Special Programs Administration ($3,335,000). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill includes $4,326,000 to continue research and development activities in fiscal year 2006. This funding level represents 

only a minor increase over the fiscal year 2005 level and is attributable to the amount identified in the budget justification as being 

necessary for inflation and other mandatory increases. 

Reductions from the budget request.—The Committee reduces 

funding by $1,948,000 below the request due to inadequate justification. The Committee is disturbed by the poor quality of the 

budget justification that was provided for this newly formed agency 

and notes the complete lack of information pertaining to specific requested increases above prior year funding levels. As has been 

noted in the past, the Committee cannot meet the administration’s 

request if it does not come with adequate justification. 

For similar reasons, the Committee denies funding for seven additional full-time equivalent staff years (FTEs). Although identified 

in several charts within the budget request document, these additional FTEs were never described within the written justification 

and no explanation was provided as to why they were needed, 

thereby making it impossible for the Committee to determine the 

significance of either funding or not funding these FTEs. 

62 

Therefore, the Committee denies the increased funding and additional FTEs that have been requested until such time as the department can adequately explain the need for these increases. 

Poor planning behind reorganization.—The budget justification 

for RITA stated repeatedly that ‘‘not enough is known about the 

impending reorganization structure and distribution of its functions 

to confidently predict RITA priorities’’ as it relates to the various 

program and performance goals. The Committee notes that P.L. 

108–426, which created RITA, was passed in November 2004 based 

on the department’s recommendations to Congress to reorganize. 

Yet, the department still does not appear to have a clear direction 

as to how this newly created agency should operate. This shows a 

lack of planning and foresight on the part of the department and 

causes this Committee to question the planning process that was 

behind the department’s request for the reorganization. It is the 

Committee’s hope that the department’s budget request for next 

fiscal year will be better organized and will provide a clearer picture as to the long-term goals and objectives of this agency. 

BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS

Under the appropriation of the Federal Highway Administration, 

the bill provides $33,000,000 for the BTS. 

The most recent long-term surface transportation reauthorization 

act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, expired on 

September 30, 2003. Since that time, Congress has passed several 

short-term extension bills that have provided contract authority for 

the various surface transportation programs, with the current extension set to expire on June 30, 2005. Because reauthorization actions have not yet been completed, the Committee has funded BTS 

at a level for fiscal year 2006 that is consistent with the Housepassed surface transportation reauthorization legislation, the 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. 

As has been the practice in previous years, the Committee limits 

BTS staff to 126 FTEs in fiscal year 2006 in order to curtail the 

significant growth in staffing that occurred previously within this 

agency. 

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 2005 ......................................................... $58,528,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 62,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 62,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,971,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

63 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $62,499,000 for activities of the Office of Inspector General, consistent with the budget 

request. The Committee continues to value highly the work of the 

Office of Inspector General in oversight of departmental programs 

and activities. 

In addition, the OIG will receive $7,224,000 from other agencies 

in this bill, as noted below: 

Federal Highway Administration ................................................................... $3,524,000 

Federal Transit Administration ..................................................................... 2,000,000 

Federal Aviation Administration .................................................................... 1,200,000 

National Transportation Safety Board .......................................................... 500,000 

Funding is sufficient to finance 435 full-time equivalent (FTE) 

staff years in fiscal year 2006, for an increase of 5 FTE. 

Unfair business practices.—The bill maintains language first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the OIG to investigate 

allegations of fraud and unfair or deceptive practices and unfair 

methods of competition by air carriers and ticket agents. 

Audit reports.—The Committee requests the Inspector General 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. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1, 

1996 by P.L. 104–88, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) 

Termination Act of 1995. Consistent with the continued trend toward less regulation of the surface transportation industry, the Act 

abolished the ICC; eliminated certain functions that had previously 

been implemented by the ICC; transferred core rail and certain 

other provisions to the Board; and transferred certain motor carrier 

functions to the Federal Highway Administration (now under the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration). The Board is specifically responsible for regulation of the rail and pipeline industries 

and certain non-licensing regulations of motor carriers and water 

carriers. The law empowers the Board through its exemption authority to promote deregulation administratively on a case-by-case 

basis and continues intact the important rail reforms made by the 

Staggers Rail Act of 1980. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $20,030,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 2 ..................................................... 23,138,000 

Recommended in the bill 3 ................................................................. 25,372,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +5,342,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +2,234,000 1 Includes $1,050,000 in collections of user fees. 

2 Assumes collection of $1,250,000 in user fees, to offset the appropriation as the fees are collected 

throughout the fiscal year. 3 Assumes collection of $1,250,000 in user fees, to offset the appropriation as the fees are collected 

throughout the fiscal year. 

64 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $25,372,000, 

an increase of $2,234,000 above the budget request. Included in the 

recommended amount is an estimated $1,250,000 in fees, which 

will offset the appropriated funding. At this funding level, the 

Board will be able to accommodate 150 full-time equivalent staff 

years. In addition, the Committee has provided one-time funding of 

$4,500,000 to accommodate STB’s pending office relocation. 

User fees.—Current statutory authority, under 31 U.S.C. 9701, 

grants the Board the authority to collect user fees. The Committee 

believes that $1,250,000 in user fees is reasonable. Language is included in the bill allowing the fees to be credited to the appropriation as offsetting collections, and reducing the general fund appropriation on a dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees are received and 

credited. This language, continued from last year, simplifies the 

tracking of the collections and provides the Board with more flexibility in spending its appropriated funds. 

Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger.—On December 12, 1997, 

the Board granted a joint request of Union Pacific Railroad Company and the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County, KS (Wichita/ 

Sedgwick) to toll the 18-month mitigation study pending in Finance 

Docket No. 32760. The decision indicated that at such time as the 

parties reach agreement or discontinue negotiations, the Board 

would take appropriate action. 

By petition filed June 26, 1998, Wichita/Sedgwick and UP/SP indicated that they had entered into an agreement, and jointly petitioned the Board to impose the agreement as a condition of the 

Board’s approval of the UP/SP merger. By decision dated July 8, 

1998, the Board agreed and imposed the agreement as a condition 

to the UP/SP merger. The terms of the negotiated agreement remain in effect. If UP/SP or any of its divisions or subsidiaries materially changes or is unable to achieve the assumptions on which the 

Board based its final environmental mitigation measures, then the 

Board should reopen Finance Docket 32760 if requested by interested parties, and prescribe additional mitigation properly reflecting these changes if shown to be appropriate. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Section 170. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department of Transportation to use funds for aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances, as authorized by 

law. 

Section 171. The Committee continues the provision limiting appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for 

an Executive Level IV. 

Section 172. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act for salaries and expenses of more than 100 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 173. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds for the implementation of section 404 of title 23, United 

State Code. 

65 

Section 174. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

recipients of funds made available in this Act from releasing personal information, including social security number, medical or disability information, and photographs from a driver’s license or 

motor vehicle record, without express consent of the person to 

whom such information pertains; and prohibits the withholding of 

funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision. 

Section 175. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal 

Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration 

from states, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and 

private sources for expenses incurred for training may be credited 

to each agency’s respective accounts. 

Section 176. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

the Secretary of Transportation to allow issuers of any preferred 

stock to redeem or repurchase preferred stock sold to the Department of Transportation. 

Section 177. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in Title I of this Act from being issued for any grant unless 

the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business 

days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full 

funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced 

by the department or its modal administrations. 

Section 178. The Committee continues a provision for the Department of Transportation allowing funds received from rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be credited to appropriations. 

Section 179. The Committee continues a provision allowing 

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 the recovery of such payments. 

Section 180. The Committee continues a provision allowing the 

Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended sums from ‘‘Office of the Secretary, Salaries and Expenses’’ to ‘‘Minority Business 

Outreach’’. 

Section 181. 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 modal administrations in this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification. 

Section 182. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to implement an essential air service local cost 

share participation pilot program. 

66 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 1 ....................................................... $156,299,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 195,253,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 187,452,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +31,153,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥7,801,000 1Does not include $22,113,000 for the office of foreign assets control. 

The Departmental Offices’ function in the Treasury Department 

is to provide basic support to the Secretary of the Treasury, who 

is the chief operating executive of the Department. The Secretary 

of the Treasury also has a primary role in formulating and managing the domestic and international tax and financial policies of 

the Federal Government. The Secretary’s responsibilities funded by 

the salaries and expenses appropriation include: recommending 

and implementing United States domestic and international economic and tax policy; fiscal policy; governing the fiscal operations 

of the Government; maintaining foreign assets control; managing 

the public debt; managing development of financial policy; representing the United States on international monetary, trade and 

investment issues; overseeing Treasury Department overseas operations; directing the administrative operations of the Treasury Department; and providing executive oversight of the bureaus within 

the Treasury Department. This account also includes funding for 

the office of professional responsibility. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $187,452,000 for 

departmental offices, salaries and expenses, an increase of 

$31,153,000 over the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $7,153,000 

below the request. The funding recommendations are made based 

on information included in the budget justification. Therefore, the 

transfer authority provided to the department under this heading 

is set at 2 percent. Funds are to be allocated as follows: 

Executive direction ............................................................................. $7,216,000 

General counsel .................................................................................. 7,521,000 

Economic polices and programs ........................................................ 32,011,000 

Financial policies and programs ....................................................... 24,721,000 

Terrorism and financial crimes programs 1 ...................................... 35,409,000 

Treasury-wide management policies and programs ........................ 16,843,000 

Administration .................................................................................... 63,731,000 

1 Includes the office of foreign assets controls. 

The Committee has included a travel limitation of $3,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2006 and restates the travel report directives contained 

in House Report 108–792. The Committee is recommending the 

travel limitation to ensure that adequate resources are available 

for the day-to-day operations of the department. The Committee directs the secretary to ensure that a portion of the travel funds are 

made available to general schedule employees to support the training and development of all departmental office employees. 

67 

Additionally, the bill includes $258,000 for unforeseen emer- gencies, $5,173,000 for the department-wide financial statement 

audit and internal control programs, $3,000,000 for information 

technology modernization requirements, and $100,000 for official 

reception and representation expenses. The Committee recommends $35,409,000 for the office of terrorism and financial intelligence (TFI). Of the amount provided, 

$1,998,000 is for the office of the undersecretary, $3,700,000 is for 

the office of terrorist financing and financial crimes (OTTC), 

22,032,000 is for the office of financial assets control (OFAC), and 

$7,679,000 is for the office of intelligence analysis (OIA). The Committee is concerned that the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence is resourcing its operations at the expense of its key analytic and intelligence units and shortchanging the ability of OFAC 

to perform its mission effectively. Earlier this year, Treasury proposed to detail 23 OFAC FTE to OIA, and then request 9 new FTE 

for OFAC in the budget justification. The Committee’s recommendation funds 9 FTE in OFAC as requested, and an additional 14 FTE in OIA. The Committee made its decision based on 

the fact that Treasury has not provided adequate justification for 

the additional FTE, nor a comprehensive plan for this office, which 

was created less than one year ago. 

The Committee directs the department to provide to the Committee a report of TFI’s short and long-term personnel and resource 

requirements for the next five years, and a narrative of the TFI’s 

strategic plan for its organizational structure, including its interaction and relationship with subordinate agencies such as the OIA, 

OFAC, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Newtork (FinCEN). 

Morevoer, the Committee directs the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) to assess TFI and include a discussion of the strategic 

goals of TFI; an assessment of its implementation plan and strategies for accomplishing its legislative mandates; whether its structure, policies, resources, human capital requirements, mission, direction and other organizational factors are in alignment with the 

functions of subordinate agencies such as OIA, FinCEN, and OFAC 

and avoids duplication of performance; if its control and measurements systems are consistent with keeping TFI on track toward its 

goals; and include recommendations for program and organizational improvements. The Committee directs the Treasury Department and the GAO to deliver their reports to the Committee no 

later than February 1, 2006. 

The Committee’s recommendation does not include an increase of 

$720,000 over the fiscal year 2005 funding level for media room operations. The Committee determines this cost increase to be excessive and directs Treasury to bring down the cost of this initiative. 

The Committee’s recommendation does not include $1,000,000 for 

building maintenance and repairs. While the Committee agrees 

that in the future funds should be set aside for routine repair and 

maintenance of the Treasury Building, the T–BARR initiative 

should be able to address any issues in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee’s recommendation does not include funds for any 

e-gov project outside of the regular scope of the department’s operations, or any project coordinated by another agency. 

The Committee appreciates Treasury’s efforts to retool the department’s budget documents in response to concerns expressed 

68 

from a year ago. In fiscal year 2005, senior Treasury officials coordinated with the Committee early in the 2006 budget process to 

make adjustments to Treasury budget presentation materials. As a 

result, the fiscal year 2006 budget-in-brief (BIB) is a remarkable 

improvement over previous years. It is a clear, concise and usable 

document. Nevertheless, while the BIB has improved, the Treasury 

congressional justification documents continue to need major 

changes. The Committee expects the same process used to transform the BIB to change the justification. A retooled congressional 

justification should provide detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives, and changes in the agency’s financial plan from prior year 

enactment that build on a request for the new year such as transfers and annualization of prior year programs. 

The Committee recognizes the positive first step in significantly 

reducing the performance information in the fiscal year 2006 budget documents. The Committee encourages the department to continue to refine and better focus its performance measures. Good 

performance information should demonstrate to the Committee the 

marginal benefits received from dollars appropriated. In light of 

tight fiscal constraints, the Committee also values Treasury efforts 

to reduce ineffective, low priority and obsolete programs. The Committee expects Treasury to continue to hold programs to a firm test 

of accountability and focus funding on top priorities, but developing 

fair and responsible budgets, in this austere fiscal environment. 

Once the fiscal year 2006 appropriations Act is signed into law, 

the Committee directs the department to submit an operating plan 

for the fiscal year 2006 resources provided to the department, including all offices and bureaus, not more than 60 days after enactment. The operating plan must include funding and FTE levels for 

all offices and objectives by fiscal year 2005 actual, fiscal year 2006 

request, and fiscal year 2006 enacted. In addition, the plan must 

include information on any initiative, major procurement, and program at the department. The operating plan should incorporate 

input from all senior level managers of the department, and once 

submitted, the final plan should be made available to those managers. In the past two years, the department has undertaken a 

large number of reprogramming actions that rely heavily on attrition and deferments to meet various new initiatives and priorities 

during the fiscal year. The Committee understands the need for 

some flexibility to meet unanticipated needs, but has the experience to know that a stable operating budget will help anchor an 

agency in its mission and enable managers to meet the day-to-day 

needs of the department. 

The Committee has noticed the inordinate amount of time it 

takes the department to respond to basic budget inquiries. Information related to the expenditure of current year and budget year 

funds is directly the jurisdiction of the Committee and one of its 

basic oversight responsibilities. Further, once an appropriations Act 

is enacted, or the budget submitted, the department should have 

definite answers regarding the obligation of funds and the justification for all budget requests. The Committee directs the department 

to respond in a more timely manner to all Committee requests. 

Further, in order to eliminate confusion over which Treasury official is responsible for signing correspondence to the Committee, the 

Committee directs that correspondence related to the Committee 

69 

shall be signed by either the Secretary, the Chief Financial Officer, 

or the relevant bureaus director. 

The Committee recognizes the prominence placed on economic 

and financial issues at the Organization for Economic Cooperation 

and Development in Paris, France, and directs the department to 

maintain a senior staff presence attached to the United States Mission in Paris. Over the years, there has been an erosion in the 

presence of the Treasury Department at the United States Mission, 

but the importance of the issues involved necessitate that this 

trend now cease and that a senior position be established. 

The Committee is concerned about the failure of airlines to properly fund the pension obligations of their employees and retirees. 

Recent bankruptcy court rulings and announcements by other airlines that they may seek similar relief from pension obligations, 

have precipitated a crisis for the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. As a result, airlines are asking taxpayers to further subsidize their continuing losses. 

Within 90 days of the enactment of this Act, the Government Accountability Office is directed to analyze the impact that a re-regulation of the airline industry would have on reducing potential pension defaults by airlines. 

DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $32,002,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 24,412,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,412,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥10,590,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥3,000,000 

This appropriation funds the modernization of Treasury business 

processes and increases in department-wide systems efficiency 

through technology investments for systems that involve more than 

one Treasury bureau or Treasury’s interface with other governmental agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,412,000 for 

department-wide systems and capital investment programs, 

$3,000,000 below the budget request and $10,590,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 

Of the amount recommended, the Committee has provided $3,000,000 for various TFI information technology investments. 

Should the department require additional resources for this initiative, the Committee directs the department to utilize revenue from 

the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, up to $3,000,000. To ensure the rational and reasonable development and procurement of such investments, the Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to provide assistance and oversight as TFI embarks on this system development. 

Recent reports of unrealized savings from major information 

technology (IT) investments, such as those associated with the development and implementation of the HR-Connect system, and 

award protests associated with the Treasury Communications EnVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
70 

terprise (TCE) Network do little to inspire the confidence of the 

Committee in the department’s ability to manage its IT portfolio, 

or inspire the Committee to fund new systems. Too often, the Committee is backed into the corner of funding initiatives and systems 

based on the promise of management reform, the threat of departmental collapse, or the argument that too much money has been 

invested to pull the plug. In this budget climate, the Committee 

cannot afford to fund the failure and shortcomings of IT investments. The Committee directs the department to provide more detailed information in the operating plan regarding all IT initiatives 

and investments, development and implementation timelines, and 

costs and savings. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $16,368,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 16,722,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 17,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +632,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +278,000 

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and investigative 

functions to identify and correct operational and administrative deficiencies, which create conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The audit function 

provides program, contract, and financial statement audit services. 

Contract audits provide professional advice to agency contracting 

officials on accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, 

award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Program audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations. Financial statement audits assess whether financial statements fairly 

present the agency’s financial condition and results of operations, 

the adequacy of accounting controls, and compliance with laws and 

regulations. The investigative function provides for the detection 

and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,000,000 for 

the Office of Inspector General, an increase of $632,000 above the 

fiscal year 2005 enacted level and an increase of $278,000 above 

the budget request. The increase is for additional audit capability 

in the areas of regulation responsibility and the on-going audit of 

the Treasury building renovation project. The bill includes 

$2,000,000 for official travel expenses, $2,000 for reception and representation expenses, and up to $100,000 for unforeseen emergencies. 

71 

TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $128,093,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 133,286,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 133,286,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +5,193,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Restructuring and Reform 

Act of 1998 established the Office of Treasury Inspector General for 

Tax Administration (TIGTA) and abolished the IRS Office of the 

Chief Inspector. TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to assess the operations and programs of the IRS and its related entities, the IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief 

Counsel. The purpose of those audits and investigations is to: (1) 

promote the economic, efficient, and effective administration of the 

nation’s tax laws and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS 

programs and operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve 

fraud and other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these 

programs and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $133,286,000 for 

the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, an increase of $5,193,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and 

equal to the budget request. 

AIR TRANSPORTATION STABILIZATION PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,984,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 2,942,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +16,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥942,000 

The Air Transportation Stabilization Board was authorized in 

the Air Transportation Safety and Stabilization Act to issue 

$10,000,000,000 of federal credit instruments to air carriers. The 

purpose is ‘‘to compensate air carriers for losses incurred by the air 

carriers as a result of the terrorist attacks on the United States 

that occurred on September 11, 2001’’, providing among other criteria, that ‘‘such agreement is a necessary part of maintaining a 

safe, efficient, and viable commercial aviation system in the United 

States’’. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

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

the air transportation stabilization program, an increase of $16,000 

over the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $942,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee’s recommendation is based on a 

lack of justification for the greater expense. 

72 

TREASURY BUILDING AND ANNEX REPAIR AND RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $12,217,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 10,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥2,217,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation funds the repairs, selected improvements, and 

construction necessary to renovate and maintain the main Treasury Building, the Treasury annex, and other Treasury buildings. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000 for 

Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration (T–BARR), a 

decrease of $2,217,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and 

the same as the budget request. The requested and proposed funding level should be adequate for the final year of funding for this 

project. 

FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $71,922,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 73,630,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 73,630,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,708,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is responsible for implementing Treasury’s anti-money laundering regulations through administration of the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. 

section 5311, et seq. (BSA). It also serves as a United States Government source for the systematic collection and analysis of information to assist in the investigation of money laundering and other 

financial crimes. FinCEN supports law enforcement investigative 

efforts by federal, state, local and international agencies, and fosters interagency and global cooperation against domestic and international financial crimes. It also provides U.S. policymakers with 

strategic analyses of domestic and worldwide trends and patterns. 

It prevents money laundering through its regulatory and outreach 

programs, including setting policy for and overseeing BSA compliance by financial institutions, and by providing BSA training for 

law enforcement, bankers, and bank regulators. Pursuant to the 

USA Patriot Act of 2001, FinCEN was made a Treasury Bureau in 

recognition of its key role in supporting investigations and other 

government efforts to identify and stop the financing of terrorist organizations and activity. The Patriot Act also gave FinCEN substantial new responsibilities for collecting, sharing, and managing 

financial and other information as part of its counter-terrorism 

mission. 

73 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $73,630,000 for 

the financial crimes enforcement network, an increase of 

$1,708,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $82,336,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 62,486,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 91,126,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +8,790,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +28,640,000 

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) is responsible for the enforcement of laws designed to eliminate certain illicit activities and to regulate lawful activities relating to distilled 

spirits, beer, wine and nonbeverage alcohol products, and tobacco. 

Its responsibilities are focused on collecting revenue; reducing taxpayer burden and improving service while preventing diversion; 

and protecting the public and preventing consumer deception in 

certain regulated commodities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $91,126,000 for 

the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, an increase of 

$8,790,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and 

$28,790,000 above the budget request. The budget request assumed 

$28,640,000 in revenue from new user fees to be enacted. However, 

the Committee never received the proposed legislation authorizing 

such fees and assumes that the proposal did not have much merit. 

In addition, the bill includes up to $6,000 for official reception and 

representation expenses and up to $50,000 for cooperative research 

and development programs. 

BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve notes, various public debt instruments, as well as most evidences of a financial character issued 

by the United States, such as postage and internal revenue stamps. 

The BEP also executes certain printings for various territories administered by the United States, particularly postage and revenue 

stamps. 

The operations of the BEP are financed by a revolving fund established in accordance with the provisions of Public Law 81–656, 

August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), which requires the BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed. The BEP is also authorized to assess 

amounts to acquire capital equipment and provide for working capital needs. The anticipated work volume is based on estimates of 

requirements submitted by agencies served. The following table 

summarizes BEP revenue and expense data for fiscal years 2004 

through 2006: 

74 

2004 

(actual) 

2005 

(estimate) 

2006 

(estimate) 

Total revenue ............................................................................ $524,752,000 $530,000,000 $575,000,000

Revenue from currency .................................................... 491,179,000 507,000,000 569,000,000 

Revenue from stamps ...................................................... 19,501,000 17,000,000 0 

Other revenue ................................................................... 14,072,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Cost of operations .................................................................... 553,558,000 530,000,000 575,000,000 

Net revenue 1 (to Treasury) ....................................................... ¥28,806,000 

1 Capital investments will be less than depreciation, a non-cash expense, in each of these years. In order to avoid accumulating working 

capital in excess of Bureau needs, currency prices are set at a level that will result in an annual loss (on paper). This loss will not exceed 

the depreciation expense, ensuring the solvency of the Bureau’s revolving fund. 

BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT

ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $173,765,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 176,923,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 176,923,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,158,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all public 

debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. securities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $176,923,000 

for administering the public debt, an increase of $3,158,000 above 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The bill includes up to $2,000,000 for systems modernization. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND

PROGRAM

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $55,078,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 7,900,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 55,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥78,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +47,100,000 

The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund provides grants, loans and technical assistance to new and existing 

community development financial institutions such as community 

development banks, community development credit unions, revolving loan funds and micro-loan funds. Recipients must use the funds 

to support mortgage, small business and economic development 

lending in currently underserved, distressed neighborhoods. The 

Fund is also responsible for implementation of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $55,000,000 for 

the program in fiscal year 2006, an increase of $47,100,000 when 

compared to the budget request, and $78,000 below the fiscal year 

2005 funding level. The budget request proposed moving the proVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
75 

gram to the Department of Commerce as a part of the ‘‘Strengthening America’s Communities’’ program, leaving only the administration of the New Markets Tax Credit program and the outstanding award portfolio. The Committee recommends the entire 

program remain at the Treasury. Of the funds provided, 

$13,000,000 is for administrative costs of the program. 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $229,083,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 236,243,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 236,243,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +7,160,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Financial Management Service (FMS) is responsible for the 

management of Federal finances and the collection of Federal debt. 

As the Federal Government’s central financial agent, FMS receives 

and disburses public monies, maintains government accounts, and 

reports on the status of the government’s finances. FMS is also accountable for developing and implementing the most reliable and 

efficient financial methods and systems to manage and improve the 

Government’s cash management, credit management, and debt collection programs. Pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act 

of 1996, FMS became the primary agency for the collecting of federal non-tax debt that is due and owed to the government. Through 

FMS, there is a coordinated effort to collect debt from those who 

have defaulted on agreements with the Federal government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $236,243,000 for 

the Financial Management Service, an increase of $7,160,000 above 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The bill includes up to $9,220,000 for information systems 

modernization initiatives and up to $2,500 for official reception and 

representation expenses. 

UNITED STATES MINT

UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

The United States Mint manufactures coins, receives deposits of 

gold and silver bullion, and safeguards the Federal government’s 

holdings of monetary metals. For fiscal year 1997, Congress established the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund (Public Law 

104–52), which authorized the U.S. Mint to use proceeds from the 

sale of coins to finance the costs of its operations and which consolidated all existing Mint accounts into a single fund. Public Law 

104–52 also provides that, in certain situations, the levels of capital 

investments for circulating coins and protective services shall factor into the decisions of the Congress such that those levels compete with other requirements for funding. 

76 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a spending level for capital investments by the U.S. Mint for circulating coinage and protective services of $36,900,000, an increase of $12,900,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 spending level and the same as the level included in the 

budget request. The following table provides basic information on 

the revenues, costs, and products of the Mint for fiscal years 2004 

through 2006: 

Circulating coins Commemorative quarters Numismatic coins Protection 

2004 (actual): 

Number of coins 11.1 billion ................ 2.2 billion .................. 24 million.

Cost of operations.$194 million .............. $241 million .............. $521 million .............. $39 million. 

Revenue .............. $443 million .............. $560 million .............. $667 million.

2005 (est.): 

Number of coins 12.8 billion ................ 2.6 billion .................. 22 million.

Cost of operations.$253 million .............. $228 million .............. $709 million .............. $36 million. 

Revenue .............. $524 million .............. $655 million .............. $800 million.

2006 (est.): 

Number of coins 12.7 billion ................ 2.9 billion .................. 22 million.

Cost of operations.

$242 million .............. $238 million .............. $696 million .............. $39 million. 

Revenue .............. $524 million .............. $718 million .............. $825 million.

Net revenue (to 

Treasury).

$439 million .............. $775 million .............. $500 million .............. ($41 million). 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

TAX ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ..................................................... ................................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................... $10,013,555,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .............................................. ................................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ............................................ ¥10,013,555,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Internal Revenue Service requested that Congress consolidate its existing accounts into a single account that would fund all 

taxpayer service and enforcement activities. The Committee denies 

this request and retains the existing, discrete account structure. 

PROCESSING, ASSISTANCE, AND MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,056,857,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,181,520,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +124,663,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +4,181,520,000 

This appropriation provides for processing tax returns and related documents; processing data for compiling statistics of income; 

assisting taxpayers in correct filing of their returns and in paying 

taxes that are due; overall planning and direction of the Internal 

Revenue Service; and management of financial resources and procurement. 

77 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,181,520,000 for Processing, Assistance and Management, which is $4,181,520,000 above the budget request and $124,663,000 above fiscal year 2005. 

Taxpayer service.—The Committee is concerned that, with the increasing focus on enforcement, the IRS might exacerbate problems 

with compliance as a result of a lack of resources for taxpayer service. It is clear to the Committee that IRS has rushed to meet an 

arbitrary figure specified for cuts to service programs, so much so 

that clearly IRS has not had time to evaluate the impact its proposals would have on taxpayers, nor has it consulted with stakeholders. The Committee does not question the notion that some 

taxpayer assistance centers (TACs) should be closed or realigned 

with other IRS assets to achieve savings. However, the methodology used to develop the list of TACs to be closed leaves a great 

deal to be desired. Specifically, the Committee is disturbed that the 

National Taxpayer Advocate (NTA), the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), the IRS Oversight Board, and 

other important stakeholder groups were not consulted during the 

development phase of the model that was used to identify which 

TACs should be closed. The Committee has included an administrative provision prohibiting the use of funds to close TACs for fiscal year 2006 until TIGTA has completed a thorough, scientific review of the impact this initiative would have on individual taxpayers. The Committee has included additional bill language that 

requires IRS to consult with NTA, TIGTA, the IRS Oversight 

Board, and other appropriate parties to receive feedback regarding 

data points that are incorporated in the model that determines 

which TACs should be closed and the weighting of those factors in 

the process. 

IRS Oversight Board.—The Committee is concerned that IRS 

proposed to reduce funding for the IRS Oversight Board by 50 percent in its budget request. As a result of this concern, the Committee has included bill language that dedicates $1,500,000 to support the continued operations of the IRS Oversight Board, which is 

an important source of independent information and analysis of 

IRS activities. The Committee expects this action will not be necessary in future fiscal years. 

The Committee is concerned that disabled military retirees, 

whose successful VA disability claims take more than 3 years to be 

resolved, are unable to receive the back tax they are owed for more 

than 3 years due to IRS statute of limitations. The Committee directs the IRS to work with the VA and report back to the Committee within 90 days of the enactment of this act on how many 

disabled military retirees have been denied the full back tax that 

they are owed due to the 3 year statute of limitations, and how 

many military retirees have VA disability claims that have been 

pending for 3 years or longer and will be penalized by the 3 year 

statute of limitations. 

78 

TAX LAW ENFORCEMENT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,363,539,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,541,466,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +177,927,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +4,541,466,000 

This appropriation provides for the examination of tax returns, 

both domestic and international; the administrative and judicial 

settlement of taxpayer appeals of examination findings; technical 

rulings; monitoring employee pension plans; determining qualifications of organizations seeking tax-exempt status; examining tax returns of exempt organizations; enforcing statutes relating to detection and investigation of criminal violations of the internal revenue 

laws; collecting unpaid accounts; compiling statistics of income and 

compliance research; securing unfiled tax returns and payments; 

and expanded efforts to reduce overclaims and erroneous filings associated with the earned income tax credit. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,541,466,000, an increase of 

$4,541,466,000 over the request and $177,927,000 over fiscal year 

2005. Included in the recommendation is $55,584,000 to support 

IRS activities under the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement 

program. 

INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,577,768,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,606,846,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +29,078,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +1,606,846,000 

This appropriation provides for service-wide data processing support, including the evaluation, development, and implementation of 

computer systems (including software and hardware) requirements. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,606,846,000, an increase of 

$1,606,846,000 over the request and $29,078,000 over fiscal year 

2005. The Committee has included bill language that makes 

$75,000,000 available until September 30, 2007 in order to facilitate information technology purchases as requested by IRS. 

Information systems vulnerability.—The Committee is concerned 

that vulnerability management has been largely overlooked by the 

Federal government as a means of securing cyberspace and critical 

computer networks. By applying basic vulnerability management 

principles, agencies can reduce the annual cost of securing networks by identifying cyber security weaknesses, quantifying their 

business risk due to exposure, knowing the state of their network 

with respect to their specific security policies, enforcing these security policies, measuring performance against them over time, and 

verifying policy compliance across distributed organizations. In adVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
79 

dition, vulnerability management can also result in reduced severity and more effective responses when incidents do occur. 

The Committee is aware that the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) has evaluated and certified a new technology providing such a vulnerability management solution. This 

technology will allow for a greater understanding of where exposures exist, will identify the corresponding business risk, and allow 

risks to be eliminated in a systematic, priority-driven manner. The 

Committee encourages IRS to review this technology and implement it, if appropriate. 

BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $203,360,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 199,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 199,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥4,360,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides funding for IT contractors to modernize key business systems of the Internal Revenue Service. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,000,000 for 

business systems modernization, a decrease of $4,360,000 from the 

fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

The release of funding from this account is governed by the same 

statutory conditions that governed the funds appropriated into this 

account in previous years. 

The Committee notes that there have been serious concerns 

voiced by the IRS Oversight Board, the Government Accountability 

Office and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 

with respect to prior program performance. The Committee recognizes that IRS and the PRIME contractor have scaled back the proposed BSM work plan to a more manageable level, and expects that 

each milestone for fiscal year 2006 will be met on time and within 

budget as a result of providing the budget request. 

HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $34,562,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 20,210,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,210,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥14,352,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides contractor support to develop and 

administer the advance payment option for the health insurance 

tax credit included in Public Law 107–210, the Trade Act of 2002. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,210,000 for 

health insurance tax credit administration, a decrease of 

$14,352,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

80 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

Sec. 201. The Committee continues a provision that allows the 

transfer of 5 percent (3 percent in the case of Tax Law Enforcement) of any appropriation made available to the IRS to any other 

IRS appropriation. 

Sec. 202. The Committee continues a provision that requires that 

IRS maintain a training program in taxpayer rights, dealing courteously with taxpayers, and cross-cultural relations. 

Sec. 203. The Committee continues a provision that requires IRS 

to institute policies and procedures that will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information. 

Sec. 204. The Committee continues a provision that makes funds 

available for improved facilities and increased manpower to provide 

efficient and effective 1–800 help line service for taxpayers. 

Sec. 205. The Committee includes a provision that prohibits IRS 

from closing or consolidating taxpayer assistance centers (TACs) 

until a thorough study is completed that assesses the impact of closures on taxpayer compliance. In addition, language is included 

that requires IRS to consult with the National Taxpayer Advocate, 

the IRS Oversight Board, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration and IRS employees on the model used to determine 

which TACs should be closed. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Section 210. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

the Department of the Treasury to purchase uniforms, insurance, 

and motor vehicles without regard to the general purchase price 

limitation, and enter into contracts with the State Department for 

health and medical services for Treasury employees in overseas locations. 

Section 211. The Committee continues the provision that authorizes transfer, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 

under certain circumstances. 

Section 212. The Committee continues the provision limiting 

funds for the purchase of law enforcement vehicles unless the purchase is consistent with vehicle management principles. 

Section 213. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the Department of the Treasury from undertaking a redesign 

of the $1 Federal Reserve note. 

Section 214. The Committee continues the provision that provides for transfers from and reimbursements to ‘‘Financial management service, salaries and expenses’’ for the purposes of debt collection. 

Section 215. The Committee continues the provision extending 

the life of Treasury’s franchise fund. 

Section 216. The Committee continues the provision that requires Congressional approval for the construction and operation of 

a museum by the United States Mint. 

Section 217. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used to merge the United States Mint 

and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without the approval of 

the House and Senate committees of jurisdiction. 

81 

Section 218. The Committee has modified last year’s provision directing the Secretary of the Treasury to provide report within 90 

days of enactment describing how Treasury defines and reports on 

the statutory provisions addressing currency manipulation by 

America’s trading partners. The department should include in the 

report specific examples of what it defines to be currency manipulation, and should include those examples that encompass the full 

range of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) definitions, including currency pegs, interventions and other forms used to artificially value a currency. In addition, the department should address 

how it consults with the IMF as required by the 1988 Omnibus 

Trade Act, how the IMF and the Treasury each separately and 

independently define currency manipulation to gain unfair trade 

advantage, how the Treasury factors its own evaluation and definition of manipulation into consultations with IMF, and how the 

Treasury’s final determination in the semi-annual report to Congress reflects both views. The secretary should report the countries 

and occasions when it has cited a trading partner since the 1988 

Trade Act, the specific citations and definitions for citing them, and 

the total numbers of times the department has cited America’s 

trading partners. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation: 

Program Level ........................................................................... $37,650,238,000 

Rescissions ................................................................................. ¥2,493,600,000 

Offsetting Collections ................................................................ ¥2,016,000,000 

Net Appropriation .................................................................. 33,452,052,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation: 

Program Level ........................................................................... 35,108,400,000 

Rescissions ................................................................................. ¥2,321,000,000 

Offsetting Collections ................................................................ ¥2,850,000,000 

Net Appropriation .................................................................. 31,915,207,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request: 

Program Level ........................................................................... 33,347,486,000 

Rescissions ................................................................................. ¥2,321,000,000 

Offsetting Collections ................................................................ ¥1,959,000,000 

Net Appropriation .................................................................. 29,147,486,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation: 

Program Level .................................................................... 1,536,845,000 

Rescissions .......................................................................... 172,600,000 

Offsetting Collections ......................................................... 834,000,000 

Net Appropriation .......................................................... 1,536,845,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 budget request: 

Program Level .................................................................... 4,304,566,000 

Rescissions .......................................................................... ¥149,248,000 

Offsetting Collections ......................................................... ¥57,000,000 

Net Appropriation .......................................................... 4,304,566,000 

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was 

established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Act of 1965 (Public Law 89–174). HUD is the principal federal 

agency responsible for administering and regulating programs and 

industries concerned with the nation’s housing needs, economic and 

community development, and fair housing opportunities. 

In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and interests of 

the nation’s communities and of the people who live and work in 

them, HUD administers mortgage and loan insurance programs, 

82 

rental and homeownership subsidy programs for low-income families, neighborhood rehabilitation programs, and community development programs. 

The Committee recommends a total program level of $33,452,042,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, an increase of $1,536,835,000 above the fiscal year 2005 

level, and $4,304,556,000 above the request. 

Over the past five years, the Committee has demonstrated the 

high priority it places on housing and community development programs by providing significant additional resources to the Department at a time of fiscal constraint. Total funding provided for HUD 

programs has increased by 15 percent in five years. However, despite this large increase, funding for most HUD programs has remained flat, or been reduced, because Section 8 funding has grown 

by 45 percent and in the budget recommended by the Committee 

for 2006, Section 8 will consume 60 percent of the entire HUD 

budget. Most of the growth has occurred in Section 8 voucher renewals, which has increased by almost 30 percent since fiscal year 

2001. Such growth is not sustainable and reform is imperative to 

ensure that all of the nation’s housing and community development 

needs can continue to receive Federal assistance. 

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ................................................... $15,531,400,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation ........................................................ 14,765,900,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ..................................................... 15,845,194,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .................. +765,480,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 budget request ................ ¥313,794,000 

The Committee recommends a total of $15,531,400,000 in total 

funding for this account, an increase of almost $765,480,000 above 

the 2005 enacted level in total and $734,471,000 above the amount 

enacted in 2005 for the renewal of tenant-based Section 8 vouchers. 

Consistent with the Administration’s request the Committee continues the advance of $4,200,000,000 of the funds appropriated 

under this heading for Section 8 programs to October 1, 2006. The 

entire advance is limited to this account. However, language in included in this account, which allows the Secretary to transfer up 

to $200,000,000 of the advance appropriation to the Project Based 

Rental Assistance Account during periods of Continuing Resolutions and if funds are available. 

Voucher Renewals.—The Committee is providing $14,089,756,000 

the same as requested and a 6% increase in funds compared to fiscal year 2005 for the renewal of tenant based vouchers. This is considerably more than rents have increased and, in fact, there is 

some evidence to suggest that, nation-wide, subsidies for rental assistance have begun to level off relative to their 2004 levels. However funds are not being reduced to reflect the potential for lower 

costs because the evidence is not yet complete and the rise in tenant-based rents over the past 5 years has been more than 40%. The 

Department is instructed to monitor and report to the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter on the trends 

83 

in Section 8 subsidy and to report on the extent to which changes 

in subsidy are due to changes in rent or changes in tenant income. 

The Committee will conduct a review of the trends in gross rents 

and subsidy requirements prior to enactment of a final bill. 

The 2006 Committee recommendation completes the transition of 

the appropriations for this program from a ‘‘unit-based’’ system 

back to a ‘‘budget-based’’ program as the program has historically 

operated. Whereas in fiscal year 2005, Congress estimated the costs 

of the Tenant-based program based on units under lease during the 

three-month period that immediately preceded passage of the Act, 

that level set the baseline for all future appropriations. This Act 

builds upon that by providing sufficient funds to renew all of the 

vouchers under lease on which appropriations were based in FY 

2005 prior to the pro rata reduction required to stay within appropriated amounts, adjusted by the local Annual Adjustment Factor 

(reflecting actual local rent increases) for 2005 and inflation estimates for 2006, plus funds for the estimated number of renewal of 

units entering the TBRA Account from other forms of assistance for 

the first time in 2005. 

The Committee recognizes that a fully ‘‘budget based’’ system 

now in effect leaves the Public Housing Authorities with a single 

fixed amount for the calendar year and with the difficult task of 

maximizing the renewal of vouchers while existing under a complex 

regime of rules and requirements that do nothing to facilitate the 

process. Absent real reforms to the program to reduce costs and 

dramatic changes to the program’s implementation guidelines to reduce the administrative burden, the Committee directs the Department to take whatever regulatory and administrative actions it can 

to increase flexibility, reduce administrative burden and streamline 

program implementation. The Committee directs the Department 

to provide a full report on the regulatory and administrative actions available to the Department by September 1, 2005. 

HUD is also instructed to establish the formula necessary to distribute funds to the PHAs based on the methodology described 

above and must communicate to each PHA, within 45 days of enactment, the fixed amount that will be made available to each PHA 

for calendar year 2006. Language is repeated this year to ensure 

that all funds are assigned and obligated expeditiously and that 

the Department holds no funds in reserve. The amount being provided in this account is the only source of Federal funds that may 

be used to renew tenant-based vouchers. The amounts appropriated 

here may not be augmented from any other source. 

The Committee has been made aware that the use of the May/ 

June/July data may have had an adverse impact on some of the 

June PHAs or created other anomalous results. Therefore, language is included to set aside up to $45,000,000 within renewal 

funding for the purpose of restoring vouchers to those public housing entities that were severely reduced solely due to the snapshot 

of costs in the fiscal year 2005 Act and due to an extraordinary increase in costs from portability over the past year. The Secretary 

shall set the thresholds for each request for funds by a public housing and has complete discretion on the amount to provide, if any, 

after verification of the information provided. 

These are one-time adjustments that reset the baseline for the 

future allocation of funds and Public housing agencies must conVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
84 

tinue to manage their Section 8 programs on a budget basis established in the 2005 Appropriations Act. Yet the issue of portability 

continues to be troubling and the Department is instructed, prior 

to the submission of the 2007 budget, to develop and submit proposals to minimize the cost that portability could have on PHAs operating on a fixed annual budget. 

The Committee has reviewed carefully but not agreed to the Administration’s request for a central fund. The Administration has 

not clearly identified the circumstances under which the funds 

would be made available, and its inclusion could lead public housing agencies to anticipate the availability of additional funding 

above their fixed budget allocation. 

The Committee encourages HUD to continue working with the 

City of Baltimore Housing Authority to identify ways that the City 

of Baltimore Housing Authority can implement the terms of the 

federal court order arising out of Bailey et al v. Housing Authority 

of Baltimore City. 

Tenant protection.—The Committee provides $165,700,000 for tenant protection vouchers, $4,004,000 more than enacted for 2005 

and $188,381,000 less than the Administration requested. The Administration’s request assumed the full implementation of a final 

mandatory conversion (demolition) rule for public housing units 

that should not be rehabilitated on the basis of a cost benefit analysis. This rule is not going to be fully implemented in time to require that first time vouchers of the entire 30,000 units assumed. 

Hence, the Committee has provided funding for tenant protection 

vouchers at the historic levels requested for this fiscal year. 

Administrative Fees.—The Committee recommends 

$1,225,000,000 for allocation to the PHAs to conduct activities associated with placing and maintaining individuals under Section 8 

assistance. This amount is $24,574,000 below the enacted level for 

2005 and $70,408,000 below the levels proposed by the Administration. This reduction reflects the shift of contracts currently handled 

by HUD’s financial management center (FMC) to the project based 

Section 8 program, and therefore no longer administered by the 

PHAs. The Committee does not include funds as requested for a 

contract to determine the appropriate and reasonable administrative fee structure. The proper time to readdress the issue of Administrative fee structures is after the Congress has implemented significant reforms to the administrative requirements. Until then the 

Department is instructed to allocate fees based on the pro rata allocation methodology used for the 2005. 

Although no assumption is made about the enactment of authorizing legislation to reduce the administrative burden on PHAs, it 

is reasonable for the Committee to assume that some immediate 

short-term reductions in burden can occur. Therefore, the Department shall provide the Committee with a list of administrative and 

regulatory changes that can be put in place in time to benefit 

PHAs for 2006, no later than September 1, 2005. 

Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinators (FSS).—The Committee includes $45,000,000 for FSS coordinators, the same amount as enacted for 2005 and $10,000,000 less than requested by the Administration. Coordinators help residents link up with important services in the community to speed the achievement of self-sufficiency. 

The Department provided no data or other information to demVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
85 

onstrate that the number of PHAs participating in the FSS program would increase by more than 50. Hence the requested increase is denied. 

Working Capital Fund.—The Committee provides the requested amount of $5,900,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund 

(WCF). In that this is a minimum amount, the Department is encouraged to apply whatever resources are needed to complete the 

development of a secure, scalable and workable information collection system so that the Department and the Congress can get a 

better understanding of the public assistance inventory. This 

should be HUD’s top priority for infrastructure development. 

PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... 5,088,300,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 5,298,272,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 5,072,100,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +16,200,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriations .................... ¥209,972,000 

The Project-Based Rental Assistance account (PBRA) provides a 

rental subsidy to a private landlord tied to a specific housing unit 

so that the properties themselves, rather than the individual living 

in the unit, remain subsidized. Amounts provided in this account 

include funding for the renewal of expiring project-based contracts, 

including Section 8, moderate rehabilitation, and single room occupancy (SRO) contracts, amendments to Section 8 project-based contracts, and administrative costs for performance-based projectbased Section 8 contract administrators and costs associated with 

administering moderate rehabilitation and single room occupancy 

contracts. 

The Committee provides a total of $5,088,300,000 for the annual renewal of project-based contracts, of which $147,200,000 is for the 

costs of contract administrators and $1,000,000 is for the Working 

Capital Fund. 

This is $255,103,000 below the enacted level for fiscal year 2005 

and is $17,000,000 above the Administration’s Request. The Committee agrees with the Administration’s request to use the recapture of project-based recaptures for the renewal of project based 

contracts as well as amendments beginning in 2006. Until now the 

use of excess funds from long-term expiring contracts has been limited to amendments. Therefore, the Committee agrees that no increase in new appropriations is necessary to meet the 2006 needs 

of this program. However, the Committee concluded that the Administration’s assumptions concerning costs savings due to the 

rental income verification (RHIIP) and mark-to-market restructures is pure speculation and unsupportable. Therefore, savings 

proposed by the Administration for these activities, are rejected by 

the Committee. 

Instead, language is included in the Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Account that allows the Department to transfer up to 

$200,000,000 of the advance appropriation available during fiscal 

year 2006, if sufficient new funds or recaptures are not available 

when needed or the government operates under a continuing resolution. Prior to 2005, the project based program had access to the 

86 

advanced appropriation during periods when new appropriations 

were not available on October 1st. 

The Committee is taking action that was not proposed by the Administration to protect all project-based units covered by HUD contracts. Language is included to permit Section 8 performance-based 

contract administration funds to be available for performancebased contract administration for other forms of project-based subsidy payments such as the debt service subsidy paid on Sec. 236 

projects and the rent subsidies provided Supportive Housing for the 

Elderly and the Disabled as well as the rent supplement and rental 

assistance payment programs. The Department will be permitted to 

use a portion of appropriations, in addition to recaptures, to utilize 

performance-based contract administrators to improve oversight 

and management of these other forms of project-based assistance. 

HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

(RESCISSION)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ......................................... ¥$2,493,600,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................................. ¥1,557,000,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................................... ¥2,500,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......... +936,600,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ....... ¥6,400,000 

The Committee recommends a rescission of $2,493,600,000 from 

unobligated balances and carryover remaining in the Housing Certificate Fund from the Section 8 tenant-based and project-based 

rental assistance programs as proposed in the budget request. 

Language is included under this account clarifying that excess 

balances in the Housing Certificate Fund shall not be used to augment fiscal year 2006 funding for the tenant-based rental assistance. The Committee believes such practice is inappropriate since 

it results in total program spending in excess of the levels appropriated in the bill leading to future funding problems that create 

instability and uncertainty for the individuals who rely on the program and jeopardize funding for other important housing programs. 

PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $2,600,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 2,579,200,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 2,327,200,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... +20,800,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +272,800,000 

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. 

The Committee recommends a total funding level of 

$2,600,000,000, an increase of $20,080,000 above the 2005 enacted 

level and $272,800,000 above the Administration’s request. Within 

the amounts provided the committee directs that: 

87 

—$17,000,000 is made available for Emergency Capital 

needs; the Committee continues last year’s language to ensure 

that funds are used only for repairs needed due to an unforeseen and unanticipated emergency event or natural disaster 

event that occurs during fiscal year 2006. —$24,000,000 is directed to the Resident Opportunity and 

Supportive Services, as requested by the Administration. —$11,000,000 is directed to Administrative receiverships, as 

requested for remediation of troubled PHAs. No funds are 

being provided for Technical Assistance based on the large 

build up of unobligated balances. The Department is expected 

to cover the costs of the fair market rents (FMR) surveys from 

funds remaining available in this account; —$8,820,000 is directed to the support of administrative and 

judicial receiverships, as requested, and —No less than $10,000,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the development of and modifications to, 

information technology systems which support Public and Indian Housing (PIH) programs. This reflects the Committee’s 

continued concern that investments must be made to correct 

deficiencies in PIH information technology systems to improve 

PIH’s ability to conduct appropriate financial and management 

oversight of its programs. 

As requested, the recommendation does not designate a separate 

set-aside for the Neighborhood Networks grants because such activities are already an eligible use of capital funds. 

In addition the Committee does not provide funding for the Section 23 Lease adjustments since all Section 23 public housing units 

have already been converted to Section 8 vouchers. 

The Department is directed to continue to provide the quarterly 

detailed reports on those PHA with obligation rates of less than 90 

percent. 

PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ......................................... $3,600,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................................. 2,438,300,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................................... 3,407,300,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......... 1,161,644,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ....... +192,700,000 

The Public Housing Operating Fund (PHOF) 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; anticrime and antidrug activities, including the costs of providing adequate security; 

routine maintenance cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses. The Committee has provided $3,600,000,000 for the Federal share of PHA operating expenses. This amount is $192,700,000 

greater than the Administration requested and $1,161,644,000 

greater than the enacted level for fiscal year 2005. In 2005 the 

88 

Congress enacted a one-time shift in the payment of funds to 

PHAS, which resulted in the one-time savings of almost one billion 

dollars. The Committee has restored funding for public housing operating subsidies to but could only do so by reducing other HUD 

programs. As requested, up to $10,000,000 may be used for the 

‘‘graduation bonus.’’ 

In 2001, Congress funded and mandated that the Department establish the costs of operating a well run Public Housing Authority. 

This report to the Congress, which became known as the Harvard 

Study, made several important recommendations to reform the current allocation formula to better align the allocation with the actual costs. Congress, in fiscal year 2005 mandated that HUD and 

the public housing industry negotiate a new regulation to implement the Harvard Study. This was completed and a consensus report was issued on June 10, 2004. The PHA community entered 

into negotiations in good faith and the results were negotiated not 

on the basis of a specific dollar amount but on a more equitable 

distribution of the funds. Once transition costs are removed, the 

amount required is not significantly greater than the amounts appropriated in recent years. That negotiation process and the result 

has been undercut and rendered irrelevant by the Administration’s 

proposed rule. 

Hence language is included that requires funds be allocated to 

the PHAs in accordance with the negotiated outcome as set forth 

in the ‘‘Post 4th Session Rule’’ signed on June 10th 2004. In addition $50,000,000 is designated within the amounts provided to assist in the conversion to asset management for those public housing 

agencies that would lose more than 5 percent in funding compared 

to the existing Performance Funding System. 

The detailed operating formula based on the instructions above 

shall be developed and submitted to the Committee in conjunction 

with or as part of the Department’s Operating Plan. 

As proposed, language designating $10,000,000 for transfer to 

the Department of Justice to be allocated by the Attorney General 

through existing programs, such as Weed and Seed is not included 

in fiscal year 2006. However, all activities previously authorized 

under the public housing drug elimination program (PHDEP) are 

permissible activities under the operating and capital fund accounts. 

The Committee includes language, as proposed in the budget, restating fundamental principles of appropriations law which prohibits funds appropriated in this Act for fiscal year 2005 payments 

from being used to supplement a prior year appropriation for prior 

year payments. 

The committee also continues language, carried in prior years, 

prohibiting funds from being used for section 9(k) activities. Proposed language is not included making funds available for two 

years. 

89 

REVITALIZATION OF SEVERELY DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING (HOPE

VI) 

Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation .................................................... $0 

Fiscal year 2005 Appropriation ......................................................... 142,848,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... ¥142,848,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 Appropriation ..................... ¥142,848,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +142,848,000 

The Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing program, also known as HOPE VI, provides competitive grants to public housing authorities to revitalize entire neighborhoods adversely 

impacted by the presence of badly deteriorated public housing 

projects. In addition to developing and constructing new affordable 

housing, the program provides PHAs with the authority to demolish obsolete projects and to provide self-sufficiency services for families who reside in and around the facility. 

The Committee does not provide funds for the HOPE VI program 

in 2006. The Administration did not request funds for this program. Language proposed by the Administration to rescind funds 

appropriated for 2005 is not included. 

The Committee recognizes that this program has had a varied 

and controversial history. On the one hand, the projects that have 

been completed have been successful and demonstrate what the 

program could accomplish. On the other hand, the Administration 

has provided an overwhelming case that far too many projects have 

not been completed in a timely way. Many funded years ago have 

yet to start. Currently over $2 billion in funds from prior years remain in a backlog and hundreds of vouchers have remained unused 

for years. Furthermore, resistance to the program from tenants remains strong, further delaying many projects. 

Most importantly, the Committee is convinced that, although 10 

years have been an important demonstration period, the per-unit 

costs of the program is too high, relative to alternatives, to be sustained over the long run. Yet promises of reform and a new longterm strategy for achieving some of the program’s objectives has 

not been forthcoming. 

Therefore, the Committee believes that the best course of action 

is to reject the Administration’s request to rescind the 2005 funding making those funds available in 2006 for grant awards, but 

until a new authorization is enacted by Congress to revise and reform the program, no further funding is merited. 

NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation .................................................... $600,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 Appropriation ......................................................... 621,984,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 582,600,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥21,984,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +17,400,000 

The Native American Housing Block Grants program provides 

funds to Indian tribes and their tribally designated housing entities 

(TDHEs) to address housing needs within their communities. The 

block grant is designed to fund a TDHE’s operating requirements 

and capital needs. 

90 

The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for the Native American Block Grant and the Indian Community Development Block 

Grant Fund. This is $17,400,000 more than the Administration requested and $21,984,000 less than enacted in 2005. The Committee’s recommendation to reduce funding relative to 2005 enacted 

levels is based on the Administration’s official estimate that 

$97,000,000 in previously appropriated funds will carry over into 

2006. 

In 2003 when HUD began using the new 2000 Census data HUD 

shifted the basis for the needs portion of the formula distribution 

of funds from single race to the multi-race database. The Committee has become aware that this shift has caused serious disruption and the loss of funding for a majority of single race tribes, 

which benefit from the use of single race data. Therefore, language 

is included instructing HUD to distribute funds on the basis of single race of multi race data which ever is the higher amount for 

each recipient. Additional funding has been provided to ensure that 

no grant recipient will lose funding as a result of the new calculation of need. 

The Indian CDBG program was previously funded as a set aside 

in the Community Development Block Grant, and the Committee 

agrees with the Administration’s proposal that the Indian CDBG 

program is best combined with the Native American Block grant 

and should be administered by the Office of Public and Indian 

Housing. However, as proposed, the balances remaining in each 

program shall remain separate and be administered separately. 

Of the amounts made available under this heading, —$549,342,000 is provided for the Native American Block 

Grant 

—$45,000,000 is provided for the Indian Community Block 

Grant 

—$2,000,000 is included for Section 601 loan guarantees, the same as enacted for FY 2005, to guarantee $17,900,000 in new 

loans. However, the Department is advised that loan level activity must be monitored to ensure that sufficient grant funds 

are available as collateral for new loans. 

—$2,308,000 is for Technical Assistance training and associated travel; 

—$150,000 is transferred to the Department Salary and Expenses account and; —$1,200,000 for the Native for American Indian Housing 

Council to conduct training and technical assistance. 

NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $8,815,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 0 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 8,815,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... +8,815,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... 0 

The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created 

the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program to provide 

grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home 

Lands (DHHL) for housing and housing related assistance to develop, maintain and operate affordable housing for eligible low-income Native Hawaiian families. 

91 

The Committee recommends $8,815,000 for this program, the 

same as provided in fiscal year 2005 as a set aside under the Community Development Block Grant heading. The committee agrees 

to fund the program as a separate account as proposed in the budget. Of the amounts provided, $352,606 is for technical assistance. 

INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Program account Limitation on direct Loans 

Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation .................... $2,645,000 $98,966,942 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................... 4,960,000 145,345,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................ 2,645,000 98,967,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ............................................................. ¥2,315,000 ¥46,378,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget 

request ............................................................. 0 0 

Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 

1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native Americans 

to build or purchase homes on trust land. This program provides 

access to sources of private financing for Indian families and Indian housing authorities that otherwise cannot acquire financing 

because of the unique legal status of Indian trust land. This financing vehicle enables families to construct new homes or to purchase 

existing properties on reservations. The Committee recommends $2,645,000 in new credit subsidy for 

the Section 184 loan guarantee program, the same amount requested by the Administration and $2,315,000 below the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level. This will be sufficient to guarantee $98,967,000 

in new loans. The Committee strongly supports the issue of the 

program of loan guarantees for the purchase, construction or rehabilitation of single-family homes on trust or restricted lands. However, the Department has indicated that of the $4,960,000 enacted 

for fiscal year 2005, $3,161,000 will carry over into 2006. Hence in 

total, more resources will be available in fiscal year 2006 than in 

fiscal year 2005. Of the amounts made available, $250,000 is transferred to the Department’s Salary and Expenses Account. 

NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Program account Limitation on direct 

Loans 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................... $882,000 $35,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................... 992,000 39,403,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................ 882,000 35,000,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation ............................................................ ¥110,000 ¥2,403,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 budget 

request ............................................................. 0 0 

The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created 

the Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund program to 

provide loan guarantees for native Hawaiian individuals and their 

families, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the Office of 

92 

Hawaiian Affairs, and private nonprofit organizations experienced 

in the planning and in the development of affordable housing for 

Native Hawaiians for the purchase, construction, and/or rehabilitation of single-family homes on Hawaiian Home Lands. This program provides access to private sources of financing that would 

otherwise not be available because of the unique legal status of Hawaiian Home Lands. 

The Committee recommends $882,000 for this program the same as requested to guarantee a total loan volume of $35,000,000, the 

full amount requested. Language is included transferring $35,000 

to the HUD salaries and expenses account for administrative expenses. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $285,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 281,751,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 268,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... +3,272,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +17,000,000 

The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program is authorized by the Housing Opportunities for Persons with 

AIDS Act. This program provides States and localities with resources and incentives to devise long-term comprehensive strategies to meet the housing needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and their 

families. Ninety percent of funding is distributed by formula to 

qualifying States and metropolitan areas on the basis of the cumulative number and incidences of AIDS reported to the Centers for 

Disease Control. The remaining 10 percent of funding is distributed 

through a national competition. Government recipients are required to have a HUD-approved Comprehensive Plan/Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS). For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends $285,000,000, an increase of $3,272,000 over the enacted levels for fiscal year 

2005, and an increase of $17,000,000 above the budget request. 

Within the total amount provided, $1,000,000 is for technical assistance, training and oversight as requested. The Committee continues to believe that creating new housing opportunities for persons with AIDS should be the priority for HOPWA funding. 

Bill language is included, carried in previous years, which requires the Secretary to renew expiring permanent supportive housing contracts previously funded under the national competition, 

which meet all program requirements, before awarding new competitive grants. 

RURAL HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $10,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 23,808,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥13,808,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +10,000,000 

This account provides funding to rural non-profit organizations, 

community development corporations, Indian tribes, State housing 

93 

finance agencies, State economic development and/or Federally recognized community development agencies. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 funding for this program. The Administration requested no funds for this program. 

Most initiatives in rural economic transformation are and should 

be funded through the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), 

which has the expertise in rural economic development, rural housing and community stabilization. These funds are intended to develop innovative economic strategies. 

EMPOWERMENT ZONES/ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $0 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 9,920,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥9,920,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... 0 

This account provides discretionary grant funding to 15 urban 

Enterprise Zones and Enterprise Communities (EZ/ECs) designated 

in Round II. 

The statute that created Round II EZ/ECs did not authorize discretionary grant funding for these communities, but instead authorized tax incentives to stimulate revitalization efforts in these 

communities. However, since fiscal year 1999, discretionary grant 

funds have been provided under this account. 

The Committee recommends no funding for this program. The 

Administration requested no funding for this program. As the 10- 

year Round II program winds down communities should use their 

remaining funds from prior year appropriations to close out activities funded by the grants. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $4,151,500,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 4,671,328,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥519,828,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request ................... +4,151,500,000 

The Community Development Fund provides funding to State 

and local governments, and to other entities that carry out community and economic development activities under various programs. 

The Committee recommends a total of $4,151,500,000 for the 

Community Development Fund account, a decrease of $519,828,000 

from the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and an increase of 

$4,151,500,000 to the fiscal year 2006 budget request. 

Of the amounts made available: 

—$3,859,900,000 is for the formula grants and the state 

share, $250,000,000 below the level enacted for FY 2005. The 

Administration proposed to eliminate this program. HUD is instructed to use the same methodology as used in FY 2005 to 

distribute these funds. 

—$290,000,000 for economic development initiative activities; and 

—$1,600,000 is transferred to the Working Capital Fund. 

94 

The Committee has maintained the formula program at the highest possible level for fiscal year 2006, consistent with the need to 

fully fund rental assistance and operating programs for low income 

families administered by public housing authorities, the disabled 

and in spite of the Administration’s pressure to reduce and retarget 

the funds to non-economic development activities. However, while 

maintaining the basic program intact, the Committee was not able 

to also maintain the large number of set asides for special programs and organizations that have been traditionally funded within this account. 

As a result, the Committee has recommended a significant reduction in the number of programs to be included as set asides in the 

Community Development Fund, and agrees that the Community 

Development Fund should focus entirely on traditional CDBG activities. Self-Help and other organizations that assist primarily in 

home ownership will no longer be funded as part of the Community 

Development Fund in order to maximize the amount to be distributed for the formula. 

In addition, the Department’s renewed emphasis on maximizing 

the allocation of funds where the needs are greatest is undermined 

by the continued growth in set asides that diminish the amount of 

funds that can be distributed in this manner. This problem was 

made more acute in fiscal year 2006 because the Committee was 

not able to fully fund the Community Development Fund at the 

levels provided in 2005. 

However, although many of the programs that began as one time 

funding requirements have not achieved self-sufficiency as hoped, 

the Committee does not agree with the Administration’s proposal 

to terminate all funding for all set asides that were funded in fiscal 

year 2005 within the CDF. Several have been merged with other 

similar programs in HUD, as noted elsewhere in this report. 

Youthbuild is proposed by the Administration for transfer and 

merger with the Job Corps in the Department of Labor and therefore is not funded in this bill. Others are funded in a new account, 

which was proposed by the Administration solely for The Self-Help 

Homeownership Opportunity program, but which the Committee 

has expanded to include other homeownership assistance activities 

and organizations formerly funded under this heading. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Program cost Limitation on Guaranteed loans 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................... $0 $0 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................... 5,952,000 275,000,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................ 0 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ............................................................. 5,952,000 ¥275,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget 

request; ............................................................ 0 0 

The Section 108 Loan Guarantees program underwrites private 

market loans to assist local communities in the financing of the acquisition and rehabilitation of publicly-owned real property, rehabilitation of housing, and certain economic development projects. 

95 

The Committee recommends no funds for this program. No funds were requested by the Administration. $6,900,000 was enacted in 

fiscal year 2005 for a loan level of $275,000,000. While the Committee recognizes that there is a place for a non-competitive loan 

program to fill gaps in funding at the local level, this program is 

not consistent with current government loan principles and has not 

been fully utilized due to the reluctance to use CDBG funds as collateral. It is also somewhat inconsistent with HUD’s attempts to 

refocus and a target CDBG grant funds to localities in the greatest 

need. The committee would welcome program changes that would 

reduce the loan guarantee below 100 percent and provide for collateral from non-CDBG sources of funds. 

BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $0 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 23,808,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥23,808,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request ................... 0 

The Brownfields Redevelopment program provides competitive 

economic development grants in conjunction with section 108 loan 

guarantees for qualified Brownfields projects. Grants are made in 

accordance with section 108(q) selection criteria. 

The goal of the program is to return contaminated sites to productive uses with an emphasis on creating substantial numbers of 

jobs for lower-income people in physically and economically distressed neighborhoods. 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Brownfields Redevelopment Program at HUD. The Administration has requested 

no funding for the past several years. Congress enacted 

$23,808,000 in fiscal year 2005. The Committee believes that due 

to the recent dramatic increases in funding in EPA and expanded 

EPA authority in recent authorizations for this program, HUD 

funding is no longer essential or appropriate. 

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $1,900,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 1,899,680,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 1,941,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... +320,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... ¥41,000,000 

The HOME investment partnerships program provides grants to 

States, units of local government, Indian tribes and insular areas, 

through formula allocation, for the purpose of expanding the supply 

of affordable housing in the jurisdiction. Upon receipt, State and 

local governments develop a comprehensive housing affordability 

strategy that enables them to acquire, rehabilitate, or construct 

new affordable housing, or to provide rental assistance to eligible 

families. 

The Committee recommends $1,900,000,000 for activities funded 

under this account, the same as enacted in fiscal year 2005 and 

$41,000,000 below the request. Funds are provided as follows: 

96 

—Formula Grants: $1,790,000,000 for formula grants for 

participating jurisdictions (States, units of local government 

and consortia of units of local government) and insular areas, 

an increase of $59,000,000 above the amount requested and 

$10,000,000 above the amount enacted for fiscal year 2005 

level. Of the amount provided, pursuant to the statute, at least 

15 percent of each participating jurisdiction’s allocation is reserved for housing that is developed, sponsored, or owned by 

Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs); —Housing Counseling: $41,700,000 for housing counseling 

programs. The Committee has continued funding for this activity within this account rather than creating a separate account 

as proposed in the budget request; —HOME/CHDO Technical Assistance: $17,300,000 for technical assistance activities for State and local participating jurisdictions and non-profit CHDOs. The Committee notes that 

the HOME statute authorizes technical assistance to be provided through contracts with eligible non-profit intermediaries 

as well as with other organizations recommended by participating jurisdictions and therefore directs HUD to use 

$8,000,000 to contract with qualified non-profit intermediaries 

to provide CHDO technical assistance in fiscal year 2006; —Working Capital Fund: no less than $1,000,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the development 

and modification of information technology systems that serve 

programs and activities under Community Planning and Development. 

In addition to the amounts above: 

—Down-payment Assistance Initiative: $50,000,000 for the 

Down-payment Assistance Initiative to be allocated by the Secretary to participating jurisdictions to provide down-payment 

assistance to low-income families to help them achieve homeownership. The budget request had included $200,000,000 for 

down-payment assistance. The amount enacted for fiscal year 

2005 was $49,600,000. 

The Committee is concerned that recent changes to metropolitan 

statistical area (MSA) boundaries may significantly lower area median incomes (AMI) in some communities with high housing costs, 

making ineligible many families and individuals who are currently 

eligible for housing subsidized through the Community Development Block Grant program and the HOME program, which have 

AMI eligibility requirements. The Committee encourages HUD to 

explore ways to help such mass transition to the new AMI, other 

than through any adjustment of funding formulas, to reduce the 

impact of MSA boundary changes on affordable housing and homeownership opportunities. 

SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP

Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation .................................................... $60,800,000 

Fiscal year 2005 Appropriations ....................................................... 0 

Fiscal year 2006 Budget Request ...................................................... 30,000,000 

Comparison with 2005 appropriations ...................................... 60,800,000 

Comparison with 2006 request .................................................. 30,800,000 

The Committee recommends $60,800,000 for the Self Help Opportunity Program. This is a new account, which is proposed by the 

97 

Administration to fund programs that previously have been funded 

as set asides within the Community Development Fund (CDF). The 

Administration requested $30,000,000 to fund the SHOP/Habitat 

for Humanity program. The Administration recommended no funding for all other programs previously included in the Community 

Development Fund. 

The Committee has expanded this account to include other activities, which are primarily focused on assisting low to moderate 

income families achieve homeownership and that were formerly 

funded within the Community Development Fund (CDF.) Most are 

funded at levels slightly below the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels. 

Reductions recommended by the committee for these programs, are 

consistent with reductions taken in most HUD programs to meet 

rental assistance priorities. Therefore language is included that 

provides: —$23,800,000 for the Self Help Homeownership Program, 

—$28,000,000 for the National Community Development Initiative (NCDI) for LISC and Enterprise Foundation, of which 

$1,000,000 is for capacity building activities administered by 

Habitat for Humanity and not less than $1,000,000, is for rural 

areas. 

—$3,000,000 for the Housing Assistance Council; 

—$4,000,000 for the Housing Partnership Network for a onetime grant to capitalize the reinsurance pool; —$1,000,000 for the Native American Indian Housing Council; and 

—$1,000,000 for the Special Olympics. 

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ......................................... $1,340,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................................. 1,240,511,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................................... 1,404,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......... +99,489,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ....... ¥100,000,000 

The homeless assistance grants account provides funding for the 

following homeless programs under title IV of the McKinney Act: 

(1) the emergency shelter grants program; (2) the supportive housing program; (3) the section 8 moderate rehabilitation (single room 

occupancy) program; and (4) the shelter plus care program. This account also supports activities eligible under the innovative homeless initiatives demonstration program. 

The Committee recommends funding homeless programs at 

$1,340,000,000, an increase of $99,489,000 above the enacted level 

for 2005 and $100,000,000 below the request. The recommendation 

includes no less than $238,000,000 to provide full funding for the 

costs associated with the renewal of all expiring Shelter Plus Care 

contracts. Language is included in the bill requiring funds to be 

made available for this purpose. 

The recommendation includes $11,674,000 for the national homeless data analysis project and for technical assistance, and no less 

than $1,000,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund for development and modifications of information technology systems that 

serve activities under Community Planning and Development. 

98 

Language is included in the bill that: (1) requires not less than 

30 percent of the funds appropriated, excluding amounts made 

available for renewals under the shelter plus care program, be used 

for permanent housing; (2) requires the renewal of all expiring 

shelter plus care contracts; (3) requires funding recipients to provide a 25 percent match for social services activities; (4) requires 

all homeless programs to coordinate their programs with mainstream health, social services and employment programs; and (5) 

provides two-year availability for obligation of funds provided 

under this account, except that no year availability is provided for 

the portion of funding necessary to meet initial contract requirements for the Single Room Occupancy program. 

Funding for the Prisoner Re-entry Initiative is not included since 

authorizing language has not been enacted. 

HOUSING PROGRAMS

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $741,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 741,000,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 741,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... 0 

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. 

The Committee recommends a $741,000,000 for the Section 202 

program for fiscal year 2005, the same levels as enacted for 2005 

and requested for 2006. The recommendation allocates funding as 

follows: 

—$656,200,000 for new capital and project rental assistance 

contracts (PRAC); 

—$10,000,000 for one-year renewals of expiring PRAC payments; 

—$49,600,000 for service coordinators and the continuation 

of congregate services grants; 

—$24,800,000 for grants to convert section 202 projects to 

assisted living facilities; and 

—No less than $400,000 for transfers to the Working Capital 

Fund to support the development of and modifications to information technology systems, which support programs and activities for the elderly. 

Language is included, carried in prior years, relating to the initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided under this 

heading. Language is also included to allow these funds to be used 

for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office. 

99 

HOUSING FOR THE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $238,100,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 238,100,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 119,900,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... +118,200,000 

The housing for the persons with disabilities (Section 811) program provides eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital 

grants to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 

supportive housing for disabled persons and provides project-based 

rental assistance (PRAC) to support operational costs for such 

units. The Committee recommends a $238,000,000 for Section 811 

activities, the same as fiscal year 2005 enacted level, and 

$118,200,000 above the request. The recommendation allocates 

funding as follows: 

—Up to $157,100,000 for capital grants and PRAC; 

—$78,300,000 for renewals or amendments of expiring tenant-based rental assistance; 

—$2,300,000 PRAC renewals; 

—$400,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund for the 

development and maintenance of information technology systems for programs and activities for housing for persons with 

disabilities programs; and —Up to $5,000,000 may be made available for incremental 

vouchers, at the Secretary’s discretion. 

The Committee recommends $238,100,000 for the Section 811 

program. This is the same as the enacted level for 2005 and is 

$118,200,000 million above the Administration’s request. The Administration proposes to eliminate funding for the construction of 

facilities that accommodate low-income disabled individuals arguing instead that disabled individuals prefer section 8 tenant based 

vouchers. The committee completely rejects this argument and has 

not been able to corroborate the Administration’s claims that there 

is no urgent need for additional facilities. The Committee finds 

that, in fact, there is universal agreement at all levels of analysis 

that facility construction and vouchers are needed for this program 

in fiscal year 2006. The Administration’s analysis is based on fundamentally flawed assumptions and blames the Department for following Congressional mandate. 

Language is included to allow these funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office. The 

Committee directs HUD to issue program guidance for the Section 

811 ‘‘mainstream’’ tenant-based program by March 15, 2006. HUD 

shall include guidance on: (1) targeting of rental assistance consistent with 811 eligibility criteria; (2) maintenance of these vouchers exclusively for persons eligible under Section 811 upon turnover; (3) retention of a meaningful role for non-profit disability organizations. The Committee is aware of concerns that funding for 

Section 811 tenant-based rental assistance may be diverted to the 

Section 8 voucher program. Such diversion would be a violation of 

Section 811 statute. No more than $5,000,000 is provided for incremental vouchers in fiscal year 2006 given the inexorable increase 

in renewal costs that would be required in subsequent years. 

100 

HOUSING COUNSELING

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $0 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 0 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 39,700,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... ¥39,700,000 

In fiscal year 2005, $39,764,000 was appropriated for housing 

counseling as a set-aside under the HOME Investments Partnership Program account. 

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. The Committee does not recommend the creation of a 

separate account for housing counseling activities, but instead has 

provided $41,700,000 for this activity as a set-aside within the 

HOME Investments Partnership Program account. 

FLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized 

HUD to establish a revolving fund into which rental collections in 

excess of the established basic rents for units in Section 236 subsidized projects are deposited. Subject to approval in appropriations 

acts, the Secretary is authorized under the Housing and Community Development Amendment of 1978 to transfer excess rent collections received after 1978 to the Troubled Projects Operating 

Subsidy program, renamed the Flexible Subsidy Fund. 

The Committee recommends that the account continue to serve 

as a repository of excess rental charges appropriated from the 

Rental Housing Assistance Fund. Although these resources will not 

be used for new reservations, they will continue to offset Flexible 

Subsidy outlays and other discretionary expenditures to support affordable housing projects. 

The recommendation includes language identical to language carried in prior years, to allow surplus funds derived from rental collections which were in excess of allowable rent levels to be returned 

to project owners only for the purposes of rehabilitating and renovating those properties. 

MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $12,896,000 

Offsetting collections ................................................................... 12,896,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 12,896,000 

Offsetting collections ................................................................... 12,896,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 13,000,000 

Offsetting collections ................................................................... 13,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .................. 0 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request ................ ¥104 

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. 

101 

All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs of administering the Act. 

The Committee recommends up to $12,896,000 for the manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from fees collected 

and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund established pursuant to the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act 

of 2000. The amount recommended is the same as the 2006 request 

and the 2005 enacted level. Language contained in previous Acts 

is continued to ensure that the net expenditures do not exceed fee 

collections at the end of the fiscal year. 

FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION

MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Limitation of direct 

loans 

Limitation of guaranteed 

loans Administrative expenses 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ......................... $50,000,000 $185,000,000,000 $355,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................. 50,000,000 185,000,000,000 354,051,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................... 50,000,000 185,000,000,000 355,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ............................................................... 0 0 +949,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget 

request ................................................................ 0 0 0 

The FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account includes 

the mutual mortgage insurance (MMI) and cooperative management housing insurance (CMHI) funds. This program account covers unsubsidized programs, primarily the single-family home mortgage program, which is the largest of all the FHA programs. The 

cooperative housing insurance program provides mortgages for cooperative housing projects of more than five units that are occupied 

by members of a cooperative housing corporation. 

The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 

commitments in the MMI program account as follows: 

$185,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and $50,000,000 for direct 

loans. The recommendation also includes $355,000,000 for administrative expenses, of which $351,000,000 is transferred to the Salaries and expenses account, and $4,000,000 is transferred to the Office of Inspector General. In addition, $62,600,000 is provided for 

non-overhead administrative contract expenses, of which no less 

than $18,281,000 is transferred to the Working Capital Fund for 

development and modifications to information technology systems 

that serve programs or activities under Housing Programs or the 

Federal Housing Administration. Language is continued as requested and carried in previous years appropriating additional administrative expenses in certain circumstances. 

102 

GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Limitation of 

direct loans 

Limitation of guar- anteed loans Administrative ex- penses Program costs 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ......................... $50,000,000 $35,000,000,000 $231,400,000 $8,800,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................. 50,000,000 35,000,000,000 225,945,000 9,920,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ........................... 50,000,000 35,000,000,000 231,400,000 8,800,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................................................. 0 0 5,455,000 ¥1,120,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget 

request ............................................................... 0 0 0 0 

The FHA general and special risk insurance (GI and SRI) program account includes 17 different programs administered by FHA. 

The GI fund includes a wide variety of insurance programs for special purpose single and multi-family loans, including loans for property improvements, manufactured housing, multi-family 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, mortgages for experimental housing and 

for high-risk mortgagors who would not normally be eligible for 

mortgage insurance without housing counseling. 

The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 

commitments for the general and special risk insurance program 

account as requested: $35,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and 

$50,000,000 for direct loans. 

As requested, the recommendation includes $8,800,000 direct appropriation for credit subsidy. The recommendation also includes 

$231,400,000 for administrative expenses, of which $211,400,000 is 

transferred to the Salaries and Expenses account and $20,000,000 

is transferred to the Office of Inspector General. An additional 

$71,900,000 is provided for non-overhead administrative expenses, 

of which no less than $10,800,000 is transferred to the Working 

Capital Fund for development and modifications to information 

technology systems that serve activities under Housing Programs 

or the Federal Housing Administration. 

Language is continued, carried in previous years, appropriating 

additional administrative expenses in certain circumstances. 

103 

GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation of guaranteed loans Administrative expenses 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ........................................... $200,000,000,000 $10,700,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .. 200,000,000,000 10,609,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request 200,000,000,000 11,360,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 

2005 appropriation .................. 0 +91,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 

2006 budget request ................ 0 ¥660,000 

The guarantee of mortgage-backed securities program facilitates 

the financing of residential mortgage loans insured or guaranteed 

by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) 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 issues 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. 

The recommendation includes a $200,000,000,000 limitation on 

loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities as requested, the 

same level provided in fiscal year 2005. The Committee also recommends $10,700,000 for administrative expenses to be transferred 

to the Salaries and Expenses account. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $60,600,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 45,100,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 69,700,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... +15,464,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... ¥9,138,000 

The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 directs the 

Secretary to undertake programs of research, studies, testing, and 

demonstrations related to the HUD mission. These functions are 

carried out internally through contracts with industry, non-profit 

research organizations, and educational institutions and through 

agreements with State and local governments and other Federal 

agencies. 

The Committee recommends $60,600,000 for PD&R. The Administration requested $69,700,000 for PD&R under a restructured 

program content, which includes basic PD&R programs and Section 

107 programs formerly funded as set asides within CDBG. In fiscal 

104 

year 2005 $88,400,000 was provided for these same programs. Of 

the amounts made available, language is included to designate: 

—$26,562,000 for basic research, of which $750,000 is directed to the National Academy of Sciences, National Research 

Council for a review of HUD ongoing research and to recommend the future of HUD’s research program. The committee 

is concerned that HUD’s research office has become largely a 

grant making organization rather than conducting leading 

edge research with a strong in house capability. The Council 

is directed to provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, prior to the submission of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget request that reviews current research priorities and makes recommendation on a new course 

of research for HUD. The Report should include specific recommendations and should examine the elimination of an in 

house research office, if the Council sees no long-term value to 

HUD specific research or that HUD related research can or 

should be done by other Departments. 

—$29,038,000 for grants to institutions of higher education 

funded under Section 107. 

—$5,000,000 for the PATH program. The Committee retains 

language included last year that exempts 50% of the funds provided from competition. HUD is encouraged to shift this program, in its entirety, including staff, to the Office of Housing. 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $38,800,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 46,128,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 38,800,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥7,328,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... 0 

The Fair Housing Act, title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 

as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of housing 

and authorizes assistance to State and local agencies in administering the provision of fair housing statutes. The Fair Housing 

Assistance Program (FHAP) assists State and local fair housing enforcement agencies that are certified by HUD as ‘‘substantially 

equivalent’’ to HUD with respect to enforcement policies and procedures. FHAP assures prompt and effective processing of complaints 

filed under title VIII that are within the jurisdiction of State and 

local fair housing agencies. The Fair Housing Initiatives Program 

(FHIP) alleviates housing discrimination by providing support to 

private nonprofit organizations, State and local government agencies and other nonfederal entities for the purpose of eliminating or 

preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair housing 

opportunities. 

The Committee recommends a total of $38,800,000 for this account, a decrease of $7,328,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted 

level and the same as the budget request. 

Of this amount, $22,700,000 is for FHAP and $16,100,000 is for 

FHIP. 

105 

The Committee expects HUD to continue to provide quarterly reports on obligation and expenditure of these funds, delineated by 

each program and activity. 

Language is included, carried in previous years, designating the 

amount available for FHIP. 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL

LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $119,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 166,656,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 119,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥47,656,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... 0 

The Lead Hazard Reduction Program, authorized under the 

Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, provides grants 

to State and local governments to perform lead hazard reduction 

activities in housing occupied by low-income families. The program 

also provides technical assistance, undertakes research and evaluations of testing and cleanup methodologies, and develops technical 

guidance and regulations in cooperation with EPA. 

The Committee recommends $119,000,000 for this account, the 

same as requested. Amounts provided are to be allocated as follows: 

—$92,600,000 for the lead-based paint hazard control grant 

program to provide assistance to State and local governments 

and Native American tribes for lead-based paint abatement in 

private low-income housing; 

—$8,800,000 for Operation LEAP (Lead Elimination Action 

Program), which provides competitive grants to non-profit organizations and the private sector for activities, which leverage 

funds for local lead hazard control programs; 

—$8,800,000 for technical assistance and support to State 

and local agencies and private property owners. This is an increase of $100,000 over the budget request; 

—$8,800,000 for the Healthy Homes Initiative for competitive grants for research, standards development, and education 

and outreach activities to address lead-based paint poisoning 

and other housing-related diseases and hazards; 

Language is included, as requested by the Administration, delegating the authority and responsibility for performing environmental review for the Healthy Homes Initiative, LEAP, and Lead 

Technical Studies projects and programs to governmental entities 

that are familiar with local environmental conditions, trends and 

priorities. This delegated environmental review authority is currently available in the CDBG, HOPWA, SHOP, SHP, and special 

projects programs. 

The Committee reminds the Department that all funding provided under this heading is to be competitively awarded as required under the HUD Reform Act of 1989 and Section 305 under 

Administrative Provisions under this title. 

106 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

2006 recommendation ........................................................................ $579,000,000 

Transfers FHA/GNMA ....................................................................... 573,535,000 

Total ............................................................................................. 1,152,535,000 

Fiscal Year 2005 appropriation ......................................................... 542,800,000 

Transfers ............................................................................................. 568,200,000 

Fiscal Year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 579,000,000 

Transfers ............................................................................................. 573,135,000 

Total .......................................................................................... 1,152,519,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation; ................... +36,181,000 

Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 budget request; ................. +16,000 

A single appropriation has been provided to finance all salaries 

and related costs associated with administering the programs of 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development, except the Office of Inspector General and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. These activities include housing, mortgage credit 

and secondary market programs community planning and development programs, departmental management, legal services, and 

field direction and administration. 

The Committee recommends total funding of $1,152,100,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the Department, the same level requested. 

The committee has provided funding based for the Department’s 

requested level of FTEs and object classes. The Department is limited to the object class levels that are described in the 2006 Congressional Budget Submission (page I–4.) This is the distribution 

that HUD must use unless changes are granted as part of the Department’s Operating Plan. 

Language is included to allow the department to transfer up to 

$15,000,000 from the S&E Account to the Working Capital Fund 

after receipt and approval of an Operating Plan change detailing 

the uses of the transfers and the object classes being reduced in 

this account. 

However, the Committee notes that the disparity between the 

true workload number as defined by the REAP process and the 

number of FTEs requested suggests that the workload model is not 

much more than a theoretical construct adhered to in the abstract 

rather than in practice. More importantly, the REAP process is 

forcing the allocation of FTEs to be prorated across program areas 

and administrative offices alike in order to meet the ceiling established by the funding. This is not a successful long term staffing 

plan. Therefore, the Committee is instructing the department to 

seek outside expertise to study alternatives and develop a new 

long-range staffing plan that will significantly reduce or offload 

overhead and administrative functions, activities and offices in 

order to preserve or increase the allocation of FTEs in program offices that deliver or oversee Congressionally mandated and funded 

programs. This new staffing plan should be submitted to the Committee no later than August 1, 2005. 

To better manage and facilitate the allocation of resources to 

field offices, language is included instructing the department to 

change the mechanism by which field offices are provided funds for 

107 

activities in the object classes for supplies. Funding included for indemnities is at the requested level but is further limited to nonprogrammatic litigation and is limited to the payment of attorney 

fees only. Program-related litigation must be paid for from the individual program office Salary and Expenses allocation. Beginning in 

fiscal year 2007 the Congressional submission must include program-related litigation costs as a separate line item request. 

Operating Plans/Reprogramming Requirements.—All Departments within the Subcommittee’s jurisdiction are required to submit operating plans and reprogramming letters and reorganization 

proposals for Committee approval. HUD is reminded that operating 

plans or reprogramming requirements apply to any reallocation of 

resources totaling more than $500,000 among any program, project 

or activity as well as to any significant reorganization within offices or the proposed creation or elimination of any program or office, regardless of the dollar amount involved; and any reorganization, regardless of the dollar amount involved. Object classification 

changes above $500,000 also are subject to operating plan or reprogramming requirements. Unless otherwise specified in this Act 

or the accompanying report, the approved level for any program, 

project, or activity is that amount detailed for that program, 

project, or activity in the Department’s annual detailed Congressional submission. These requirements apply to all funds provided 

to the Department. The Department is expected to make any necessary changes during fiscal year 2006 to its current procedures 

and systems to ensure that it is able to meet the necessary operating plan and reprogramming requirements applied to other agencies funded in the bill. 

Budget Submission—. The Committee expects the Department’s 

fiscal year 2007 submission to be submitted in the identical format 

and continues its direction that strategic planning documents, formats or materials are not to be incorporated into the submission. 

Language has been continued under Administrative Provisions, 

carried since fiscal year 2004, setting forth such requirements. 

Language is included in the bill, similar to language carried in 

prior Acts, which designates amounts provided from various accounts for salaries and expenses and which requires the department to implement appropriate funds control and financial management procedures. Language carried in previous years regarding 

limitations on certain positions at the department is deleted as proposed in the budget. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $165,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 267,840,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 265,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥102,840,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request ................... ¥100,000,000 

The Working Capital Fund was established pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the development of, 

modifications to, and infrastructure for Department-wide information technology systems, and for the continuing operation of both 

Department-wide and program-specific information technology systems. 

108 

The Committee recommends $165,000,000 in direct appropriation 

for the Working Capital Fund to support Department-wide information technology system activities, a reduction of $102,840,000 

below the fiscal year 2005 level and $100,000,000 below the request. In addition to the direct appropriation for Department-wide 

systems, funds are transferred from various accounts to be used exclusively for program-specific information technology requirements. 

The Committee has included language that precludes the use of 

these or any other funds appropriated previously to the WCF or 

program offices for transfer to the WCF that would be used or 

transferred to any other entity in HUD or elsewhere for the purposes of implementing Administration’s ‘‘e-Gov’’ initiative without 

the Committee’s approval in HUD’s operating plan. The Committee 

is on record that funds appropriated for specific projects and activities should not be reduced or eliminated in order to fund other activities inside and outside of HUD without the expressed approval 

of the Committee. HUD is not to contribute or participate in activities that were specifically precluded in legislation, unless the Committee agrees to a change. 

The Committee has reduced funding from the request because 

the request was submitted before the successful resolution of the 

Department’s HITS contract dispute. Hence the budget request, 

which assumed that the dispute would continue, is no longer applicable. Full funding for the new contract has been included based 

on HUD’s latest estimate of the final contract’s costs. 

The Committee remains committed to improving HUD’s information technology capacity. To a large extent, both HUD’s and Congress’ ability to oversee the effectiveness of HUD’s programs is undermined due to the failure of HUD’s information systems to provide the information necessary to assess program performance and 

ensure effective resource management. The Committee continues to 

have concerns regarding the Department’s progress in implementing several of its major information technology projects. The 

Department is directed to provide an updated five-year IT plan consistent with such format no later than November 15, 2005. In addition, the Department is directed to submit to the Committee no 

later than September 15, 2005 a report on updating the status of, 

funds spent to date, and estimated fiscal year 2005 funding requirements for the following major projects: PIH Information Center (PIC), FHA Subsidiary Ledger, HUD Integrated Financial Management Improvement Project (HIFMIP), and the Single Family Integration System. Such report shall include a comparison to the information submitted to the Committee on November 15, 2005. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation FHA funds Total 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ................................................. $79,000,000 $24,000,000 $103,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................................................... 79,360,000 24,000,000 103,360,000 

Fiscal year 2006 request ................................................................ 79,000,000 24,000,000 103,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ................. ¥300,000 0 ¥360,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request .............. 0 0 0 

The Office of Inspector General provides agency-wide audit and 

investigative functions to identify and correct management and adVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
109 

ministrative deficiencies that create conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, waste 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. 

The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General, a decrease of $360,000 below the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2005 and the same as the budget request. Of this 

amount, $24,000,000 is derived from transfers from FHA funds. 

Language is included in the bill, similar to language carried in 

prior Acts, which: (1) designates amounts available to the Inspector 

General from other accounts; and (2) clarifies the authority of the 

Inspector General with respect to certain personnel issues. 

The Committee has become aware that the IG has advocated 

forcing HUD to rescind obligated balances for project based contracts that have already received appropriations and which are obligated on live contracts. The Committee is strongly opposed to the 

rescission of funds that may still be needed in the future and 

which, if enacted, could force the Committee to appropriate funds 

a second time. 

This situation has now occurred in the Section 236 program with 

amounts rescinded in fiscal year 2005 declared in excess only to 

have appropriations required in fiscal year 2006. The IG is instructed to identify, in any audit or non-audit related decision, recommendation or conclusion that refers to excess funds available for 

rescission, those funds, which are obligated on live contracts. Further the IG is to include in its operating plan any proposed evaluation of live programs, contracts or projects instituted for the purpose of identifying excess funds for rescission. 

The Committee also recommends language that precludes the 

audit of GNMA on any terms and conditions other than those currently in effect, and which have been in effect for years. GNMA 

does not belong under credit reform rules and has never been subjected to those rules in any previous audit. 

The Committee directs the IG to increase its audits and investigative efforts related to Public Housing Agencies’ administration 

of the Section 8 voucher program. The Committee requests that the 

IG provide a work plan for these activities no later than January 

1, 2006. 

OFFICE OF FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE OVERSIGHT SALARIES AND

EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ................................................... $60,000,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation ........................................................ 58,735,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ..................................................... 60,000,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .................... +1,265,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request ................. 0 

110 

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) 

was established in 1992 to regulate the financial safety and soundness of the two housing government-sponsored enterprises 

(GSEs)—the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) 

and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). 

The office was authorized in the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which also provided the 

regulator enhanced authority to enforce these standards. In addition to financial regulation, the OFHEO monitors the GSEs compliance with affordable housing goals that were contained in the Act. 

The Committee recommends a total of $60,000,000 for OFHEO, 

as requested and to be derived from fees assessed to the GSEs and 

deposited into the Federal Housing Enterprises Oversight Fund. 

OFHEO received an additional $5 million in 2005 supplemental 

funds, which will be available to augment the 2006 appropriation. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

The bill contains a number of administrative provisions. 

Section 301 relates to the division of financing adjustment factors, as requested. 

Section 302 prohibits available funds from being used to investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair Housing Act, 

which was proposed for deletion. 

Section 303 continues language to correct an anomaly in the 

HOPWA formula that results in the loss of funds for certain States. 

Section 304 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain requirements related to an assisted living pilot project, as requested. 

Section 305 continues language requiring funds appropriated to 

be distributed on a competitive basis in accordance with the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989. 

Section 306 continues language, carried in previous years, regarding the availability of funds subject to the Government Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950. 

Section 307 continues language, carried in previous years, regarding allocation of funds in excess of the budget estimates. 

Section 308 continues language, carried in previous years, regarding the expenditure of funds for corporations and agencies subject to the Government Corporation Control Act. 

Section 309 continues language, carried in previous years, requiring submission of a spending plan for technical assistance, training 

and management improvement activities prior to the expenditure 

of funds. 

Section 310 continues language requiring the Secretary to provide quarterly reports on uncommitted, unobligated and excess 

funds in each departmental program and activity. 

Section 311 continues language requiring the Secretary to maintain Section 8 assistance on certain properties occupied by elderly 

or disabled families. 

Section 312 extends a technical amendment included in the fiscal 

year 2000 Appropriations Act relating to the allocation of HOPWA 

funds in the Philadelphia and Raleigh-Cary metropolitan areas. A 

proviso is added to allow a state to administer the HOPWA program in the event that a local government is unable to undertake 

the HOPWA grants management functions. 

111 

Section 313 continues language allowing the Secretary to maintain and dispose of certain elderly and disabled projects upon foreclosure. 

Section 314 continues language requiring HUD to report on 

voucher utilization and costs. 

Section 315 continues language setting certain requirements for 

the Department’s annual congressional justification of appropriations. 

Section 316 continues language carried in previous years elsewhere in this title requiring public housing authorities to continue 

to reserve incremental vouchers funded in previous years for persons with disabilities upon turnover. 

Section 316 clarifies an equitable title issue for the Section 202 

program. 

Section 317 relates to state authority regarding participation on 

housing boards. 

Section 318 continues language in previous acts specifying the allocation of Indian Block grants to Native Alaskan recipients. 

Section 319 requires that the 2005 audit of the National Mortgage Association continue in its current business-oriented format. 

Section 320 includes language to clarify the use of mortgage insurance with respect to health care facilities. 

Section 321 requires that the holders of mortgages in the Section 

236 program submit invoices electronically. 

Section 322. The new definition of nonprofit organization was enacted on December 27, 2000. The amendment clarifies that the 

projects selected by HUD for Section 202b assistance prior to December 1, 2003 are also be eligible to use the limited partnership 

ownership structure. No more than three commercial properties are 

authorized to receive grants under section 202b of the Housing Act 

of 1959. 

The Committee does not recommend several new administrative 

provisions requested in the budget to amend various housing authorization statutes. 

TITLE IV—THE JUDICIARY 

The funds recommended by the Committee in Title IV of the accompanying bill are for the operation and maintenance of United 

States Courts and include the salaries of judges, magistrates, probation and pretrial services officers, and supporting personnel and 

other expenses of the Federal Judiciary. 

In addition to direct appropriations, the Judiciary collects fees 

and has various carryover authorities. The Judiciary uses these 

non-appropriated funds to offset its direct appropriation requirements. Consistent with prior year practices, the Committee expects 

the Judiciary to submit a financial plan, allocating all sources of 

available funds including appropriations, fee collections, and carryover balances. The Judiciary should consider this financial plan to 

be the baseline for determining if reprogramming notification is required. The Committee expects the plan to be submitted within 45 

days after enactment of this Act. 

112 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $57,372,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 60,730,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 60,730,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,358,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,730,000 for 

fiscal year 2005 for the salaries and expenses of personnel and the 

cost of operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the 

building and grounds. The recommendation is $3,358,000 above the 

fiscal year 2005 level and is the same as the request for this account. The recommendation provides inflationary and other standard adjustments and supports additional security staff to support 

operations of the Court. The Committee expects this funding will 

be more than sufficient to provide for security needs for the foreseeable future. 

The Committee has included bill language making $2,000,000 

available until expended for the purpose of making information 

technology investments. The Committee directs the Supreme Court 

to provide an annual report, to be included in its budget justification materials, showing information technology carry-over balances 

and describing each expenditure made in the previous fiscal year. 

As noted in the fiscal year 2005 and 2006 budget hearings for the 

Supreme Court, the Committee wants to ensure that the public is 

provided sufficient insight into the Supreme Court’s operations. 

The Committee commends the Supreme Court and the American 

Bar Association for posting transcripts of proceedings and certain 

briefs on the Internet. 

CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $9,846,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 5,624,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,624,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥4,222,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,624,000 for 

fiscal year 2006 for personnel and other services relating to the Supreme Court building and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of the Capitol (AoC). The recommendation is the same as 

the request and $4,222,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level. The 

Committee appreciates the restraint the Supreme Court has shown 

in adhering to its construction budget and schedule, and urges the 

Supreme Court and the AoC to remain diligent in their efforts to 

control the costs of the project. However, if any changes to the 

scope of the original project are made, the Committee expects to be 

informed. Language in the bill allows funds to remain available 

until expended. 

113 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $21,520,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 26,462,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 24,613,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,350,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,849,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,613,000 for 

fiscal year 2006 for the salaries and expenses of the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The recommendation is 

$3,350,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and $1,849,000 

below the request. 

The recommendation includes funding for inflationary adjustments and increased contractual costs for Court Security Officers. 

The Committee denies funding for all requested program increases. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $14,713,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 15,480,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,480,000 

Bill compared with: ............................

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +767,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,480,000 for 

fiscal year 2006 for the salaries and expenses of the United States 

Court of International Trade. The Committee recommendation is 

the same as the budget request and $767,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 level. 

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL

SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ............................................. $4,125,321,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ........................................... 4,460,939,000 

Recommended in the bill ....................................................... 4,348,780,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ...................................... +223,459,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 .................................... ¥112,159,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,348,780,000 

for the operations of the regional courts of appeals, district courts, 

bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and probation and 

pretrial services offices. The recommendation is $112,159,000 below 

the request and $223,459,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation. 

The Committee understands that the Judiciary’s staffing, operations and maintenance, and information technology resources are 

allocated to the courts according to formulas used to equitably distribute resources based on the actual workload of each district. The 

Committee believes this is the optimal method of making such allocations and expects the Judiciary to continue to allocate its resources using the formulas approved by the Judicial Conference. 

114 

The Committee also expects the Administrative Office to periodically update the formulas to ensure their accuracy. 

VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $3,254,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 3,833,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,833,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +579,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a reimbursement of $3,833,000 for 

fiscal year 2006 from the Special Fund to cover expenses of the 

Claims Court associated with processing cases under the National 

Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This amount is $579,000 

above the amount available in fiscal year 2005 and equal to the request. 

DEFENDER SERVICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $667,351,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 768,064,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 721,919,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +54,568,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥46,145,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $721,919,000 for 

fiscal year 2006. The recommendation is $54,568,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and $46,145,000 below the request. 

This account provides funding for the operation of the Federal 

Public Defender and Community Defender organizations and for 

compensation and reimbursement of expenses of panel attorneys 

appointed pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) for representation in criminal cases. 

FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $60,713,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 71,318,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 60,053,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥660,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥11,265,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,053,000 for 

payments to jurors, which is $660,000 below the fiscal year 2005 

level and $11,265,000 below the request. The Committee does not 

provide the $10,000,000 requested for payments to jurors for cases 

related to the recent Supreme Court Booker/Fanfan decision based 

on reports from the Judiciary that these funds are not needed. 

COURT SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $327,565,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 389,626,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 379,461,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +51,896,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥10,165,000 

115 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $379,461,000 for 

Court Security for fiscal year 2006 to provide for necessary expenses of security and protective services for the United States 

Courts in courtrooms and adjacent areas. This is an increase of 

$51,896,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and $10,165,000 below 

the request. The Committee has made this reduction in consultation with the Judiciary, which has indicated costs for court security 

officers will be less than originally anticipated. 

The recommendation provides for inflationary increases, for additional equipment and security systems, and for new contract court 

security officers. The recommendation also funds the program increase for additional staff to assist the USMS in managing the judicial facility security program as well as home security programs 

for Federal judges. 

Bill language is included allowing up to $15,000,000 to remain 

available until expended. 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $67,289,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 72,198,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 70,262,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +2,973,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,936,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $70,262,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the Administrative Office of the 

United States Courts (AO), which is $2,973,000 above the fiscal 

year 2005 level and $1,936,000 below the request. 

The AO provides administrative and management support to the 

United States Courts, including the probation and bankruptcy systems. It also supports the Judicial Conference of the United States 

in determining Judiciary policies, developing methods to allow the 

courts to conduct business efficiently and economically, and enhancing the use of information technology in the courts. 

FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $21,447,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 22,876,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 22,249,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +802,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥627,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,249,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the Federal Judicial Center for fiscal 

year 2006, which is $802,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and 

$627,000 below the request. 

The Center improves the management of Federal judicial dockets 

and court administration through education for judges and staff, 

and research, evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts 

and the Judicial Conference. 

116 

JUDICIAL RETIREMENT FUNDS

PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $36,700,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 40,600,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 40,600,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,900,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee provides $40,600,000 for payments to the Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund, the Judicial Survivors’ Annuities 

Fund, and the Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund for fiscal 

year 2006. This amount is the same as the budget request and 

$3,900,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. These payments are 

considered mandatory for budget scorekeeping purposes. 

These funds cover the estimated annuity payments to be made 

to retired bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, Claims Court 

judges, and spouses and dependent children of deceased judicial officers. 

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $13,126,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 14,700,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 14,046,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +920,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥654,000 

The Committee recommends $14,046,000 for the salaries and expenses of the United States Sentencing Commission for fiscal year 

2006, which is $920,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation 

and $654,000 below the request. 

The purpose of the Commission is to establish, review, and revise 

sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also required to monitor the 

operation of the guidelines and to identify and report necessary 

changes to the Congress. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

Sec. 401. The Committee continues language to permit funds in 

the bill for salaries and expenses for the Judiciary to be available 

for employment of experts and consultant services as authorized by 

5 U.S.C. 3109. 

Sec. 402. The Committee continues language that permits up to 

5 percent of any appropriation made available for fiscal year 2006 

to be transferred between Judiciary appropriations accounts provided that no appropriation shall be decreased by more than 5 percent or increased by more than 10 percent by any such transfer except in certain circumstances. In addition, the language provides 

that any such transfer shall be treated as a reprogramming of 

funds under section 810 of the accompanying bill and shall not be 

available for obligation or expenditure except in compliance with 

the procedures set forth in that section. 

117 

Sec. 403. The Committee continues language authorizing not to exceed $11,000 to be used for official reception and representation 

expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United States. 

TITLE V—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $25,359,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 33,200,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 33,200,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +7,805,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $33,200,000 

for the resident tuition support program, $7,805,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the budget request. 

These funds are to be used on behalf of eligible District of Columbia residents to pay an amount based upon the difference between 

in-State and out-of-State tuition at eligible public and private institutions of higher education. 

The program was created by the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to provide District college-bound students the opportunity to expand their higher education choices. The program 

receives its funding through a Federal appropriation which is deposited into a dedicated account under the control of the District 

of Columbia Chief Financial Officer. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY

COSTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $14,880,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 15,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +120,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $15,000,000 

for emergency planning and security costs, $120,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President’s request. These funds are for emergency planning and security costs 

related to the presence of the Federal government in the District 

of Columbia and surrounding jurisdictions. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $189,274,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 221,693,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 221,693,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +32,419,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $221,693,000 

for operation of District of Columbia Courts, including the Family 

Court, $32,419,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and 

the same as the President’s request. This amount includes 

118 

$9,198,000 for the Court of Appeals, $87,342,000 for the Superior 

Court, $41,643,000 for the Court System, and $83,510,000 for capital improvements to courthouse facilities. 

DEFENDER SERVICES IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $38,192,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 45,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 45,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +6,808,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends $45,000,000 for Defender Services 

in District of Columbia Courts, $6,808,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 appropriation and the same as the President’s request. These 

funds provide payment for counsel appointed in proceedings in the 

Family Court of the Superior Court and under the District of Columbia Guardianship, Protective Proceedings, and Durable Power 

of Attorney Act of 1986. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER

SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $178,560,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 203,388,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 203,388,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +24,828,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $178,560,000 

for the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) 

and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, 

$24,828,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same 

as the President’s request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND

SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,762,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +5,238,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +10,000,000 

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $10,000,000 to 

the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (WASA), 

$5,238,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and over the 

President’s request. These funds are to continue implementation of 

the Combined Sewer Overflow Long-Term Plan and are to be 

matched 100 percent by WASA. 

The District’s combined sewer system was designed and constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the late 1800’s 

and serves about a third of the District. The capacity of the system 

is exceeded during storms with the excess flow being discharged to 

the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek, and tributary waters. WASA has developed a long-term plan to control these overflows and improve the water quality of the rivers. The plan is estimated to cost $1.3 billion and take between 15 to 40 years to comVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
119 

plete depending on how much Federal assistance is obtained. While 

the Committee is supportive of the project and is providing funding 

for it in the bill, the Committee does not have the resources to provide the level of funding WASA is seeking from the Federal government. Therefore, the Committee strongly encourages WASA to pursue other sources of public and private funding. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE ANACOSTIA WATERFRONT INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $2,976,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +2,024,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $5,000,000 for 

the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, $2,024,000 over the fiscal year 

2005 appropriation and the same as the President’s request. These 

funds are for the design and construction of a continuous pedestrian and bicycle trail system from the Potomac River to the District’s border with Maryland. 

The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative is a multi-year, multi-project 

initiative to revitalize the Anacostia River and its waterfront communities. The design and construction of a continuous pedestrian 

and bicycle trail system from the Potomac River to the District’s 

border with Maryland is one such project. The Committee provides 

$5,000,000 to continue construction in fiscal year 2006. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING

COUNCIL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,290,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 1,300,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,300,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +10,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,300,000 to 

the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, $10,000 above the fiscal 

year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President’s request. 

These funds are to support initiatives related to the coordination 

of Federal and local criminal justice resources in the District of Columbia. 

The Committee recognizes the Criminal Justice Coordinating 

Council (CJCC) as an important agency within the law enforcement 

and criminal justice community in the District of Columbia. Federal and local agencies are expected to demonstrate accountability 

on the initiatives undertaken each year to improve public safety in 

the city. To this end, we request the CJCC collect and analyze data 

that measures progress made on the individual CJCC initiatives 

and to include these measures in the annual report. 

120 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE OFFICE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $32,240,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥12,240,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +20,000,000 

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $20,000,000 

for the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia, 

$12,240,000 below the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and 

$20,000,000 above the President’s request. These funds are for education, public safety, health, economic development, and infrastructure initiatives in the District of Columbia. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $39,680,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 41,616,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 41,616,000 

Bill compared with: Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. $1,936,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $41,616,000 for the Federal payment for school improvement, $1,936,000 above fiscal year 2005 

and the same as the budget request. These funds are allocated as 

follows: $13,525,000 to improve public school education in the District of Columbia, and $14,566,000 to the Secretary of Education 

for opportunity scholarships for low-income children in the District 

of Columbia, of which $1,000,000 is for administrative expenses. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR BIOTERRORISM AND FORENSICS LABORATORY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $7,936,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 7,200,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,200,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +736,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $7,200,000 for 

costs associated with the continued construction of a bioterrorism 

and forensics laboratory in the District of Columbia, the same 

funding level as the budget request and $736,000 below the fiscal 

year 2005 appropriation. The Federal payment is contingent upon 

the District providing $1,500,000 in local funds for this project. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

The Committee recommends a total of $8,700,158,000 for the operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in the fiscal year 2006 proposed budget and financial plan submitted to the 

Congress by the Government of the District of Columbia on June 

6, 2005. Of the total, $5,007,344,000 is from local funds, 

$1,921,287,000 is from Federal grant funds, $1,754,399,000 is from 

other funds, $17,129,000 is from private funds, and $163,116,000 

is from prior year funds. The Committee directs that any changes 

121 

to the financial plan as submitted by the District must follow the 

reprogramming guidelines. 

The Committee has included two administrative provisions that 

would allow the mayor, upon certification by the chief financial officer, to expend local and other funds of the District not identified 

in this bill should there be an unanticipated growth in revenue. 

The additional funds are subject to the administrative provisions of 

this title and the normal reprogramming procedures contained in 

section 505 of this title. The Committee makes this recommendation based on the leadership and efforts of the past control boards, 

the mayor, and the chief financial officer, with the cooperation of 

the city council to bring about financial reform to the District. The 

Committee is optimistic that the District’s leadership will continue 

on the course of building financial growth and soundness. The 

Committee will revisit these provisions in consideration of the fiscal year 2007 bill. Should the District government fail to adhere to 

the notification and reprogramming requirements, or fail to create 

and implement a plan to address the dire state of DC’s capital infrastructure, or the cost of services rise without reason, the Committee will not consider favorably the continuation of the provisions. 

With the expanded authority to use District funds, the Committee expects the District government to first and foremost address capital infrastructure needs. 

The following tables detail the revenue and expenses plans of the 

District for fiscal year 2006: 

122 


Insert offset folio 03 here HR153.001
123 


Insert offset folio 04 here HR153.002
124 


Insert offset folio 05 here HR153.003
125 


Insert offset folio 06 here HR153.004
126 


Insert offset folio 07 here HR153.005
127 


Insert offset folio 08 here HR153.006
128 


Insert offset folio 09 here HR153.007
129 


Insert offset folio 010 here HR153.008
130 

The Committee is concerned about the number of erroneous 

parking violation citations from the District of Columbia. In many 

of these instances the vehicles owned by non-District residents do 

not match the vehicles described in the citations. Many times, 

when non-District residents have attempted to resolve the issue, 

often by providing a notarized affidavit that their vehicle does not 

match the description on the Notice of Unsatisfied Parking Ticket, 

they have serious difficulty navigating the District’s appeal process 

and are eventually still found responsible for the erroneous charge. 

Within 120 days of enactment of this Act, the District of Columbia 

is instructed to file a written report with the Committee detailing 

a plan to improve the process through which these appeals are resolved and a plan to improve the ticket issuing process so that the 

frequency of these errors is decreased. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Section 501. The Committee continues the provision that specifies that an appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall 

be considered as the maximum amount that may be expended for 

said purpose or object. 

Section 502. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

funds for travel and payment of dues. 

Section 503. The Committee continues the provision that appropriates funds for refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for 

paying settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia 

government. 

Section 504. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of appropriation for publicity or propaganda purposes. 

Section 505. The Committee continues the provision that establishes reprogramming and transfer requirements. 

Section 506. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits use of funds only to the objects for which the appropriations 

were made. 

Section 507. The Committee continues the provision that clarifies 

the pay setting authority for District employees as the District’s 

Merit Personnel Act rather than title 5 of the United States Code. 

Section 508. The Committee continues the provision that directs 

the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit new fiscal year 

2006 revenue estimates as of the end of such quarter. 

Section 509. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the District government from renewing or extending sole 

source contracts without opening them to the competitive bidding 

process as set forth in section 303 of the District of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985. 

Section 510. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs 

associated with the offices of U.S. Senator or Representative under 

section 4(d) of the D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979. 

Section 511. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits Federal funds made available in this Act from being used to 

implement or enforce any system of registration for unmarried cohabitating couples. 

131 

Section 512. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

the mayor to accept, obligate, and expend Federal, private, and 

other grants received by the District government that are not reflected in the amounts appropriated in this Act. 

Section 513. The Committee continues the provision that restricts the use of official vehicles to official duties and not between 

a residence and workplace, except in the case of a police officer who 

resides in the District of Columbia at the discretion of the Chief, 

an officer or employee of the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical 

Services Department who resides in the District of Columbia and 

is on call 24 hours a day, the Mayor of the District of Columbia, 

and the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia. 

Section 514. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of funds for the audit of the District government’s 

annual financial statements unless the DC Inspector General either conducts, or contracts for, the audit. 

Section 515. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the Corporation Counsel or 

any other officer or entity of the District government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action which seeks to require 

Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 516. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of any funds in this Act to carry out any program 

of distributing sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug. 

Section 517. The Committee continues the provision that requires the Chief Financial Officers of the District of Columbia to 

certify that they understand the duties and restrictions applicable 

to their agency as a result of this Act. 

Section 518. The Committee continues the provision that includes a ‘‘conscience clause’’ on legislation that pertains to contraceptive coverage by health insurance plans. 

Section 519. The Committee continues the provision that requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit quarterly 

reports on various issues pertaining to the District of Columbia. 

Section 520. The Committee continues the provision that requires the CFO to submit a revised appropriated funds operating 

budget in the format of the budget that the District government 

submitted pursuant to section 442 of the DC Home Rule Act for all 

agencies no later than 30 calendar days after the date of enactment 

of this Act. 

Section 521. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the transfer of Federal funds to any department, agency, or 

instrumentality of the U.S. government, except pursuant to a 

transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this or any 

other appropriation Act. 

Section 522. The Committee continues the provision that requires the District of Columbia Courts to transfer all fines levied 

and collected by the Courts in cases charging Driving Under the 

Influence and Driving While Impaired to the general treasury of 

the District of Columbia to remain available until expended and 

used by the Office of the Corporation Counsel for enforcement and 

prosecution of District traffic alcohol laws. 

132 

Section 523. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the use of any funds in the Act to: (1) pay the fees of an attorney who represents a party in an action or any attorney who defends any action, including an administrative proceeding, brought 

against D.C. Public Schools under the Individuals With Disabilities 

Act (IDEA) in excess of $4,000 for that action; (2) pay the fees of 

an attorney or firm whom the CFO determines to have a pecuniary 

interest, either through an attorney, officer or employee of the firm, 

in any special education diagnostic services, schools, or other special education service providers; and (3) require all savings to be 

used to expand special education services within the District. 

Section 524. The Committee continues the provision that requires attorneys in special education cases brought under IDEA to 

comply with several reporting requirements and allow the Inspector General to conduct investigations to determine the accuracy of 

the certifications. 

Section 525. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

for appropriations in this Act to be increased by no more than 

$42,000,000 from unexpended general funds, and may be used only 

for one-time expenditures, to avoid deficit spending, for debt reduction, for program needs, or to avoid revenue shortfalls. 

Section 526. The Committee recommends a new provision that 

makes a technical correction under the heading of ‘‘Federal Payment for School Improvement’’ in Public Law 108–355 (118 Stat. 

1327). 

Section 527. The Committee recommends a new provision that 

allows for the obligation of additional ‘‘Other Funds’’ and ‘‘Local 

Funds’’ under certain circumstances. 

Section 528. The Committee recommends a new provision that 

allows for short-term borrowing from the emergency and contingency reserve funds established under section 450A of the District 

of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 98–198; D.C. Official 

Code, sec. 1–204.50a) under certain circumstances. 

Section 529. The Committee continues the provision that maintains funding for the District of Columbia Inspector General. 

Section 530. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds to change the legality of marijuana use. 

Section 531. The Committee continues the provision relating to 

abortion. 

The Committee has not included a proposed provision allowing 

the District to implement activities to improve tax collections. 

While the Committee supports strongly any efforts by the District 

to collect properly and account for taxes owed, there was not adequate time to evaluate such a proposal prior to consideration of this 

bill. The Committee directs the mayor to submit a report by October 1, 2005 providing the details of such an initiative, the amount 

of additional revenue collected, and the costs associated with any 

initiative. The Committee encourages the District to consider activities that would yield a greater return on the investment than 

as proposed in the provision. 

133 

TITLE VI—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND 

FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

These funds provide for the compensation of the President as 

well as official expenses of the Executive Office of the President, as 

authorized by title 3, United States Code. 

COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $450,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 450,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 450,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. 0 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

These funds provide for the compensation of the President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 102. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for 

Compensation of the President, including an expense allowance of 

$50,000. These are the same as amounts as appropriated in fiscal 

year 2005 and the same as requested by the President. The bill 

specifies that none of the funds for official expenses shall be considered as taxable to the President, and any unused amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent with 31 U.S.C. 1552. 

WHITE HOUSE OFFICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $61,504,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 53,830,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 53,830,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥8,424,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

The Salaries and Expenses account of the White House Office 

supports staff and administrative services necessary for the direct 

support of the President, including costs for the Homeland Security 

Council. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,830,000 for 

the White House Office, the same as in the Administration’s request. This account also includes $750,000 for the Privacy and Civil 

Liberties Oversight Board, newly established within the White 

House Office. The Committee’s recommendation transfers funding 

for the White House Communications Agency to the Department of 

Defense’s Defense Information Agency. 

134 

EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $12,658,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 12,436,000 

Recommended in the bill; .................................................................. 12,436,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥222,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

These funds provide for the care, maintenance, and operation of 

the Executive Residence, including official and ceremonial functions of the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,436,000 for 

the operating expenses of the Executive Residence, a decrease of 

$222,000 from the amounts appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and 

the same as the amounts requested by the President. The bill includes the same restrictions on reimbursable expenses for use of 

the Executive Residence as were enacted in fiscal year 2005. 

WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,885,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 1,700,000 

Recommended in the bill; .................................................................. 1,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥185,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

To provide for the repair, alteration, and improvement of the Executive Residence at the White House, a separate account was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and track expenditures for 

capital improvement projects at the Executive Residence at the 

White House. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,700,000 for 

White House Repair and Restoration, a decrease of $185,000 below 

the amount enacted in fiscal year 2005 and the same as the 

amount requested by the President. 

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,008,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 4,040,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,040,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +32,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national economy 

and its various segments, advises the President on economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth and stability, 

appraises economic programs and policies of the Federal GovernVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
135 

ment, and assists in preparation of the annual Economic Report of 

the President to Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,040,000 for 

the Council of Economic Advisers, an increase of $32,000 from the 

amount enacted in fiscal year 2005 and the same as requested by 

the President. The Committee continues the CEA rental costs as 

part of the Enterprise Services activity in the Office of Administration. 

OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $2,282,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 3,501,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. 1,218,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 1,000 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

The office of policy development supports the National Economic 

Council and the Domestic Policy Council in carrying out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President in the formulation, 

coordination, and implementation of economic and domestic policy. 

The office of policy development also provides support for other domestic policy development and implementation activities, as directed by the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,500,000 for the office of policy development, an increase of $1,218,000 above 

amount enacted in fiscal year 2005and $1,000 below the request. 

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $8,860,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 8,705,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 8,705,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... ¥155,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 0 

1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

The National Security Council advises the President on the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to national security. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,705,000 for the National Security Council, a decrease of $155,000 below the 

amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and the same as requested 

by the President. The committee continues the realignment of GSA 

rental payments and other costs to the Office of Administration as 

part of the enterprise services program. The number of full-time 

136 

equivalent staff years remains at the fiscal year 2005 enacted level 

of 71. 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $91,530,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 1 ..................................................... 98,609,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 89,322,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥2,208,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥9,287,000 1Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ‘‘The White House’’. 

The Office of Administration is responsible for providing cost-effective, administrative services to the Executive Office of the President. These services, defined by Executive Order 12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel, library and records services, information 

management systems support, and general office services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $89,322,000 for 

the Office of Administration, a decrease of $2,208,000 below the 

amount appropriated in fiscal year 2004 and a decrease of 

$9,287,000 below the amount requested by the President. 

Enterprise services program.—The Committee continues the Enterprise Services Program for most White House Offices. Funds for 

GSA rental payments for the Office of Management and Budget 

($6,646,000) and for the Office of National Drug Control Policy 

($2,641,000) proposed for funding through the Enterprise Services 

activities for fiscal year 2006 have not been included. These funds 

have been placed back in their respective organizations and have 

been placed in those offices in the amounts that the Administration 

would have requested for each. The Committee is taking this action 

to avoid the possibility that Report and bill language affecting 

those Offices would inappropriately apply to other White House offices if left in the centralized Enterprise Services Program. All 

other Offices have their GSA costs in the Enterprise Services Program, as requested. 

The Committee recommends funding for all other Office of Administration activities at the requested level for each activity in fiscal year 2006. 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $67,864,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 68,411,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 76,930,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +9,066,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +8,519,000 

The Office of Management and Budget assists the President in 

the discharge of budgetary, economic, management, and other executive responsibilities. 

137 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,930,000 for 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an increase of 

$9,066,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and 

$8,519,000 above the amount requested by the President. Recommended adjustments to the budget estimate are: 

Staffing adjustment.—The fiscal year 2006 budget estimate provides sufficient funding for 500 FTEs, a net increase of 10 FTEs 

over the fiscal year 2005 estimated FTE utilization. The Committee’s review of the historic OMB staffing data indicates that FTEs 

(work years) dedicated to the development and preparation of the 

President’s budget have declined over the past several years. The 

Committee believes that instead, resources have been diverted to 

other activities and initiatives that have not been approved by or 

specifically funded by the Congress. Therefore, the Committee directs increased FTEs and funding to the four major program areas 

listed below to emphasize that the principal responsibility for 

which funds are being provided, is the development and the execution of the Federal budget. But the net increase in FTEs is intended to recognize that there has also been a major growth in program content and the number of individual programs funded in the 

areas of Defense, Homeland Security, and Natural Resources and 

Human Resources. 

Total funding for Object classes 12.1, 21, 22, 23.3, 24, 25, 26, and 

31 is $27,321,000. Of this amount, not to exceed $3,000 shall be for 

Official Entertainment in object class 26. The Committee provides 

funding at or above the levels requested for all other object classes 

to reflect the higher FTE allocation and restores $7,000,000 in proposed GSA rental payments rather than in the Office of Administration as proposed. The Director of OMB may reallocate operating 

funds among these object classes, except where funding is expressly 

prohibited. The reprogramming of funds among these object classes 

should be based on the new allocation of staffing resources. OMB 

must include the revised allocation in its Operating Plan. Furthermore, any subsequent transfer of funds between or among object 

classes in excess of $250,000 should be submitted to the Committee 

in a revised Operating Plan. 

Reception and representation expenses.—The bill limits reception 

and representation (R&R) expenses to $3,000 as requested by the 

Administration. 

Operating Plan and PART Analysis.—Besides the requirements 

noted above, OMB is also required to include a detailed description 

of each program or activity or project that OMB intends to subject 

to its Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) study process 

for the 2007 and 2008 budgets. Included in the description shall be 

the specific methodology that will be used to conduct each study, 

the data that will be used in the analysis for each program studied, 

and office responsible for providing OMB with information and 

analysis. The Operating Plan relevant to the PART studies shall be 

provided to, and be considered approved only after the relevant 

subcommittee has agreed to the study criteria and methodology. 

OMB is encouraged to work with the subcommittees in advance of 

the Operating Plan to ensure that the process can continue without 

disruption. 

138 

For studies agreed to by the Committee all scores, results and 

recommendations may be included in departmental budget submissions in addition to the materials submitted as part of a traditional 

budget. With respect to those not agreed to in OMB’s Operating 

Plan no information relating to the study may be included in Department or Agency Budget Requests. 

Operating Plan and ‘‘E-Gov’’ initiative.—The Committee has expressed serious concerns about the continued forced implementation of this initiative on Departments and Agencies. Many aspects 

of this initiative are fundamentally flawed, contradict underlying 

program statutory requirements and have stifled innovation by 

forcing conformity to an arbitrary government standard. Most importantly, the implementation of this initiative has forced departments and agencies and offices and bureaus within each to transfer 

funds without the consent of the Committee and has used funds for 

activities for which funding was not specifically appropriated. 

Therefore, language is included as a government-wide provision 

in this Act which states that no funds are to be allocated to the 

‘‘e-Gov’’ initiatives in OMB or any other department or agency and 

no funds are to be transferred from any department or agency for 

these initiatives, unless and to the extent approved in the OMB 

Operating Plan. The Operating Plan shall detail the amount proposed for transfer from each department and agency, (by program, 

office, bureau or activity, as appropriate) the specific use of funds, 

the relevance of that use to that department of agency and each 

bureau or office within, which is contributing funds, and a description of those activities for which funds were appropriated that will 

not be implemented or only partially implemented by the department or agency as a result of the proposed transfer. The Committee 

urges the OMB to work directly with the individual subcommittees 

in advance of the Operating Plan so that approved initiatives can 

move forward without disruption. 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $26,784,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 24,224,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 26,908,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +124,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +2,684,000 

The Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act 

of 1998 charges the Office of National Drug Control Policy, established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, with developing policies, objectives and priorities for the National Drug Control Program as defined by the Act and Executive Order 12880. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,908,000 for 

the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a $2,684,000 

increase over the President’s request. 

Funding is directed as follows: Operations—$25,592,000; Policy 

Research—$1,316,000. 

139 

Staffing.—The Committee provided the requested level of 123 

FTEs. 

COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $41,664,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 30,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 30,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥11,664,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

Pursuant to the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 (title VII of Division C of Public Law 105–277), 

the Counter drug Technology Assessment Center serves as the central counter drug research and development organization for the 

United States Government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,000,000 for 

the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, a decrease of 

$11,664,000 from the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels and the same 

as the President’s request. Included in the appropriation is 

$18,000,000 for supply and demand reduction research to be allocated at the discretion of the ONDCP and $12,000,000 for the 

Technology Transfer Program. 

The Committee agrees that it is time to review and assess the 

future of this program and determine which reforms are needed 

and where to emphasize future funding, ONDCP is instructed to 

prepare an analysis of options and recommendations for the future 

course of counter drug technology research and submit the report 

with the fiscal year 2007 budget submission to the Committee. 

HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $226,523,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 0 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 227,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +477 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +227,000,000 

The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) Program 

was established by the Director of ONDCP pursuant to section 

1005 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and now as reauthorized 

by section 707 of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Act of 

1998 to provide assistance to Federal and State and local law enforcement entities operating in those areas most adversely affected 

by drug trafficking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $227,000,000 for 

the HIDTA Program, an increase of $227,000,000 above the President’s request. The Committee rejects the Administration’s proposal to shift HIDTA funding to the Department of Justice and to 

reduce funding by more than 50 percent. The increase above the 

fiscal year 2005 enacted amounts is to ensure full funding for all 

existing HIDTA program activity, to expand existing HIDTAs 

140 

where such expansion is justified, and to fund new HIDTAs as appropriate. The Committee directs that no less than $208,000,000 is 

for base funding for the HIDTA program. Recommended funding 

levels are as follows: 

HIDTA base allocation $219,650,000 

Discretionary funds for new counties $2,000,000 

Discretionary funds for CPOT $2,000,000 

Audit $2,000,000 

The HIDTA program serves to enhance and coordinate drug control effects among local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies in order to eliminate or reduce drug trafficking, and the Committee supports a vigorous HIDTA program. To achieve its mission, 

the HIDTA program must continue to enhance individual and national performance and work to develop a system that enhances the 

synchronization of drug control efforts. The Committee continues to 

direct that HIDTAs existing in fiscal year 2006 shall receive funding at least equal to the fiscal year 2005 initial allocation level, 

which does not include funding provided through the CPOT initiative. 

The Committee is aware of areas facing increased drug trafficking that may be appropriate candidates for designation as a 

HIDTA, inclusion in an existing HIDTA, or increased funding. The 

Committee recognizes the strong pressure to add new HIDTAs and 

expand those currently existing, and underscores the need for performance-based management to ensure that HIDTAs demonstrate 

both effectiveness and need and are provided adequate resources. 

Prior to submitting any future budget requests, the Committee 

encourages the Director of ONDCP to review the outcome-oriented 

performance measures developed in 2004 by the HIDTA Directors 

Committee. This performance data will assist during future PART 

ratings and clearly should be used to inform budget decisions. 

OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $211,990,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... $213,300,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... $213,292,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,302,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥8,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee has provided the funds as requested for each of 

the programs funded in this Account and directs that funding be 

allocated as proposed on Page 63 of the ONDCP fiscal year 2006 

Congressional submission with the exception that $992,000 shall be 

allocated to the National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws instead of no funds requested and that $1,000,000 shall be allocated 

to establishing improved performance measure for each program 

instead of the $2,000,000 requested. 

The Committee directs ONDCP to maintain funding for non-advertising services for the Media Campaign at no less than the Fiscal year 2003 ratio of service funding to total funds and to continue 

the corporate outreach program as it operated prior to its cancellation. 

141 

The Committee has supported past education efforts to demonstrate the consequences of using performance-enhancing drugs. 

Although this program was successful, all professional sports, including Major League Baseball, must undertake a comprehensive 

campaign to educate youth on the dangers of steroid use. Professional sports must work closely with U.S. Anti-doping Administration (USADA) to educate high school, middle school and grade 

school children on the dangers of performance enhancing drugs. 

UNANTICIPATED NEEDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $993,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 1,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +7,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or defense. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for unanticipated needs, 

as requested. Expenditures from this account may be authorized by 

the President. 

SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE OFFICIAL

RESIDENCE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,534,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 4,455,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,455,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥79,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

These funds support the official duties and functions of the Office 

of the Vice President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,455,000 for 

the Office of the Vice President, a decrease of $79,000 below the 

amount enacted for fiscal year 2005 and the same as requested by 

the President. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $330,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 325,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 325,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥5,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

These funds support the care and operation of the Vice President’s residence and specifically support equipment, furnishings, 

142 

dining facilities, and services required to perform and discharge the 

Vice President’s official duties, functions and obligations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $325,000 for the 

Operating Expenses of the Vice President’s residence, a decrease of 

$5,000 below the amount enacted in fiscal year 2005 and the same 

as requested by the President. 

TITLE VII—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE

BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $5,641,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 5,941,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,941,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 

Board (the Access Board) is the lead Federal Agency promoting accessibility for all handicapped persons. The Access Board was reauthorized in the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, Public 

Law 102–569. Under this authorization, the Access Board’s functions are to ensure compliance with the Architectural Barriers Act 

of 1968, and to develop guidelines for and technical assistance to 

individuals and entities with rights or duties under titles II and III 

of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum accessibility guidelines and requirements for public accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities and 

vehicles, state and local government facilities, and recreational facilities. The Access Board also provides technical assistance to Government agencies, public and private organizations, individuals, 

and businesses on the removal of accessibility barriers. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,941,000 for the operations of the 

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, an 

increase of $300,000 over fiscal year 2005 and the same as the 

budget request. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $62,149,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 62,449,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 62,449,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Consumer Product Safety Act established the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission (CPSC), an independent Federal regulatory agency, to reduce unreasonable risk of injury associated with 

143 

consumer products. Its primary responsibilities and overall goals 

are: to protect the public against unreasonable risk of injury associated with consumer products; to develop uniform safety standards 

for consumer products, minimizing conflicting State and local regulations; and to promote research into prevention of product-related 

deaths, illnesses, and injuries. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,449,000 for 

fiscal year 2006, the same level as requested and a decrease of 

$201,000 below fiscal year 2005. 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $13,888,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 17,612,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,877,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,989,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,735,000 

The Election Assistance Commission was established by the Help 

America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) and is charged with implementing provisions of that Act relating to the reform of Federal 

election administration throughout the United States, including the 

development of voluntary voting systems guidelines, the certification and testing of voting systems, studies of election administration issues, and the implementation of election reform payments to 

states as well as grant programs related to election reform. 

The Committee urges the EAC to provide $250,000 for the HAVA 

college program during the 2006 elections. This program, first implemented during the 2004 election, recruits and trains young people in colleges, universities, and community colleges to serve as 

nonpartisan poll workers, helping to address a nationwide 

pollworker shortage. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,877,000 for 

the Election Assistance Commission, an increase of $1,989,000 

above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $1,735,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee provides the budget request for research and development activities, including the transfer of 

$2,800,000 to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

The Committee recommends the following major changes to the 

budget request: 

Reduce information technology/equipment purchases ..................... ¥350,000 

Deny funding for four additional FTE .............................................. ¥622,000 

Reduce funding for printing and reproduction ................................. ¥501,000 

Reduce funding for travel .................................................................. ¥400,000 

Increase funding for external auditing services ............................... +200,000 

Inspector General services.—The Committee recommendation provides an additional $200,000 above the budget request for contract 

auditing services for a total auditing program level of $2,105,000, 

144 

an increase of more than $2,009,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The Committee has been concerned about the lack of 

Inspector General services at EAC, particularly given the vast 

sums of money that have been distributed to date. The Committee 

is aware that EAC has been seeking contract IG services, and expects that such services will be in place by January 1, 2006. 

Staffing increases.—The Committee is concerned that EAC has 

requested an additional four FTE, particularly given the short-term 

nature of EAC’s activities with respect to reviewing state spending 

plans for HAVA funds. Increased funding has been provided for 

contract services, which the Committee believes is sufficient to 

manage audit functions. Accordingly, the Committee does not approve the hire of four additional FTE. 

Military voting.—The Committee is aware that technologies now 

exist to allow overseas military personnel to vote via a secure email system. The Committee encourages EAC to examine this technology and, if warranted, develop appropriate guidelines in time for 

the 2006 election. 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $29,884,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 29,965,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 29,965,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +81,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

Funding for the Office of the Inspector General at the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation is provided pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 

1105(a)(25), which requires a separate appropriation account for 

appropriations for each Office of Inspector General of an establishment defined under section 11(2) of the Inspector General Act of 

1978. 

The Committee recommendation, the same as the budget request, provides for the transfer of $29,965,000 from the Bank Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance Fund, and the 

FSLIC Resolution Fund to finance the Office of Inspector General 

for fiscal year 2004. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $51,742,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 54,600,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 54,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +2,958,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +100,000 

The Commission administers the disclosure of campaign finance 

information, enforces limitations on contributions and expenditures, supervises the public funding of Presidential elections, and 

performs other tasks related to Federal elections. 

145 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,700,000 for the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an increase of $2,958,000 

over amounts appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and an increase of 

$100,000 over the request. 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $25,468,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 25,468,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,468,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ............................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), established by 

the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, serves as a neutral party in 

the settlement of disputes that arise between unions, employees, 

and agencies on matters outlined in the Federal Service Labor 

Management Relations statute, decides major policy issues, prescribes regulations, and disseminates information appropriate to 

the needs of agencies, labor organizations, and the public. Establishment of the FLRA gives full recognition to the role of the Federal Government as an employer. Pursuant to the Foreign Service 

Act of 1980, FLRA also supports the Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and the Foreign Service Labor Relations Board. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,468,000 for 

the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the same funding level as 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $19,340,032 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 20,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,158,968 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) was established in 

1961 as an independent government agency, responsible for the 

regulation of international waterborne commerce of the United 

States. In addition, FMC has responsibility for licensing and bonding ocean transportation intermediaries and assuring that vessel 

owners or operators establish financial responsibility to pay judgment for death or injury to passengers, or nonperformance of a 

cruise, on voyages from U.S. ports. It monitors the activities of 

ocean common carriers, who operate in the U.S./foreign commerce 

to ensure just and reasonable practices, maintains a trade monitoring and enforcement program, monitors the laws and practices 

of foreign governments which could have a discriminatory or other 

impacts on shipping conditions in the U.S., among other activities. 

146 

The principal shipping statutes administered by the FMC are the 

Shipping Act of 1984 (46 USC app. 1710 et seq.), the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988 (46 USC app. 1701 et seq.), and section 

19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 USC app. 876). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,499,000 for 

the Federal Maritime Commission, a total of $1,158,968 (6 percent) 

above the fiscal year 2005 level and equal to the budget request for 

fiscal year 2006. 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($7,217,043,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (7,768,795,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (7,768,795,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (+551,752,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... ............................

The Federal Buildings Fund (FBF) finances the activities of the 

Public Buildings Service, which provides space and services for 

Federal agencies in a relationship similar to that of landlord and 

tenant. The FBF, established in 1975, replaces direct appropriations by using income derived from rent assessments, which approximate commercial rates for comparable space and services. The 

Committee makes funds available through a process of placing limitations on obligations from the FBF as a way of allocating funds 

for various FBF activities. The Committee may also appropriate 

funds into the FBF as a way of covering the difference between the 

total revenues coming into the FBF and the total limitation on the 

expenditure from the FBF. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $7,768,795,000 for 

the fund, an increase of $551,752,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels. 

The Committee notes that a total of $34,857,000 has been provided within the federal buildings fund in past years for construction, including funds for sites and expenses and associated design 

and construction services, for the Detroit, Michigan Ambassador 

Bridge Border Station. Further, the Committee notes that the General Services Administration (GSA) and the private sector companies who own and operate the Ambassador Bridge have reached 

agreement on innovative private financing/lease back arrangements 

to accerlerate the establishment of critically important new border 

inspection facilities on the Ambassador Bridge site. 

The Committee instructs the GSA to continue to make the full 

$34,857,000 available only for border station improvement initiatives at the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, Michigan until the GSA 

receives an accurate cost estimate for making the improvements 

under the lease back arrangement. 

147 

CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($708,542,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (708,106,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (708,106,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (¥436,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... (---) 

The construction and acquisition activity funds site, design, construction, and management and inspection costs for construction of 

new Federal facilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $708,106,000 for construction and acquisition, a decrease of $436,000 below the fiscal 

year 2005 enacted level. Fiscal year 2006 is the first year of a twoyear moratorium imposed by the Judiciary for new major courthouse construction projects. The Committee provides funding for 

two courthouse projects on the Judiciary’s priority list which can be 

awarded in fiscal year 2006, consistent with the Judiciary’s policy. 

REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($980,222,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (961,376,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (961,376,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (¥18,846,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... (---) 

The repairs and alterations activity funds design, construction 

and management and inspection for the repair, alteration, and 

modernization of existing real estate assets. It funds projects to improve health and safety, recapture vacant non-revenue producing 

Government-owned and leased space, and various special programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $961,376,000 for repairs and alterations, a decrease of $18,846,000 from the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level. The Committee directs GSA to embark on the 

projects included in the budget request in priority order, starting 

with those projects that address safety and health needs and moving next to the projects with completed designs. 

INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($161,442,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (168,180,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (168,180,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (+6,738,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... (---) 

The installment acquisition payments activity funds interest payment for facilities constructed under the Public Building AmendVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
148 

ment of 1972 and lease-purchase agreements since 1987, a total of 

80 projects. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $168,180,000 for installation acquisition payments, an increase of $6,738,000 above 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. Based on this funding level, 68 of the original 80 projects 

will be paid off, leaving 12 projects remaining. 

RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($3,657,315,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (4,046,031,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (4,046,031,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (+388,716,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... (---) 

The rental of space program funds lease payments, temporary 

space for Federal employees during major repair and alteration 

projects, and relocations from Federal buildings due to forced 

moves and relocations as a result of health and safety conditions. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,046,031,000 for 

rental of space, an increase of $388,716,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitations on Availability of Revenue: 

Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005 ..................................... ($1,709,522,000) 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal year 2006 ........ (1,885,102,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... (1,885,102,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005 .................................... (+175,580,000) 

Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ..................... (---) 

The building operations activity funds cleaning, maintenance, 

utilities, fuel, grounds, maintenance, space acquisitions and assignment services in government-owned facilities and in leased space 

when not provided by the lessor. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,885,102,000 for 

building operations, an increase of $175,580,000 above the fiscal 

year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

GENERAL ACTIVITIES

GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $61,603,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 52,796,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 52,796,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥8,807,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ --- 

149 

This appropriations account provides for government-wide policy 

and evaluation activities associated with the management of real 

and personal property assets and certain administrative services; 

government-wide policy support responsibilities relating to acquisition, telecommunications, information technology management, and 

related technology activities; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 

3109. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $52,796,000, a reduc- tion of $8,807,000 from fiscal year 2005 levels, for these purposes. 

This funding level assumes that the office of government-wide policy will refocus its activities on core policy and regulatory activities 

that support statutory mission requirements, and eliminate activities that are not clearly policy-related. This funding level and realignment assumes a reduction of 92 full time equivalents, 45 of 

which will be transferred. GSA states that this funding level will 

not trigger a reduction-in-force. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $91,438,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 99,890,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 99,890,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +8,452,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ --- 

This appropriations account provides for government-wide activities associated with the utilization and donation of surplus personal property; disposal of real property; telecommunications, information technology management, and related technology activities; 

agency-wide policy direction and management; ancillary accounting, records management, and other support services; services as 

authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and other related operational expenses. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $99,890,000 for operating expenses, an increase of $8,452,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $42,012,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 43,410,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 43,410,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,398,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ --- 

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and investigative 

functions to identify and correct GSA management and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The audit function 

provides internal audit and contract audit services. Contract audits 

provide professional advice to GSA contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits reVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
150 

view and evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test 

internal control systems, and develop information to improve operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The investigative 

function provides for the detection and investigation of improper 

and illegal activities involving GSA programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $43,410,000 for the office of inspector general, an increase of $1,398,000 above the 

fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT (E-GOV) FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $2,976,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +24,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥2,000,000 

The appropriation provides support for interagency electronic 

government initiatives that utilize the Internet or other electronic 

methods as a means to increase Federal government accessibility, 

efficiency, and productivity. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for 

the electronic government fund, an increase of $24,000 above the 

fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $2,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation does not include a general provision proposed in the fiscal year 2005 budget request allowing the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to use $40,000,000 of 

surplus funds in the general supply fund to finance OMB’s list of 

e-gov initiatives across government. The Committee refuses to relinquish oversight of the development and procurement of information technology projects of the various agencies under its jurisdiction. If the general supply fund is running a $40,000,000 or greater 

surplus, the Committee directs GSA to evaluate the pricing structure of its services to Federal agencies to determine if GSA is overcharging its Federal clients. Further, if OMB seeks funding for an 

initiative under its direction, OMB should request those funds 

under its own appropriation complete with a comprehensive budget 

justification. 

ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $3,081,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 2,952,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,952,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥129,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides support consisting of pensions, office 

staffs, and related expenses for former Presidents Gerald R. Ford, 

151 

Jimmy Carter, George Bush and Bill Clinton and for pension and 

postal franking privileges for the widow of former President Lyndon B. Johnson. Also, this appropriation is authorized to provide 

funding for security and travel related expenses for each former 

President and the spouse of a former President pursuant to section 

531 of Public Law 103–329. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,952,000 for 

allowances and office staff of former Presidents, a decrease of 

$129,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as 

the budget request. The following table describes the distribution 

of the funds: 

FISCAL YEAR 2006 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Ford Carter Bush Clinton Widows Total 

Personal Compensation ........................................ 96 96 96 96 0 384 

Personnel Benefits ................................................ 22 2 51 64 0 139 

Benefits for Former Presidents ............................ 184 184 184 192 20 764 

Travel .................................................................... 45 2 54 63 0 164 

Rental Payments to GSA ...................................... 105 102 175 473 0 855 

Communications, Utilities and Miscellaneous 

Charges: 

Telephone ..................................................... 15 10 15 75 0 115 

Postage ........................................................ 9 15 13 15 8 60 

Printing ........................................................ 5 5 14 9 0 33 

Other Services ............................................. 38 76 65 111 0 290 

Supplies and Materials ............................... 17 5 14 16 0 52 

Equipment ................................................... 6 7 47 11 0 71 

Total Obligations ................................ 542 504 728 1,125 28 2,927 

FEDERAL CITIZEN INFORMATION CENTER FUND

Appropriations, fiscal year 2005 ....................................................... $14,787,744 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 15,030,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,030,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +242,256 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ --- 

The Consumer Information Center (CIC) was established within 

the General Services Administration (GSA) by Executive Order on 

October 26, 1970, to help Federal departments and agencies promote and distribute consumer information collected as a byproduct 

of the Government’s program activities. 

The Federal Information Center (FIC) program was established 

within the General Services Administration in 1966, and was formalized by Public Law 95–491 in 1980. The program’s purpose is 

to provide the public with direct information about all aspects of 

Federal programs, regulations, and services. To accomplish this 

mission, contractual services are used to respond to public inquiries 

via a nationwide toll-free telephone call center. 

In 2000, the Consumer Information Center assumed responsibility for the operations of the FIC program with the resulting organization being officially named the Federal Consumer Information Center. The Federal Consumer Information Center combines 

the nationwide toll-free telephone assistance program and the dataVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
152 

base of the FIC with the CIC website and publications distribution 

programs. 

During fiscal year 2002, the Federal Consumer Information Center became part of GSA’s newly established Office of Citizen Services and Communications and was renamed the Federal Citizen Information Center (FCIC). The new Office serves as a central federal 

gateway for citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media 

to obtain information and services from the government. FCIC assumed operational control of the FirstGov.gov website in fiscal year 

2002. 

Public Law 98–63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a revolving 

fund for the CIC. Under this fund, FCIC activities are financed 

from the following: annual appropriations from the general funds 

of the Treasury, reimbursements from agencies for distribution of 

publications, user fees collected from the public, and any other income incident to FCIC activities. All are available as authorized in 

appropriation acts without regard to fiscal year limitations. The bill 

includes a limitation of $18,000,000 on the availability of the revolving fund. Any revenues accruing to this fund in excess of this 

amount shall remain in the fund and are not available for expenditure except as authorized in appropriation Acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends $15,030,000, an 

increase of $242,256 over the level for fiscal year 2005 and the 

same as the budget request. 

The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from 

Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications, user 

fees from the public, and other income. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Section 701. The Committee continues the provision that provides that costs included in rent received from government corporations for operation, protection, maintenance, upkeep, repair and 

improvement shall be credited to the Federal Buildings Fund. 

Section 702. The Committee continues the provision providing 

authority for the use of funds for the hire of motor vehicles. 

Section 703. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that funds made available for activities of the Federal Buildings 

Fund may be transferred between appropriations with advance approval of the Congress. 

Section 704. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for developing courthouse construction requests 

that do not meet GSA standards and the priorities of the Judicial 

Conference. 

Section 705. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that no funds may be used to increase the amount of occupiable 

square feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or 

any other service usually provided, to any agency which does not 

pay the requested rent. 

Section 706. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

GSA to pay small claims (up to $250,000) made against the government. 

153 

Section 707. The Committee prohibits funding in the Act for activities related to conveyance of a property in Phoenix, Arizona in 

order to ensure that current postal activities are continued at the 

property. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $37,005,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 37,005,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 38,205,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +1,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +1,200,000 

The Merit Systems Protection Board performs the adjudicatory 

functions necessary to maintain the civil service merit system. 

These include hearing appeals on adverse actions, reduction-inforce actions, and retirement. The Board reports to the President 

on whether merit systems are sufficiently free from prohibited personnel practices to protect the public interest. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,205,000 for 

the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), an increase of 

$1,200,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and 

an increase of $1,200,000 above the budget request, in order to accommodate additional appeals cases resulting from the DoD and 

DHS decision to maintain MSPB as arbitrator and to accommodate 

relocation expenses. The Committee has instead made available the 

amount of no more than $2,605,000 for adjudicated appeals 

through an appropriation from the trust fund consistent with past 

practice. 

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN 

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOUNDATION 

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY TRUST FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,980,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 0 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +20,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +2,000,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the activities of the 

Morris K. Udall Foundation, $20,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The Committee also continues bill language to allow a 

percentage of the appropriation to be used for the Native Nations 

Institute. 

154 

ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,299,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... (700,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,900,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +601,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +1,200,000 

Public Law 105–156 established the United States Institute for 

Environmental Conflict Resolution as part of the Morris K. Udall 

Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy 

Foundation. It also established in the Treasury an Environmental 

Dispute Resolution Fund to be available to establish and operate 

the Institute. The purpose of the Institute is to conduct environmental conflict resolution and training. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,900,000 for 

the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund, an increase of 

$601,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $264,809,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 280,975,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 283,975,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +19,166,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +3,000,000 

This appropriation provides the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) with funds for its basic operations dealing 

with management of the Government’s archives and records, operation of Presidential libraries, and for the review for declassification of classified security information. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $283,975,000 for 

the operating expenses of NARA, an increase of $19,166,000,000 

above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $3,000,000 above the 

budget request. The Committee provides $2,930,000 to make the 

initial move of Nixon Presidential materials from College Park, MD 

to Yorba Linda, CA and to provide for initial staffing and operations of the library. 

ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $35,627,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 35,914,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,914,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +287,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The electronic records archive appropriations supports all direct 

NARA actions and activities associated with this major project for 

preserving digitally created records for archival purposes, storing 

155 

and managing them electronically, and ensuring appropriate longterm access. The appropriation supports a program office, research 

partnerships, and information technology analysis and design. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,914,000 for 

the electronic records archive of the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA), an increase of $287,000 above the fiscal 

year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

As stated in the Committee’s report for fiscal year 2005, NARA 

is directed to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations quarterly reports on the cost, schedule, and performance of the Electronic Records Administration (ERA) project. These 

quarterly reports should provide information on the status of the 

project’s schedule, budget, and expenditures as measured against a 

reported baseline; a prioritization of project risks and their mitigation efforts; and corrective actions taken to manage identified 

schedule slippages, cost overruns, or quality problems should they 

occur. 

REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $13,325,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 6,182,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,182,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥7,143,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides for the repair, alteration, and improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries nationwide. It enables the National Archives to maintain its facilities in 

proper condition for visitors, researchers, and employees, and also 

maintain the structural integrity of the buildings. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,182,000 for 

repairs and restoration, a decrease of $7,143,000 below the fiscal 

year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION

GRANTS PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $4,960,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ............................

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. 2,540,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +7,500,000 

This program provides for grants funding that the Commission 

makes, nationwide, to preserve and publish records that document 

American history. Administered within the National Archives and 

Records Administration, which preserves federal records, the 

NHPRC helps state, local, and private institutions preserve nonfederal records, helps publish the papers of major figures in American history, and helps archivists and records managers improve 

156 

their techniques, training, and ability to serve a range of information users. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,500,000 for 

the National Historical Publications and Research Commission 

grants program, an increase of $2,540,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level and $7,500,000 above the budget request of 

which, $2,000,000 shall be transferred to the operating expenses 

account for the staffing and operating expenses of the National 

Historical Publications and Records Administration. 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

CENTRAL LIQUIDITY FACILITY

Limitation on direct 

loans 

Limitation on administrative expenses 

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation .............................................................................. (1,500,000,000) $323,000) 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation ................................................................................... (1,500,000,000) (310,000) 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ................................................................................ (1,500,000,000) $323,000) 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation .............................................. (0) (+13,000) 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 request ........................................................ (0) (0) 

The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,500,000,000 on 

CLF lending activity to member credit unions from borrowed funds. 

This limitation represents the same level as fiscal year 2005 and 

the same as the budget request. The Committee expects to be kept 

apprised of CLF lending activity. 

The Committee recommends the budget request of not more than 

$323,000 for administrative expenses, an increase of $13,000 above 

the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Fiscal year 2006 recommendation ..................................................... $950,000 

Fiscal year 2005 appropriation .......................................................... 992,000 

Fiscal year 2006 budget request ....................................................... 950,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation ...................... ¥42,000 

Comparison with fiscal year 2006 request ................................ 0 

The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 

(CDRLF) was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 

‘‘low-income’’ credit unions in providing basic financial services to 

low-income communities. Low-interest loans and deposits are made 

available to assist these credit unions. Loans or deposits are normally repaid in five years, although shorter repayment periods may 

be considered. Technical assistance grants are also available to 

low-income credit unions. Earnings generated from the CDRLF are 

available to fund technical assistance grants in addition to funds 

provided for specifically in appropriations acts. Grants are available for improving operations as well as addressing safety and 

soundness issues. 

For fiscal year 2006 the Committee recommends $950,000 for the 

National Credit Union Administration’s Community Development 

Revolving Loan Fund for technical assistance grants. While the Administration and NCUA have not requested additional funds for 

157 

loans in fiscal year 2006, the Committee expects the CDRLF to continue making loans from their available funds derived from repaid 

loans and interest earned on previous loans to designated credit 

unions. The Committee encourages NCUA to support small low-income credit unions that seek professional development through programs such as those offered by the CDCU Institute. 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $76,086,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 76,700,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 76,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +614,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

Under the Independent Safety Board Act, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is responsible for improving transportation safety by investigating accidents, conducting special studies, 

developing recommendations to prevent accidents, evaluating the 

effectiveness of the transportation safety programs of other agencies, and reviewing appeals of adverse actions involving airman 

and seaman certificates and licenses, and civil penalties issued by 

the Department of Transportation. In addition, the NTSB operates 

the NTSB Academy in Ashburn, Virginia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,700,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the National Transportation Safety Board, 

an increase of $614,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level 

and the same as the fiscal year 2006 budget request. Further, the 

Committee is aware of NTSB’s shortage of accident investigators 

and will maintain the requested level in order to allow NTSB to 

sustain its safety mission. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(RESCISSION)

Rescission, fiscal year 2005 ............................................................... ¥$8,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... ¥1,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a rescission of $1,000,000 from 

funds provided in P.L. 106–246 for the investigation of Egypt Air 

990 and Alaska Air 261 accidents. The Board has determined the 

causes of these accidents and the funding is no longer required. 

158 

NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $114,080,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 118,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 118,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +3,920,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, established by title 

VI of Public Law 95–557 in October 1978, is committed to promoting reinvestment in older neighborhoods by local financial institutions working cooperatively with the community and local government. This is primarily accomplished by assisting communitybased partnerships (NeighborWorks organizations) in a range of 

local revitalization efforts. Increase in homeownership among 

lower-income families is a key revitalization tool. Neighborhood 

Housing Services of America (NHSA) supports lending activities of 

the NeighborWorks organizations through a national secondary 

market that leverages its capital with private sector investment. 

The Committee recommends a funding level of $118,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2005, the same amount as the budget request and an 

increase of $3,920,000 when compared to the fiscal year 2005 appropriation. 

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $11,148,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 11,148,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,148,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. 0 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ 0 

The Office of Government Ethics (OGE), established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, provides overall direction of executive branch policies designed to prevent conflicts of interest and insure high ethical standards. The OGE discharges its responsibilities to preserve and promote public confidence in the integrity of 

executive branch officials by developing rules and regulations pertaining to conflicts of interest, post employment restrictions, standards of conduct, and public and confidential financial disclosure in 

the executive branch. It monitors compliance with public and confidential financial disclosure requirements of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, to determine 

possible violations of applicable laws or regulations and recommending appropriate corrective action. OGE also consults with and 

assists various officials in evaluating the effectiveness of applicable 

laws and the resolution of individual problems, and prepares formal advisory opinions, informal letter opinions, policy memoranda, 

and Federal Register entries on how to interpret and comply with 

the requirements on conflicts of interest, post employment, standards of conduct, and financial disclosure. Finally, OGE issues and 

amends regulations implementing the procurement integrity provisions relating to negotiating for employment, post employment, and 

159 

gratuities in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act Amendments of 1988, P.L. 100–679. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,148,000 for 

the Office of Government Ethics, the same amount as enacted in 

fiscal year 2005 and as the budget request. 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $124,496,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 124,521,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 119,952,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥4,544,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥4,569,000 

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is the Federal Government agency responsible for management of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit civil service system. Although individual agencies are increasingly responsible for personnel operations, OPM provides a Government-wide policy framework for personnel matters, advises and assists agencies (often on 

a reimbursable basis), and ensures that agency operations are consistent with requirements of law, with emphasis on such issues as 

veterans preference. OPM oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues regulations and policies on hiring, classification 

and pay, training, investigations, and many other aspects of personnel management, and operates a reimbursable training program 

for the Federal Government’s managers and executives. OPM is 

also responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits 

and life insurance programs affecting most federal employees, retired federal employees, and their survivors. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $119,952,000 for 

the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), a decrease of 

$4,544,000 below the enacted fiscal year 2005 level and $4,569,000 

below the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes $6,983,000 for the enterprise human resources integration project; $1,450,000 for the ehuman resources line of business project; $500,000 for the e-training project; and $1,412,000 for the e-payroll project as proposed in 

the budget request. The recommendation also provides 

$102,679,000 from appropriate trust funds to OPM. 

The Committee’s recommendation makes the following changes 

to the budget request: 

¥$2,649,000 from the Strategic Human Resources Policy Annual Performance Goal 7. The Committee directs OPM to continue the implementation and refining of the new human resources management systems at the Department of Defense 

and the Department of Homeland Security before bringing the 

system to other agencies and departments. 

¥$3,000,000 from the Center for Financial Services for the 

costs of performance measurement, program evaluation and reVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
160 

search projects. The budget materials do not support such a request. 

+$680,000 for the Call to Service Recruitment Initiative with 

the Partnership for Public Service to identify successful recruitment models across different college campuses that can be 

replicated across the Federal Government. 

+$400,000 for activities as required by the Voting Rights Act 

of 1965 

Operating Plans.—The Committee directs the office to submit an 

operating plan for fiscal year 2006, signed by the director for review by the Committees on Appropriations of both the House and 

Senate within 60 days of the bill’s enactment. The operating plan 

must include funding levels for the various offices, centers, programs, and initiatives covered in the budget justification and supporting documents referenced in the House and Senate appropriations reports, and the statement of the managers. 

Budget Justifications.—While the budget justification materials 

are much improved over the fiscal year 2005 submission, there is 

still a good deal of improvement to be done. For example, OPM is 

requesting to use fiscal year 2004 carry-over funds to assist the duties and requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in fiscal 

year 2005. While the Committee is supportive of activities to uphold the Voting Rights Act of 1965, there is no mention of these 

activities in the fiscal year 2005 or fiscal year 2006 budget justifications. The Committee directs OPM to include these activities 

in future budget justifications. 

In addition, the Committee notes that the budget references a 

large number of initiatives, offices, centers, and councils, but the 

budget fails to include specific funding and resource information for 

the references items. Further, the budget describes the ‘‘success’’ or 

indicators of the programs only as ‘‘deadlines met,’’ ‘‘milestones 

met,’’ ‘‘positive evaluation,’’ or ‘‘green.’’ While the Committee recognizes the prerogative of the administration to internally establish 

outcomes and measures, those measures are not translated adequately in the budget justification to meet the needs of the Committee in its role of overseeing spending. The Committee directs 

OPM to include in the budget justification for the Committees on 

Appropriations clear, detailed, and concise information on how the 

programs will be funded and how they will be measured. 

The Committee is concerned that the participation rate of veterans and disabled veterans in the Federal workforce is lower than 

estimated and job availability has shrunk in recent years. The 

Committee directs the Office of Management and Budget and the 

Office of Personnel Management to submit a report to Congress 

within 90 days after enactment on how many veterans and disabled veterans are employed in the Federal government by department and agency, including in the Executive Office of the President, the barriers that exist to hiring veterans and disabled veterans, and ways to increase the number of veterans and disabled 

veterans employed in the Federal Government to the level employed at the time of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. 

161 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,614,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 1,614,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,614,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ............................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit, investigative, 

evaluation, and inspection functions to identify management and 

administrative deficiencies, which may create conditions for fraud, 

waste and mismanagement. The audits function provides internal 

agency audit, insurance audit, and contract audit services. Contract 

audits provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on 

accounting and financial matters regarding the negotiation, award, 

administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations, including 

financial statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide 

detailed technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits review the operations of health and life insurance carriers, 

health care providers, and insurance subscribers. The investigative 

function provides for the detection and investigation of improper 

and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,614,000 for 

the Office of Inspector General of the Office of Personnel Management, the same as the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the budget request. In addition, the recommendation also provides 

$16,786,000 from appropriate trust funds to the Office of Inspector 

General. 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEES HEALTH

BENEFITS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $7,219,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 8,135,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 8,135,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +916,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation covers: (1) the Government’s share of the cost 

of health insurance for 1,851,000 annuitants as defined in sections 

8901 and 8906 of title 5, United States Code; (2) the Government’s 

share of the cost of health insurance for about 12,000 annuitants 

(who were retired when the federal employees health benefits law 

became effective), as defined in the Retired Federal Employees 

Health Benefits Act of 1960; and (3) the Government’s contribution 

for payment of administrative expenses incurred by the Office of 

Personnel Management in administration of the Act. 

162 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEES LIFE

INSURANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $35,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 35,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ............................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation finances the Government’s share of premiums, which is one-third the cost, for basic life insurance for annuitants retiring after December 31, 1989, and who are less than 

65 years old. 

PAYMENT TO CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $9,987,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 9,772,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,772,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥215,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

This appropriation provides for payment of annuities, including 

the payment of annuities under special acts for persons employed 

on the construction of the Panama Canal or their widows and widows of employees of the Lighthouse Service; payment of the Federal 

government share of retirement costs of the unfunded liability resulting from any statute authorizing new or liberalized benefits, extension of retirement coverage, or pay increases; transfers for interest on unfunded liability and payment of military service annuities 

covering interest on the unfunded liability and annuity disbursements for military service; payments for spouse equity providing 

survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of annuitants who 

died between September 1978 and May 1986 and did not elect survivor coverage; and transfers for payment of FERS supplemental liability covering annual amortization payments financing supplemental liabilities for FERS. 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $15,325,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 15,325,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,325,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ............................

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The Office of Special Counsel: (1) investigates federal employee 

allegations of prohibited personnel practices (including reprisal for 

whistleblowing) and, when appropriate, prosecutes before the Merit 

Systems Protection Board; (2) provides a channel for whistleblowing by federal employees; and (3) enforces the Hatch Act. The 

Office may transmit whistleblower allegations to the agency head 

concerned and require an agency investigation and a report to the 

Congress and the President when appropriate. 

163 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,325,000 for 

the Office of Special Counsel, the same as the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the fiscal year 2006 budget request. 

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $26,090,000 

Budget Request, fiscal year 2006 ...................................................... 25,650,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 24,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥2,090,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥1,650,000 

The Selective Service System was established by the Selective 

Service Act of 1948. The basic mission of the System is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces adequate to ensure 

the security of the United States during a time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have relied on volunteers to 

fill military manpower requirements, but selective service registration was reinstituted in July, 1980. For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends $24,000,000 for the Selective Service System, $2,090,000 below the fiscal year 2005 

funding level and $1,650,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs the Selective Service System to simply maintain the 

databases required for a draft as described in the Selective Service 

Act of 1948 plus any medical databases, train draft boards, and respond to inquiries regarding registration. No funds are provided to 

the Selective Service System to expand or augment its services or 

capabilities. 

U.S. INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON THE HOMELESSNESS

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $1,499,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 1,800,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. 0 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ¥301,000 

The Committee recommends $1,499,000 for operating expenses of 

the Interagency Council on Homelessness, the same as the enacted 

level for 2005 and $301,000 below the requested amount. Staff 

turnover and the continued lack of cooperation between the Council 

and the Department of Housing and Urban Development remains 

a concern for the Committee. In addition the failure of the Administration to put forth a comprehensive funding plan for the elimination of chronic homelessness which includes other mainstream 

programs in other Departments indicates that the Council is not 

being successful in developing a government-wide response to this 

national problem. Therefore, the Council is instructed to work 

closely with HUD’s Homeless program and present to the House 

and Senate Appropriations Committees no later than July 1, 2006 

a comprehensive funding strategy that demonstrates that the 

President’s initiative to end chronic homelessness will achieve its 

164 

result within the 10 year timeframe originally stated and include 

the roles that HUD will have in that effort and the role of the ICH 

to support the activities of HUD’s homeless programs and to obtain 

financial and programmatic input from related departments and 

agencies. 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 

PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

The Postal Service is funded almost entirely by Postal rate payers rather than tax payers. Funds provided to the Postal Service 

in the Payment to the Postal Service Fund include the costs of revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail for the blind and overseas voters; reconciliation adjustments for amounts appropriated 

for free and reduced rate mail and the actual amounts required; 

and partial reimbursement for losses which the Postal Service incurred as a result of insufficient appropriations in fiscal years 1991 

through 1993 and the additional revenues it would have received 

between 1993 and 1998 in the absence of certain rate phasing provisions of the Revenue Forgone Act of 1993. Congress does not provide funds for either general operations or capital investments. 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $629,650,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 149,059,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 116,350,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. ¥451,591,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ +29,000,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $116,350,000 in 

fiscal year 2006 for Payment to the Postal Service Fund, an increase of $29,000,000 to the President’s request. This amount includes $58,767,000 for revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate 

mail, $28,583,000 for reconciliation amounts for past years pursuant to subsection 39 U.S.C. § 2401 (c), and $29,000,000 for revenue 

forgone on free and reduced-rate mail pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 

§2401(d) and $73,000,000 is provided as an advance appropriation 

for fiscal year 2007. 

The Committee has concerns with the new process implemented 

this year by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In past 

years, the OMB would use the Postal Service’s audit figures to base 

the advance appropriation request for free mailings for the blind 

and overseas voters. However, this year it appears that OMB simply took the average appropriation over a series of years to derive 

the President’s request, apparently for the sole reason that the 

Postal Service’s audit figures were higher than in previous years. 

This new system could produce funding amounts that may be either significantly lower or higher than actual sums that the Postal 

Service needs. Providing less than the Postal Service needs will 

only compound their financial burdens, something that the Committee has strongly urged the Postal Service to try and repair. In 

addition, the Committee would certainly not want to provide more 

funding than the Postal Service actually needs for these activities. 

The Committee is concerned that OMB’s new use of averages in determining the amount for free mail is inaccurate and the ComVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
165 

mittee urges OMB to continue to use Postal Service audit figures 

in the future. 

Emergency preparedness.—The Committee is concerned that 

OMB, in the fiscal year 2006 budget request, has not given attention to the safety and security of our nation’s mail system and protections for postal employees against terrorist threats. The Committee therefore directs OMB to report to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment of this 

Act the revised estimated amount of Federal funding that may be 

necessary to complete the Postal Service’s work to secure the nation’s mail system. The Committee further directs the USPS to provide a report within 90 days of enactment of this Act on the 

progress of the mail irradiation facility being built in the Washington, DC area. 

Sauk Village, Illinois.—The Committee recommends that the 

United States Postal Service evaluate the need for the communities 

of Lynwood, Illinois and Sauk Village, Illinois to establish a new 

604 ZIP Code for these two communities to share. It is the Committee’s understanding that no new resources or facilities would be 

needed to approve this change. The Committee directs the Postal 

Service to report its findings to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations upon completion of the evaluation. 

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 ......................................................... $40,851,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ....................................................... 48,998,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 48,998,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 .................................................. +8,147,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................................................ ............................

The U.S. Tax Court adjudicates controversies involving deficiencies in income, estate, and gift taxes. The Court also has jurisdiction to determine deficiencies in certain excise taxes to issue declaratory judgments in the areas of qualifications of retirement 

plans, exemption of charitable organizations, and to decide certain 

cases involving disclosure of tax information by the Commissioner 

of the Internal Revenue Service. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,998,000 for 

the U.S. Tax Court, an increase of $8,147,000 above the fiscal year 

2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request. Increased 

funds are provided for critical technology upgrades. 

TITLE VIII—GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT 

Section 801. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

pay raises to be funded within appropriated levels in this Act or 

previous appropriations Acts. 

Section 802. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act. 

166 

Section 803. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of 

funds unless expressly so provided herein. 

Section 804. The Committee continues the provision limiting consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement contracts. 

Section 805. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act to be transferred without express authority. 

Section 806. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to engage in activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act. 

Section 807. The Committee continues the provision concerning 

employment rights of Federal employees who return to their civilian jobs after assignment with the Armed Forces. 

Section 808. The Committee continues the provision concerning 

compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 809. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds by any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy 

American Act. 

Section 810. The Committee modifies a provision specifying reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 811. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that fifty percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 

certain purposes. 

Section 812. The Committee includes a provision providing that 

funds used by the Executive Office of the President not be used to 

request any official background investigation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

Section 813. The Committee includes a provision requiring that 

cost accounting standards not apply to a contract under the Federal Health Benefits Program. 

Section 814. The Committee continues a provision regarding nonforeign area cost of living allowances. 

Section 815. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for abortions under the FEHBP. 

Section 816. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for abortions under the FEHBP unless the 

life of the mother is in danger or the pregnancy is a result of an 

act of rape or incest. 

Section 817. The Committee continues a new provision waiving 

restrictions on the purchase of non-domestic articles, materials, 

and supplies in the case of acquisition by the Federal Government 

of information technology. 

Section 818. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for a proposed rule relating to the determination 

that real estate brokerage is a financial activity. 

Section 819. The Committee includes a provision that designates 

that some of the funds made available in Title I of this Act under 

the heading, ‘‘Office of the Secretary, Transportation Planning, Research, and Development,’’ shall be used to reimburse fixed-based 

general aviation operators and the providers of general aviation 

ground support services at Ronald Reagan Washington National 

Airport, and at airports within fifteen miles of that airport, for 

their financial losses incurred while the airports were closed as a 

167 

result of the actions of the federal government following the terrorist attacks on the United States that occurred on September 11, 

2001. The funds designated for this purpose are available until expended and may be used only if the recipients of such funding release the U.S. Government from all claims arising from the closing 

of these aviation facilities. 

Section 820. The Committee includes a provision that extends 

the Federal Election Commission’s administrative fine program 

through December 31, 2008. 

TITLE IX—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Departments, Agencies, and Corporations 

Section 901. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

agencies to pay costs of travel to the United States for the immediate families of federal employees assigned to foreign duty in the 

event of a death or a life threatening illness of the employee. 

Section 902. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its 

workplaces are free from the illegal use of controlled substances. 

Section 903. The Committee continues the provision regarding 

price limitations on vehicles to be purchased by the Federal Government. 

Section 904. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds made available to agencies for travel, to also be used for 

quarter allowances and cost-of-living allowances. 

Section 905. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the government, with certain specified exceptions, from employing 

non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be in the continental 

U.S. 

Section 906. The Committee continues the provision ensuring 

that agencies will have authority to pay GSA bills for space renovation and other services. 

Section 907. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

agencies to finance the costs of recycling and waste prevention programs with proceeds from the sale of materials recovered through 

such programs. 

Section 908. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that funds may be used to pay rent and other service costs in the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 909. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

payments to persons filling positions for which they have been 

nominated after the Senate has voted not to approve the nomination. 

Section 910. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

interagency financing of groups absent prior statutory approval. 

Section 911. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

the Postal Service to employ guards and give them the same special police powers as certain other federal guards. 

Section 912. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance with the applicable law of the U.S. 

Section 913. The Committee continues the provision limiting the 

pay increases of certain prevailing rate employees. 

168 

Section 914. The Committee continues the provision limiting the 

amount of funds that can be used for redecoration of offices under 

certain circumstances. 

Section 915. The Committee continues the provision to allow for 

interagency funding of national security and emergency telecommunications initiatives. 

Section 916. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to certify that a Schedule C appointment was not created 

solely or primarily to detail the employee to the White House. 

Section 917. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual harassment. 

Section 918. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the payment of any employee who prohibits, threatens or prevents 

another employee from communicating with Congress. 

Section 919. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

Federal training not directly related to the performance of official 

duties. 

Section 920. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for implementation of agreements in nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are included. 

Section 921. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

propaganda, publicity and lobbying by executive agency personnel 

in support or defeat of legislative initiatives. 

Section 922. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

any federal agency from disclosing an employee’s home address to 

any labor organization, absent employee authorization or court 

order. 

Section 923. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds to be used to provide non-public information such as mailing 

or telephone lists to any person or organization outside the government without the approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 924. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for propaganda and publicity purposes not authorized by Congress. 

Section 925. The Committee continues the provision directing 

agency employees to use official time in an honest effort to perform 

official duties. 

Section 926. The Committee continues the provision, with technical modifications, authorizing the use of funds to finance an appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement 

Program. 

Section 927. The Committee continues the provision, with technical modifications, authorizing agencies to transfer funds to the 

Governmentwide Policy account of GSA to finance an appropriate 

share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program 

and other purposes. 

Section 928. The Committee continues the provision, to prohibit 

any department or agency from using appropriated funds to independently contract with private companies to provide online employment applications and processing services. 

Section 929. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

breast feeding in a federal building or on federal property if the 

woman and child are authorized to be there. 

169 

Section 930. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

interagency funding of the National Science and Technology Council and provides for a report on the budget and resources of the National Science and Technology Council. The report should include 

the entire budget of the National Science and Technology Council. 

Section 931. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

documents involving the distribution of federal funds to indicate 

the agency providing the funds and the amount provided. 

Section 932. The Committee extends the authorization period for 

agency franchise funds by striking ‘‘October 1, 2005’’ and inserting 

‘‘October 1, 2006’’, as requested. 

Section 933. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to monitor personal information relating to the use 

of federal internet sites to collect, review, or create any aggregate 

list that includes personally identifiable information relating to access to or use of any federal internet site of such agency. 

Section 934. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

health plans participating in the FEHBP to provide contraceptive 

coverage and provides exemptions to certain religious plans. 

Section 935. The Committee continues the provision providing 

recognition of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the official antidoping agency. 

Section 936. The Committee continues a provision allowing funds 

for official travel to be used by departments and agencies, if consistent with OMB and Budget Circular A–126, to participate in the 

fractional aircraft ownership pilot program. 

Section 937. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being expended for the purchase of a product or service 

offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc. unless the agency determines the products to constitute the best value to the buying agency. 

Section 938. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds for implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to 

the Legislative Branch, and implementing limitations on the Coast 

Guard Congressional Fellowship Program. 

Section 939. The Committee continues a provision requiring 

agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual before 

issuing the individual a government travel charge card and limits 

agency actions accordingly. 

Section 940. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

restricts the use of funds for federal law enforcement training facilities. 

Section 941. The Committee continues a provision that allows for 

transfer authority among certain offices of the Executive Office of 

the President. 

Section 942. The Committee includes a provision amending P.L. 

105–270. 

Section 943. The Committee includes a provision concerning the 

use of funds for the ‘‘e-gov’’ initiative that were not appropriated 

specifically for that purpose. 

Section 944. The Committee continues a provision, with modifications, providing that the adjustment in rates of basic pay for employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in fiscal year 

2006 shall be an increase of 3.1 percent. 

170 

Section 945. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

a credit card issuer from adjusting a card holder’s annual percentage rate based on information unrelated to the account. 

Section 946. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits executive branch agencies from creating prepackaged news 

stories that are broadcast or distributed in the United States unless the story includes a clear notification within the text or audio 

of that news story that the prepackaged news story was prepared 

or funded by that executive branch agency. This provision confirms 

the opinion of the Government Accountability Office dated February 17, 2005 (B–304272) 

Section 947. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 

authorizing the export of U.S. agricultural commodities to Cuba. 

Agriculture exports financed by the payment of cash in advance 

under the Act totaled more than $1 billion during the past 4 years. 

Section 903 of the Act prohibits the imposition of new restrictions 

or conditions on this trade absent prior notice to and approval by 

Congress. Despite this prohibition, the Department of Treasury 

unilaterally imposed a new restriction on this trade by a ‘‘clarification’’ published in a final rule on February 25, 2005—without notice to or the approval of Congress. The amendment prevents the 

use of funds to administer, implement, or enforce the final rule so 

that cash in advance transactions may continue in the manner in 

which they had been transacted prior to the administration of this 

restrictive new ‘‘clarification’’. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives: 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

Clause 3(d)(1) of the rule XXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives states: 

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of 

a public character, shall include a statement citing the 

specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution 

to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. 

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report 

this legislation from clause 7 of section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America which states: 

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law . . . 

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this 

specific power granted by the Constitution. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in 

the accompanying bill that are not authorized by law: 

171 


Insert graphic folio 013 here HR153.009
172 


Insert graphic folio 014 here HR153.010
173 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following statement is submitted describing 

the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

The Committee recommends the following transfers: 

UNDER TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Under the Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Salaries and expenses’’, the 

Secretary of Transportation is allowed to transfer amounts among 

the individual offices of the Office of the Secretary, subject to certain conditions. 

Under the Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Payments to air carriers,’’ the 

Secretary of Transportation is allowed to transfer overflight fees 

collected to the Federal Aviation Administration to repay funds 

borrowed during the fiscal year to fund the essential air service 

program. 

Under Federal Transit Administration, ‘‘Administrative expenses’’, the Administrator is authorized to transfer funds between 

offices. 

Title I, Sec. 162. The Committee continues the provision that allows transit funds appropriated before October 1, 2003, that remain available for expenditure to be transferred. 

Under Title I, Administrative Provisions—Department of Transportation, Sec. 180, the Committee continues a provision allowing 

the Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended sums from 

‘‘Office of the secretary, salaries and expenses’’ to ‘‘Minority business outreach’’. 

UNDER TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY

Under the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, up to $10,000,000 may be transferred to the Processing, Assistance and Management or Information Systems account for management of the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement program. 

Under the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Serv- ice, up to $10,000,000 may be transferred to the Processing, Assistance and Management or Information Systems account for management of the Earned Income Tax Credit. 

Section 201 allows the transfer of 5 percent of any appropriation 

(or 3 percent of the Tax Law Enforcement appropriation) made 

available to the IRS to any other IRS appropriation, subject to 

prior Congressional approval. 

Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration under certain circumstances. 

Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, Office of the Inspector General, Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances. 

UNDER TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring all uncommitted 

174 

prior balances of excess rental charges as of fiscal year 2005 and 

all collections made during fiscal year 2006 to the flexible subsidy 

fund. 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring the following 

amounts to the salaries and expenses account for administrative 

expenses: FHA mutual mortgage insurance and general and special 

risk insurance program accounts ($558,767,000); GNMA guarantees 

of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account 

($10,700,000); community development loan guarantees program 

account ($0); Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account 

($250,000); native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee fund 

($35,000); and Native American housing block grants account 

($150,000). 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring up to $12,896,000 

from the manufactured housing fees trust fund to the manufactured housing standards program. 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring no less than the following amounts to the working capital fund under the salaries and 

expenses account for development and management of information 

technology systems: tenant-based rental assistance ($5,900,000); 

project-based rental assistance ($1,000,000); public housing capital 

fund ($13,230,000); community development fund ($3,400,000); 

home investment partnership program account ($1,000,000); homeless assistance grants account ($1,000,000); housing for the elderly 

account ($400,000); housing for persons with disabilities account 

($400,000); FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account 

($18,281,000); FHA general and special risk insurance program account ($10,800,000). 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring up to $200,000,000 

from the Tenant-Based Assistance Account to the Project-Based Assistance Account 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring $24,00,000 from the 

various funds of the Federal Housing Administration to the Office 

of Inspector General. 

The Committee has included language under the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development transferring $60,000,000 from 

the federal housing enterprise oversight fund to the office of federal 

housing enterprise oversight account. 

UNDER TITLE IV—THE JUDICIARY

Under the Judiciary, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and 

Other Judicial Services, funds may be transferred to the United 

States Marshals Service for courthouse security. 

Sec. 402. The Committee continues a provision permitting the 

Judiciary to transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation with certain limitations 

175 

UNDER TITLE V—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Committee has included language transferring $29,833,000 

from the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency to the 

Public Defender Service. 

The Committee has included language transferring fines collected under DC Official Code section 50–2201.05(b)(1) and (2) in 

the general funds to the Office of the Attorney General of the District of Columbia. 

The Committee has included language to allow for a transfer 

from the funds identified in the fiscal year 2005 comprehensive annual financial report as the District’s Grant Disallowance balance. 

UNDER TITLE VI—EXECUTIVE OFFICES OF THE PRESIDENT

Language is included under Office of National Drug Control Policy, ‘‘Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center’’ allowing for the 

transfer of funds to other Federal departments or agencies. 

Language is included under Federal Drug Control Programs, 

‘‘High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Programs’’ which allows for 

the transfer of funds to other Federal departments or agencies. 

Language is included under Federal Drug Control Programs, 

‘‘Other Federal Drug Control Program’’ allowing the transfer of 

funds to other Federal departments or agencies. 

Language is included under Official Residence of the Vice President, ‘‘Operating Expenses’’ allowing the transfer of funds to other 

Federal departments or agencies. 

UNDER TITLE VII—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Under Title VII Independent Agencies, a number of transfers are 

allowed: 1) the GSA allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents account may transfer such sums as necessary to the Department of the Treasury for certain pension benefits, 2) the GSA Electronic Government Fund may transfer $3,000,000 to federal departments in pursuit of programs goals, 3) under the Election Assistance Commission, $2,800,000 to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 4) under the National Archives and Records 

Administration, $2,000,000 is transferred from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the operating expenses account, and 5) under Office of Personnel Management, 

amounts from certain trust funds are transferred to salary and expenses accounts for oversight and administration of the funds. 

Title VII, Sec. 703. The Committee continues the provision providing that funds made available for activities of the Federal Building Fund may be transferred between appropriations with advance 

approval of the Congress. 

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 strongly considers program 

performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding 

recommendations. This includes a review of agency and departVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00175 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
176 

mental performance plans, audits, and investigations of the U.S. 

General Accounting Offices of Inspector General, and other performance-related information. The Committee’s goal is to provide 

adequate, but not excessive, resources for the programs covered by 

this Act, consistent with funding allocations provided by the Congressional budget process. 

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): 

CHAPTER 443 OF TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE 

CHAPTER 443—INSURANCE 

* * * * * * * 

§ 44302. General authority 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(f) EXTENSION OF POLICIES.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall extend through August 

31, ø2005,¿ 2006, and may extend through December 31, 

ø2005,¿ 2006, the termination date of any insurance policy 

that the Department of Transportation issued to an air carrier 

under subsection (a) and that is in effect on the date of enactment of this subsection on no less favorable terms to the air 

carrier than existed on June 19, 2002; except that the Secretary shall amend the insurance policy, subject to such terms 

and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, to add coverage 

for losses or injuries to aircraft hulls, passengers, and crew at 

the limits carried by air carriers for such losses and injuries 

as of such date of enactment and at an additional premium 

comparable to the premium charged for third-party casualty 

coverage under such policy. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 44303. Coverage 

(a) * * * 

(b) AIR CARRIER LIABILITY FOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS ARISING

OUT OF ACTS OF TERRORISM.—For acts of terrorism committed on 

or to an air carrier during the period beginning on September 22, 

2001, and ending on December 31, ø2005,¿ 2006, the Secretary 

may certify that the air carrier was a victim of an act of terrorism 

and in the Secretary’s judgment, based on the Secretary’s analysis 

and conclusions regarding the facts and circumstances of each case, 

shall not be responsible for losses suffered by third parties (as referred to in section 205.5(b)(1) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations) that exceed $100,000,000, in the aggregate, for all claims by 

such parties arising out of such act. If the Secretary so certifies, 

the air carrier shall not be liable for an amount that exceeds 

177 

$100,000,000, in the aggregate, for all claims by such parties arising out of such act, and the Government shall be responsible for 

any liability above such amount. No punitive damages may be 

awarded against an air carrier (or the Government taking responsibility for an air carrier under this subsection) under a cause of action arising out of such act. The Secretary may extend the provisions of this subsection to an aircraft manufacturer (as defined in 

section 44301) of the aircraft of the air carrier involved. 

* * * * * * * 

SECTION 122 OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, 

JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998 

(Public law 105–119) 

SEC. 122. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to 

paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to establish, for a period of ø7 years¿ 8 years from date of enactment of 

this provision, a personnel management demonstration project providing for the compensation and performance management of not 

more than a combined total of 950 employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering, intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 

Firearms. 

* * * * * * * 

SECTION 223 OF THE NATIONAL HOUSING ACT 

MISCELLANEOUS HOUSING INSURANCE

SEC. 223. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(f)(1) Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Act, the Secretary is authorized, in his discretion, to insure under any section 

of this title a mortgage executed in connection with the purchase 

or refinancing of an existing multifamily housing project or the 

purchase or refinancing of existing debt of an existing hospital (or 

existing nursing home, existing assisted living facility, existing intermediate care facility, existing board and care home, or any combination thereof). 

* * * * * * * 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—FEDERAL FUNDS 

* * * * * * * 

178 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

For a Federal payment for a school improvement program in the 

District of Columbia, $40,000,000, to be allocated as follows: for the 

District of Columbia Public Schools, $13,000,000 to improve public 

school education in the District of Columbia; for the State Education Office, $13,000,000 to expand quality public charter schools 

in the District of Columbia, to remain available until September 

30, 2006; for the Secretary of the Department of Education, 

$14,000,000 to provide opportunity scholarships for students in the 

District of Columbia in accordance with division C, title III of the 

District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108– 

199; 118 Stat. 126), of which up to $1,000,000 may be used to administer and fund assessments: Provided, That of the $13,000,000 

for the District of Columbia Public Schools, not less than 

$2,000,000 shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high performing or significantly improved public schools; not less than 

$2,000,000 shall be to support the Transformation School Initiative 

directed to schools in need of improvement: Provided further, That 

of the remaining amounts, the Superintendent of the District of Columbia Public Schools shall use such sums as necessary to provide 

grants to schools which are not eligible for other programs referenced under this heading, and to contract for management consulting services and implement recommended reforms: Provided 

further, That the Comptroller General shall conduct a financial 

audit of the District of Columbia Public Schools: Provided further, 

That of the $13,000,000 provided for public charter schools in the 

District of Columbia, $2,000,000 shall be for the City Build Initiative to create neighborhood-based charter schools; $2,750,000 shall 

be for the Direct Loan Fund for Charter Schools; $150,000 shall be 

for administrative expenses of the Office of Charter School Financing and Support to expand outreach and support of charter schools; 

$100,000 shall be for the D.C. Public Charter School Association to 

enhance the quality of charter schools; ø$4,000,000¿ $4,000,000, to 

remain available until expended, shall be for the development of an 

incubator facility for public charter schools; $2,000,000 shall be for 

a charter school college preparatory program; and ø$2,000,000 

shall be for a new incentive fund¿ $2,000,000, to remain available 

until expended, shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high 

performing or significantly improved public charter schools: Provided further, That the District of Columbia government shall establish a dedicated account for the Office of Charter School Financing and Support (the Office) that shall consist of the Federal funds 

appropriated in this Act, any subsequent appropriations, any unobligated balances from prior fiscal years, any additional grants, and 

any interest and principal derived from loans made to Charter 

Schools, and repayment of dollars utilized to support credit enhancement earned in this or any fiscal year: Provided further, That 

the account shall be under the control of the District of Columbia 

Chief Financial Officer who shall use those funds solely for the purposes of carrying out the Credit Enhancement Program, Direct 

Loan Fund Grant Program, and any other charter school financing 

under the management of the Office: Provided further, That in this 

and subsequent fiscal years the Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

shall conduct an annual audit of the funds expended by the Office 

179 

and provide an annual financial report to the Mayor, the Council 

of the District of Columbia, the Office of the District of Columbia 

Treasurer and the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 

Representatives and Senate for these funds showing, by object 

class, the expenditures made and the purpose therefor: Provided 

further, That not more than $250,000 of the total amount appropriated for this program may be used for administrative expenses 

and training expenses related to the cost of the National Charter 

School Conference(s) to be hosted by December 2006; and no more 

than 5 percent of the funds appropriated for the direct loan fund 

may be used for administrative expenses related to the administration and annual audit of the direct loan, grant, and credit enhancement programs. 

* * * * * * * 

SECTION 640 OF THE TREASURY AND GENERAL 

GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000 

SEC. 640. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section 

shall apply with respect to violations that relate to reporting periods that begin on or after January 1, 2000, and that end on or before December 31, ø2005¿ 2008. 

SECTION 403 OF THE GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT 

REFORM ACT OF 1994 

(Public Law 103–356) 

SEC. 403. FRANCHISE FUND PILOT PROGRAMS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(f) TERMINATION.—The provisions of this section shall expire on 

October 1, ø2005¿ 2006. 

SECTION 4 OF THE FEDERAL ACTIVITIES INVENTORY 

REFORM ACT OF 1998 

SEC. 4. APPLICABILITY. 

(a) * * * 

(b) EXCEPTIONS.—This Act does not apply to or with respect to 

the following: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(5) Executive agencies with fewer than 100 full-time employees as of the first day of the fiscal year. However, such an agency shall be subject to section 2 to the extent it plans to conduct 

a public-private competition for the performance of an activity 

that is not inherently governmental. 

180 

SECTION 604 OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 

§ 604. Permissible purposes of reports 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (c), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) To a person which it has reason to believe— 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(F) otherwise has a legitimate business need for the information— 

(i) * * * 

(ii) subject to subsection (d), to review an account to 

determine whether the consumer continues to meet 

the terms of the account. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(d) RESERVED.¿ 

(d) LIMITATION ON USE OF CONSUMER REPORT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—A credit card issuer may not use any negative information contained in a consumer report to increase any 

annual percentage rate applicable to a credit card account, or 

to remove or increase any introductory annual percentage rate 

of interest applicable to such account, for any reason other than 

an action or omission of the card holder that is directly related 

to such account. 

(2) NOTICE TO CONSUMER.—The limitation under paragraph 

(1) on the use by a credit card issuer of information in a consumer report shall be clearly and conspicuously described to the 

consumer by the credit card issuer in any disclosure or statement required to be made to the consumer under this title. 

* * * * * * * 

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 proposed in the accompanying 

bill which may be considered, under certain circumstances, to 

change the application of existing law, either directly or indirectly. 

The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for 

more than one year for a number of programs for which the basic 

authorizing legislation does not explicitly authorize such extended 

availability. The bill provides, in some instances, for funding of 

agencies and activities where legislation has not yet been finalized. 

In addition, the bill carries language, in some instances, permitting 

activities not authorized by law, or exempting agencies from certain provisions of law, but which has been carried in appropriations 

acts for many years. 

The bill includes limitations on official entertainment, reception 

and representation expenses for the Secretary of Transportation, 

the Secretary of the Treasury and the National Transportation 

181 

Safety Board. Similar provisions have appeared in many previous 

appropriations Acts. The bill includes a number of limitations on 

the purchase of automobiles, motorcycles, or office furnishings. 

Similar limitations have appeared in many previous appropriations 

Acts. Language is included in several instances permitting certain 

funds to be credited to the appropriations recommended. 

In Title VII of the bill, in connection with the General Services 

Administration, certain limitations on availability of revenue in the 

federal buildings fund and certain legislative provisions have been 

carried forward from last year. 

The bill continues a number of general provisions applying to 

agencies covered by the bill as well as certain provisions applying 

government-wide. These provisions have been carried in the prior 

year appropriations bill, and some have been carried for many 

years. Additionally, the Committee includes a number of new general provisions. 

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 specifying transfer authority among offices. 

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Salaries and 

expenses’’ which would allow crediting the account with up to 

$2,500,000 in user fees. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Salaries 

and expenses’’ limiting the use of funds available for the position 

of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. 

Language is included that limits operating costs and capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund for the Department of Transportation 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’’ limiting the amount of loans that can be 

subsidized. 

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Minority 

business outreach’’ specifying that funds may be used for business 

opportunities related to any mode of transportation. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Payments to air carriers’’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation 

to repay any funds borrowed from to the Federal Aviation Administration to fund the essential air service program. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Payments to air carriers’’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation 

to consider the relative subsidy requirements of carriers when determining between or among carriers competing to provide service. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ limiting funds for certain aviation program activities. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits funds to plan, finalize, or implement 

any regulation that would promulgate new aviation user fees not 

182 

specifically authorized by law after the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that credits funds received from States, counties, municipalities, foreign authorities, other public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred in the provision of agency services. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that provides $7,500,000 for the contract tower cost 

sharing program. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ permitting the use of funds to enter into a grant 

agreement with a nonprofit standard setting organization to develop aviation safety standards. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits the use of funds for new applicants of 

the second career training program. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits the use of funds for Sunday premium 

pay unless an employee actually performed work during the time 

corresponding to the premium pay. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits funds from being used to operate a 

manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous United 

States. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits funds for conducting and coordinating 

activities on aeronautical charting and cartography through the 

Transportation Administrative Service Center. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Operations’’ that prohibits the use of funds to purchase store gift 

cards or gift certificates through a government-issued credit card. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Facilities and equipment’’ that allows certain funds received for 

expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of air 

navigation facilities to be credited to the account. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Facilities and equipment’’ that requires the Secretary of Transportation to transmit a comprehensive capital investment plan for the 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Research, engineering, and development’’ that 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 limits funds available for the planning or execution of programs with obligations in excess of 

$3,600,000,000. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ ‘‘Liquidation of Contract Authorization’’ 

that provides liquidating cash. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ that provides not more than 

$81,346,000 for administration. 

183 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ that allows funds to be used for airports to procure and install runway incursion prevention systems 

and devices. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ that specifies $20,000,000 for the small 

community air service pilot program. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ that rescinds fiscal year 2005 contract 

authority above the obligation limitation. 

Section 101 requires FAA to accept airport equipment, subject to 

certain criteria. 

Section 102 limits the number of workyears on a particular contract. 

Section 103 prohibits FAA from requiring airport to provide specified items without cost, with some exceptions. 

Section 104 prohibits the use of funds for changing weight restrictions or prior permission rules at Teterboro Airport in New 

Jersey. 

Section 105 extends the terms and conditions of FAAs aviation 

insurance program for one additional year. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘‘Limitation on administrative expenses’’ that provides a limitation on administrative expenses of the agency. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘‘Federal-aid highways’’ that provides a limitation on obligations for the Federal-aid highways program and a limitation on research programs. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘‘Federal-aid highways’’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation to use fees charged and collected on applicants for a direct 

loan, guaranteed loan, or line of credit as authorized under 23 

U.S.C. 183 and 184 and makes the fees used not subject to any limitation on obligations. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘‘Federal-aid highways, (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)’’ that provides liquidating cash. 

Section 110 distributes obligation authority among the Federalaid highway programs. 

Section 111 provides that funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics may be credited to the Federal aid highways 

account. 

Section 112 allows Nevada and Arizona to reimburse debt service 

payment on the Bypass Bridge at Hoover Dam project with future 

apportionments, in accordance with title 23, United States Code. 

Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, ‘‘Motor Carrier Safety Operations and Programs’’ 

that provides a limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract 

authorization for the operating expenses of the agency and for 

motor carrier safety research programs. 

Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, ‘‘National Motor Carrier Safety Program’’ that provides a limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract authorization for motor carrier safety grant programs. 

184 

Section 120 subjects funds appropriated in this Act to the terms 

and conditions of section 350 of Public Law 107–87, including that 

the Secretary of Transportation submit a report on Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘‘Operations and research’’ prohibiting the planning or 

implementation of any rulemaking on labeling passenger car tires 

for low rolling resistance. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘‘Highway traffic safety grants’’ prohibiting the use of 

funds for construction, rehabilitation or remodeling costs or for office furniture for state, local, or private buildings. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘‘Highway traffic safety grants’’ limiting funding 

available for grants administration. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘‘Highway traffic safety grants’’ limiting funding 

available for grants administration. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘‘Highway traffic safety grants’’ limiting the amount 

of funds available for technical assistance to states under section 

410. 

Section 130 allows states to use funds provided under section 402 

of title 23, U.S.C., to produce and place highway safety public service messages. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘‘Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program’’ authorizing 

the Secretary to issue fund anticipation notes necessary to pay obligations under sections 511 and 513 of the Railroad Revitalization 

and Regulatory Reform Act. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘‘Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program’’ that prohibits 

new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments using federal 

funds for credit risk premium under section 502 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘‘Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation’’ limiting 

passenger rail routes that may receive federal subsidies. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘‘Administrative Expenses’’ prohibiting funds for a permanent office of 

transit security. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘‘Formula Grants’’ making $2,500,000 available for the National 

Transit database. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘‘Job 

Access and Reverse Commute Grants’’ making up to $3,000,000 

available for technical assistance. 

Section 160 exempts previously made transit obligations from 

limitations on obligations. 

Section 161 allows unobligated funds for projects under ‘‘Capital 

Investment Grants’’ in prior year appropriations Acts to be used 

this fiscal year. 

Section 162 allows the transfer of prior year appropriations from 

older accounts to be merged in to new accounts with similar, current activities. 

185 

Section 191 prohibits obligations incurred during the current 

year from construction funds in excess of the appropriations and 

limitation contained in this Act or in any prior appropriation Act. 

Section 192 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD 

and rental payments shall be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘‘Hazardous materials safety’’ which allows 

up to $1,200,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘‘Hazardous materials safety’’ that credits 

certain funds received for expenses incurred for training and other 

activities incurred in performed of hazardous materials exemptions 

and approval functions. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘‘Pipeline safety’’ that requires the agency to 

fund the one-call state grant program. 

Language is included under Research and Special Programs Administration, ‘‘Emergency preparedness grants’’ specifying the Secretary of Transportation or his designee may obligate funds provided under this head. 

Language is included under Research and Innovative Technology 

Administration, ‘‘Research and development’’ that credits to the appropriation funds received from States and other sources for expenses incurred for training. 

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. Language is also included under Office of Inspector General, ‘‘Salaries and expenses’’ that authorizes the Office of Inspector 

General to investigate unfair or deceptive practices and unfair 

methods of competition by domestic and foreign air carriers and 

ticket agents. 

Language is included under Surface Transportation Board, ‘‘Salaries and expenses’’ allowing the collection of $1,250,000 in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board; 

and providing that the sum appropriated from the general fund 

shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as such fees are received. 

Section 170. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department of Transportation to use funds for aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances, as authorized by 

law. 

Section 171. The Committee continues the provision limiting appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for 

an Executive Level IV. 

Section 172. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act for salaries and expenses of more than 100 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation, and prohibits political and Presidential personnel assigned 

on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation. 

186 

Section 173. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds for the implementation of section 404 of title 23, United 

States Code. 

Section 174. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

recipients of funds made available in this Act from releasing personal information, including social security number, medical or disability information, and photographs from a driver’s license or 

motor vehicle record, without express consent of the person to 

whom such information pertains; and prohibits the withholding of 

funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision. 

Section 175. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal 

Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration 

from states, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and 

private sources to be used for expenses incurred for training may 

be credited to each agency’s respective accounts. 

Section 176. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

the Secretary of Transportation to allow issuers of any preferred 

stock to redeem or repurchase preferred stock sold to the Department of Transportation. 

Section 177. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in Title I of this Act from being issued for any grant unless 

the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business 

days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full 

funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced 

by the department or its modal administrations. 

Section 178. The Committee continues a provision for the Department of Transportation allowing funds received from rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be credited to appropriations. 

Section 179. The Committee continues a provision allowing 

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 180. The Committee continues a provision allowing the 

Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended sums from ‘‘Office of the secretary, salaries and expenses’’ to ‘‘Minority business 

outreach’’. 

Section 181. 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 modal administrations in this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification. 

Section 182. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to implement an essential air service local cost 

share participation pilot program. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Language has been included for Departmental Offices, Salaries 

and Expenses, that provides funds for operation and maintenance 

of the Treasury Building and Annex; hire of passenger motor vehicles; maintenance, repairs, and improvements of, and purchase of 

commercial insurance policies for real properties leased or owned 

187 

overseas; official reception and representation expenses; unforeseen 

emergencies of a confidential nature; grants to state and local law 

enforcement groups to help fight money laundering; and Treasurywide financial audits and the transfer of these funds. 

Language has been included for the Departmentwide Systems 

and Capital Investments Program that provides funds for the development and acquisition of automated data processing equipment, software, and services; and providing transfer authority. 

Language has been included for the Office of Inspector General 

that provides funds to carry out the provisions of the Inspector 

General Act of 1978, the hire of vehicles, official travel expenses, 

and unforeseen emergencies. 

Language has been included for the Treasury Inspector General 

for Tax Administration that provides for the purchase and hire of 

motor vehicles, services by 5 U.S.C. 3109, travel expenses, and unforeseen emergencies. 

Language has been included for the Financial Crime Enforcement Network that provides funds for hire of vehicles; the travel 

of non-federal personnel attending conferences or meetings involving financial law enforcement, intelligence, and regulation; the purchase of personal services contracts; and assistance to Federal law 

enforcement agencies with or without reimbursement. 

Language has been included for the Financial Management Service that provides multiple year availability for systems modernization funds. 

Language has been included for the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau that provides funds for the hire of passenger motor 

vehicles, cooperative research and development; and laboratory assistance to state and local agencies with or without reimbursement. 

Language has been included for the U.S. Mint that identifies the 

source of funding for the operations and activities of the U.S. Mint; 

specifies the level of funding for circulating coinage and protective 

service capital investments; and provides reimbursement to the 

General Accounting Office for a contract study. 

Language has been included for the Bureau of the Public Debt 

that provides appropriations from the General Fund will be reduced as fees are collected, and that a portion of the funds are to 

be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for administration of the Fund. 

Language is included for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration that provides for the purchase and hire of motor vehicles, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, travel and representation expenses, and unforeseen emergencies. 

Section 210 allows the Department of the Treasury to purchase 

uniforms, insurance, and motor vehicles without regard to the general purchase price limitation, and enter into contracts with the 

State Department for health and medical services for Treasury employees in overseas locations. 

Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, Office of the Inspector General, Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances. 

188 

Section 212 limits funds for purchase of law enforcement vehicles 

only if the purchase is consistent with vehicle management principles. 

Section 213 prohibits the Department of the Treasury from undertaking a redesign of the $1 Federal Reserve note. 

Section 214 provides for transfers from and reimbursements to 

the Salaries and Expenses appropriation of the Financial Management Service for the purposes of debt collection. 

Section 215 continues the Treasury’s franchise fund. 

Section 216 requires authorization for the construction and operation of a museum by the United States Mint. 

Section 217 prohibits merging of the Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. 

Section 218 directs the Secretary to report on Chinese currency. 

Language is included under Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Processing, Assistance and Management’’ dedicating funding for the Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board. 

Language is included for the Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Processing, assistance, and management’’ that provides funds for management services, rent and utilities, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 

3109, and official reception and representation expenses. Language 

also has been included that provides funds for the Tax Counseling 

for the Elderly program, low-income taxpayer clinic grants, the IRS 

Oversight Board and official representation and reception expenses. 

Language is included for Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Tax law enforcement’’ that provides funds for the purchase and hire of vehicles; services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and reimbursement of 

the Social Security Administration. 

Language is included for Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Information 

systems’’ that provides funds for the hire of motor vehicles and 

services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109. 

Language has been included for Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Business systems modernization’’ that provides for the capital asset acquisition of information technology, including management and related contractual costs of said acquisitions, including contractual 

costs associated with operation authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 

that restricts the use of the funds. 

Language is included for the Internal Revenue Service, ‘‘Health 

insurance tax credit administration’’ to implement the health insurance tax credit included in the Trade Act of 2003 (Public Law 

107–210). 

Section 202 requires the IRS to maintain a training program in 

taxpayer’s rights, dealing courteously with taxpayers, and crosscultural relations. 

Section 203 requires the IRS to institute policies and procedures, 

which will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information. 

Section 204 requires the IRS to maintain and improve a 1–800 

help line service for taxpayers. 

Section 205 prohibits the use of funds to modify the number or 

location of taxpayer assistance centers until certain criteria are 

met. 

189 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, which designates funds for various programs, activities, and purposes, and specifies the uses of such funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, tenant-based rental assistance, which specifies the 

allocation of funds and limits the use of certain funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, project-based rental assistance, which specifies the 

allocation of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, public housing capital fund, which limits the delegation of certain waiver authorities and prohibits funds from being 

used for certain activities. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, public housing operating fund, which sets the basis 

for the allocation of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, housing opportunities for persons with AIDS which 

sets forth certain requirements for the allocation of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, community development fund, which specifies the allocation of certain funds; limits the use of certain funds; and makes 

technical changes to the uses of certain funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, home investment partnerships program, which specifies the allocation of certain funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, homeless assistance grants, which establishes certain 

minimum funding and matching requirements; and requires grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social service providers. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, housing for the elderly, which specifies the allocation 

of certain funds; designates certain funds to be used only for certain grants; and allows the Secretary to waive certain provisions 

governing contract terms. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, housing for persons with disabilities, which specifies 

the allocation of certain funds; allows funds to be used to renew 

certain contracts; and allows the Secretary to waive certain provisions governing contract terms. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, flexible subsidy fund, which permits the use of excess 

rental charges. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, manufactured housing fees trust fund, which permits 

fees to be modified and permits temporary borrowing authority 

from the General Fund of the Treasury. 

Language is included under the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, policy development and research, which specify the use of certain funds. 

190 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, fair housing and equal opportunity, which place restrictions on the use of funds for lobbying activities. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, management and administration, which specifies the 

allocation of funds; sets forth certain authorities of, and requirements on, the office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, 

which permits temporary borrowing authority from the General 

Fund of the Treasury. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, administrative provisions; prohibits funds to investigate or prosecute certain lawful activities; prohibits funds to be 

used to change the terms and condition on which the audit of 

GNMA is conducted; revises allocations for housing opportunities 

for persons with AIDS grant recipients; waives certain section 8 

rental payment limits for a demonstration program; relates to the 

expenditures for certain corporations and agencies; relates to allocations of funds in excess of budget estimates; requires submission 

of a spending plan for certain activities; requires certain reporting 

requirements regarding departmental funds; requires maintenance 

of certain rental assistance contract; allowing the use of certain 

funds for maintenance and disposition of certain properties; sets 

forth requirements for submission of budget justifications; and for 

allocation of certain assistance. 

TITLE IV—THE JUDICIARY 

Under Supreme Court, ‘‘Salaries and expenses’’ language is included permitting certain funds to remain available until expended. 

Under Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and other Judicial 

Services, Court Security, language is included regarding additional 

uses of funds. 

Section 401 permits use of funds for activities authorized by 5 

U.S.C. 3109. 

TITLE V—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support’’ 

provides that the amount appropriated shall remain available until 

expended. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and 

Security Costs’’ provides that the amount appropriated shall remain available until expended. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment to the District of Columbia 

Courts’’: (1) provides that all amounts under this heading shall be 

apportioned quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget 

and obligated and expended in the same manner as funds appropriated for salaries and expenses of other Federal agencies, with 

payroll and financial services to be provided on a contractual basis 

with the General Services Administration; (2) allows funds made 

available for capital improvements to remain available until September 30, 2007; and (3) provides for the reallocation of funds. 

Language under ‘‘Defender Services in the District of Columbia 

Courts’’: (1) provides that the amount appropriated shall remain 

191 

available until expended, (2) provides that all amounts under this 

heading shall be apportioned quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget and obligated and expended in the same manner 

as funds appropriated for salaries and expenses of other Federal 

agencies, with payroll and financial services to be provided on a 

contractual basis with the General Services Administration. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia’’: (1) provides that all amounts under this heading shall be apportioned 

quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget and obligated 

and expended in the same manner as funds appropriated for salaries and expenses of other Federal agencies, with payroll and financial services to be provided on a contractual basis with the General 

Services Administration; (2) authorizes the Director to accept and 

use gifts to support offender and defendant programs and equipment and vocational training services to educate and train offenders and defendants, (3) authorizes the Director to charge fees to 

cover the costs of training and materials distributed at conferences. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment to the District of Columbia 

Water and Sewer Authority’’ provides that the amount appropriated shall remain available until expended. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment for the Anacostia Waterfront 

Initiative’’ provides that the amount appropriated shall remain 

available until September 30, 2007. 

Language under ‘‘Federal Payment to the District of Columbia 

for Capital Development’’ provides that the amount appropriated 

shall remain available until expended. 

Section 501 specifies that an appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall be considered as the maximum amount that 

may be expended for said purpose or object. 

Section 502 permits funds for travel and payment of dues. 

Section 503 appropriates funds for refunding overpayments of 

taxes collected and for paying settlements and judgments against 

the District of Columbia government. 

Section 504 prohibits the use of appropriation for publicity or 

propaganda purposes. 

Section 505 establishes reprogramming and transfer requirements. 

Section 506 prohibits use of funds only to the objects for which 

the appropriations were made. 

Section 507 clarifies the pay setting authority for District employees as the District’s Merit Personnel Act rather than title 5 of 

the United States Code. 

Section 508 directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit new fiscal year 2006 revenue estimates as of the end of such 

quarter. 

Section 509 prohibits the District government from renewing or 

extending sole source contracts without opening them to the competitive bidding process as set forth in section 303 of the District 

of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985. 

Section 510 prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the offices of U.S. Senator or 

Representative under section 4(d) of the D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979. 

192 

Section 511 prohibits Federal funds made available in this Act 

from being used to implement or enforce any system of registration 

for unmarried cohabitating couples. 

Section 512 allows the mayor to accept, obligate, and expend 

Federal, private, and other grants received by the District government that are not reflected in the amounts appropriated in this 

Act. 

Section 513 restricts the use of official vehicles to official duties 

and not between a residence and workplace, except in the case of 

a police officer who resides in the District of Columbia at the discretion of the Chief, an officer or employee of the D.C. Fire and 

Emergency Medical Services Department who resides in the District of Columbia and is on call 24 hours a day, the Mayor of the 

District of Columbia, and the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia. 

Section 514 prohibits the use of funds for the audit of the District 

government’s annual financial statements unless the DC Inspector 

General either conducts, or contracts for, the audit. 

Section 515 prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the Corporation Counsel or any other officer or entity of the District government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action 

which seeks to require Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the District of Columbia. 

Section 516 prohibits the use of any funds in this Act to carry 

out any program of distributing sterile needles or syringes for the 

hypodermic injection of any illegal drug. 

Section 517 requires the Chief Financial Officers of the District 

of Columbia to certify that they understand the duties and restrictions applicable to their agency as a result of this Act. 

Section 518 includes a ‘‘conscience clause’’ on legislation that pertains to contraceptive coverage by health insurance plans. 

Section 519 requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to 

submit quarterly reports on various issues pertaining to the District of Columbia. 

Section 520 requires the CFO to submit a revised appropriated 

funds operating budget in the format of the budget that the District government submitted pursuant to section 442 of the DC 

Home Rule Act for all agencies no later than 30 calendar days after 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

Section 521 prohibits the transfer of Federal funds to any department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. government, except 

pursuant to a transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, 

this or any other appropriation Act. 

Section 522 requires the District of Columbia Courts to transfer 

all fines levied and collected by the Courts in cases charging Driving Under the Influence and Driving While Impaired to the general 

treasury of the District of Columbia to remain available until expended and used by the Office of the Corporation Counsel for enforcement and prosecution of District traffic alcohol laws. 

Section 523 prohibits the use of any funds in the Act to: (1) pay 

the fees of an attorney who represents a party in an action or any 

attorney who defends any action, including an administrative proceeding, brought against D.C. Public Schools under the Individuals 

With Disabilities Act (IDEA) in excess of $4,000 for that action; (2) 

pay the fees of an attorney or firm whom the CFO determines to 

193 

have a pecuniary interest, either through an attorney, officer or 

employee of the firm, in any special education diagnostic services, 

schools, or other special education service providers; and (3) require 

all savings to be used to expand special education services within 

the District. 

Section 524 requires attorneys in special education cases brought 

under IDEA to comply with several reporting requirements and 

allow the Inspector General to conduct investigations to determine 

the accuracy of the certifications. 

Section 525 allows for appropriations in this Act to be increased by no more than $42,000,000 from unexpended general funds, and 

may be used only for unanticipated one-time expenditures, to avoid 

deficit spending, for debt reduction, for unanticipated program 

needs, or to avoid revenue shortfalls. 

Section 526 makes a technical correction under the heading of 

‘‘Federal Payment for School Improvement’’ in Public Law 108–355 

(118 Stat. 1327). 

Section 527 allows for the obligation of additional ‘‘Other Type 

Funds’’ under certain circumstances. 

Section 528 allows for the obligation of additional ‘‘Local Funds’’ 

under certain circumstances. 

Section 529 allows for short-term borrowing from the emergency 

and contingency reserve funds established under section 450A of 

the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 98–198; D.C. 

Official Code, sec. 1–204.50a) under certain circumstances. 

Section 530 maintains funding for the District of Columbia Inspector General. 

TITLE VI—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 

The Committee has continued language that mandates that unused amounts of the President’s expense allowance will revert to 

the Treasury and which provides funds for service authorized by 5 

U.S.C. 3109, subsistence expenses, hire of vehicles, newspapers, 

periodicals, teletype news service, travel, and official entertainment 

expenses. The Committee has continued language making funds 

available for reimbursement to the White House Communications 

Agency. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

operation and maintenance of the White House for official entertainment expenses; language specifying the authorized use of 

funds; language specifying that reimbursable expenses are the exclusive authority of the Executive Residence to incur obligations 

and receive offsetting collections; language requiring the sponsors 

of political events to make advance payments; language requiring 

the national committee of the political party of the President to 

maintain $25,000 on deposit; language requiring the Executive 

Residence to ensure that amounts owed are billed within 60 days 

of a reimbursable event and collected within 30 days of the bill notice; language authorizing the Executive Residence to charge and 

assess interest and penalties on late payments; language authorizing all reimbursements to be deposited into the Treasury as a 

miscellaneous receipt; language requiring a report to the Committee on the reimbursable expenses within 90 days of the end of 

the fiscal year; language requiring the Executive Residence to 

maintain a system for tracking and classifying reimbursable 

194 

events; and language specifying that the Executive Residence is not 

exempt from the requirements of subchapter I or II of chapter 37 

of title 31, United States Code. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

the hire of vehicles and funds for a capital investment plan that 

provides for the continued modernization of the information technology infrastructure. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

expenses, the hire of vehicles, carrying out provisions of chapter 35 

of 44 U.S.C., directs that funds shall be applied only to items for 

which appropriations were made, prohibits the review of agricultural marketing orders and the alteration of certain testimony. The 

Committee has continued language prohibiting the use of funds for 

the purpose of OMB calculating, preparing, or approving any tabular or other material that proposes the sub-allocation of budget 

authority or outlays by the Committees on Appropriations. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

expenses, research, official reception and representation expenses, 

participation in joint projects, and allows for the acceptance of 

gifts. The Committee has continued language providing funds for 

model state drug law conferences and policy research and evaluation and making these funds available until expended. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

counternarcotics research and development and the technology 

transfer program. 

The Committee has continued language that provides a certain 

level of funding for State, local and Federal drug control efforts, 

and requires obligation of funds within a specified period of time. 

The Committee continues language regarding the availability of 

funds. 

The Committee has continued language that provides funds for 

operation and maintenance of the official residence of the Vice 

President, the hire of vehicles, official entertainment expenses and 

provides for the transfer of funds as necessary. The Committee has 

continued language that enables the Vice President to provide assistance to the President, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 

subsistence, and the hire for vehicles. 

Under the Office of Management and Budget, prohibits the use 

for funds to restrict the implementation of marketing orders issued 

pursuant to the Agriculture Marketing Agreement Act. 

Under the Office of National Drug Control Policy, prevents a 

change from the current allocation of funds for the media campaign. 

TITLE VII—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Language has been included for the General Services Administration Federal Buildings Fund that specifies the conditions under 

which funds made available can be used and designates certain 

projects that can be undertaken. Many technical provisions have 

been included regarding use of funds in the Federal Buildings 

Fund that are not specifically authorized by law. Language has 

been included that limits project funds available for construction 

and repair and alteration of buildings not authorized by law. A 

more detailed analysis of the Federal Buildings Funds can be found 

in the General Services Administration chapter of this report. 

195 

Language has been included for General Services Administration 

government-wide policy that provides funds for policy and evaluation activities associated with the management of real and personal 

property assets and certain administrative services; support responsibilities relating to acquisition, telecommunications, information technology management, and related technology activities; and 

services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109. 

Language has been included for General Services Administration 

operating expenses that provides funds for expenses for activities 

associated with personal and real property; technology management and activities; information access activities; agency-wide policy direction and management; other support services; and official 

reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included for the GSA Office of Inspector General that provides funds for information and detection of fraud; and 

for awards in recognition of efforts that enhance the office. 

Language has been included for the GSA electronic government 

fund that allows these funds to be transferred. 

Language has been included for allowances and office staff for 

former Presidents that allow a portion of these funds to be transferred. 

Section 701 provides that costs included in rent received from 

government corporations for operation, protection, maintenance, 

upkeep, repair and improvement shall be credited to the Federal 

Buildings Fund. 

Section 702 authorizes the use of funds for the hire of motor vehicles. 

Section 703 provides that funds made available for activities of 

the Federal Buildings Fund may be transferred between appropriations with advance approval of the Congress. 

Section 704 prohibits the use of funds for developing courthouse 

construction requests that do not meet GSA standards and the priorities of the Judicial Conference. 

Section 705 provides that no funds may be used to increase the 

amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any other service usually provided, to any 

agency which does not pay the requested rent. 

Section 706 permits GSA to pay small claims (up to $250,000) 

made against the government. 

Section 707 prohibits GSA from conveying a property in Phoenix, 

Arizona. 

Language has been included which stipulates that mail for oversees voting and mail for the blind is free. 

Language has been included which stipulates that 6–day delivery 

and rural mail delivery shall continue at not less than the 1983 

level 

Language has been included which prohibits funds from being 

used to charge a fee to a child support enforcement agency seeking 

the address of a postal customer. 

Under the National Credit Union Administration, language has 

been included which limits funds for administrative expenses at 

$323,000. 

Under the Selective Service System, language has been included 

which prohibits funds for being used to induct any person into the 

US Armed Forces. 

196 

TITLE VIII—GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT 

Section 801. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

pay raises to be funded within appropriated levels in this Act or 

previous appropriations Acts. 

Section 802. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act. 

Section 803. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of 

funds unless expressly so provided herein. 

Section 804. The Committee continues the provision limiting consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement contracts. 

Section 805. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act to be transferred without express authority. 

Section 806. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to engage in activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act. 

Section 807. The Committee continues the provision concerning 

employment rights of Federal employees who return to their civilian jobs after assignment with the Armed Forces. 

Section 808. The Committee continues the provision concerning 

compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 809. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds by any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy 

American Act. 

Section 810. The Committee modifies a provision specifying reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 811. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that fifty percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 

certain purposes. 

Section 812. The Committee includes a provision providing that 

funds used by the Executive Office of the President not be used to 

request any official background investigation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

Section 813. The Committee includes a provision requiring that 

cost accounting standards not apply to a contract under the Federal Health Benefits Program. 

Section 814. The Committee continues a provision regarding nonforeign area cost of living allowances. 

Section 815. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for abortions under the FEHBP. 

Section 816. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for abortions under the FEHBP unless the 

life of the mother is in danger or the pregnancy is a result of an 

act of rape or incest. 

Section 817. The Committee continues a new provision waiving 

restrictions on the purchase of non-domestic articles, materials, 

and supplies in the case of acquisition by the Federal Government 

of information technology. 

Section 818. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for a proposed rule relating to the determination 

that real estate brokerage is a financial activity. 

197 

Section 819. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to implement an Essential Air Service (EAS) local 

Cost Share Participation pilot program. 

Section 820. The Committee includes a provision that extends 

the Federal Election Commission’s administrative fine program 

through December 31, 2008. 

TITLE IX—GOVERNMENT-WIDE PROVISIONS 

Departments, Agencies, and Corporations 

Section 901. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

agencies to pay costs of travel to the United States for the immediate families of federal employees assigned to foreign duty in the 

event of a death or a life threatening illness of the employee. 

Section 902. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its 

workplaces are free from the illegal use of controlled substances. 

Section 903. The Committee continues the provision regarding 

price limitations on vehicles to be purchased by the Federal Government. 

Section 904. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

funds made available to agencies for travel, to also be used for 

quarter allowances and cost-of-living allowances. 

Section 905. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the government, with certain specified exceptions, from employing 

non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be in the continental 

U.S. 

Section 906. The Committee continues the provision ensuring 

that agencies will have authority to pay GSA bills for space renovation and other services. 

Section 907. The Committee continues the provision allowing 

agencies to finance the costs of recycling and waste prevention programs with proceeds from the sale of materials recovered through 

such programs. 

Section 908. The Committee continues the provision providing 

that funds may be used to pay rent and other service costs in the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 909. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

payments to persons filling positions for which they have been 

nominated after the Senate has voted not to approve the nomination. 

Section 910. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

interagency financing of groups absent prior statutory approval. 

Section 911. The Committee continues the provision authorizing 

the Postal Service to employ guards and give them the same special police powers as certain other federal guards. 

Section 912. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance with the applicable law of the U.S. 

Section 913. The Committee continues the provision limiting the 

pay increases of certain prevailing rate employees. 

Section 914. The Committee continues the provision limiting the 

amount of funds that can be used for redecoration of offices under 

certain circumstances. 

198 

Section 915. The Committee continues the provision to allow for 

interagency funding of national security and emergency telecommunications initiatives. 

Section 916. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to certify that a Schedule C appointment was not created 

solely or primarily to detail the employee to the White House. 

Section 917. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual harassment. 

Section 918. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the payment of any employee who prohibits, threatens or prevents 

another employee from communicating with Congress. 

Section 919. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

Federal training not directly related to the performance of official 

duties. 

Section 920. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the expenditure of funds for implementation of agreements in nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are included. 

Section 921. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

propaganda, publicity and lobbying by executive agency personnel 

in support or defeat of legislative initiatives. 

Section 922. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

any federal agency from disclosing an employee’s home address to 

any labor organization, absent employee authorization or court 

order. 

Section 923. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds to be used to provide non-public information such as mailing 

or telephone lists to any person or organization outside the government without the approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 924. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for propaganda and publicity purposes not authorized by Congress. 

Section 925. The Committee continues the provision directing 

agency employees to use official time in an honest effort to perform 

official duties. 

Section 926. The Committee continues the provision, with technical modifications, authorizing the use of funds to finance an appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement 

Program. 

Section 927. The Committee continues the provision, with technical modifications, authorizing agencies to transfer funds to the 

Governmentwide Policy account of GSA to finance an appropriate 

share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program 

and other purposes. 

Section 928. The Committee continues the provision, to prohibit 

any department or agency from using appropriated funds to independently contract with private companies to provide online employment applications and processing services. 

Section 929. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

breast feeding in a federal building or on federal property if the 

woman and child are authorized to be there. 

Section 930. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

interagency funding of the National Science and Technology Council and provides for a report on the budget and resources of the NaVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00198 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
199 

tional Science and Technology Council. The report should include 

the entire budget of the National Science and Technology Council. 

Section 931. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

documents involving the distribution of federal funds to indicate 

the agency providing the funds and the amount provided. 

Section 932. The Committee extends the authorization period for 

agency franchise funds by striking ‘‘October 1, 2005’’ and inserting 

‘‘October 1, 2006’’, as requested. 

Section 933. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds to monitor personal information relating to the use 

of federal internet sites to collect, review, or create any aggregate 

list that includes personally identifiable information relating to access to or use of any federal internet site of such agency. 

Section 934. The Committee continues the provision requiring 

health plans participating in the FEHBP to provide contraceptive 

coverage and provides exemptions to certain religious plans. 

Section 935. The Committee continues the provision providing 

recognition of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the official antidoping agency. 

Section 936. The Committee continues a provision allowing funds 

for official travel to be used by departments and agencies, if consistent with OMB and Budget Circular A–126, to participate in the 

fractional aircraft ownership pilot program. 

Section 937. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being expended for the purchase of a product or service 

offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc. unless the agency determines the products to constitute the best value to the buying agency. 

Section 938. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds for implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to 

the Legislative Branch, and implementing limitations on the Coast 

Guard Congressional Fellowship Program. 

Section 939. The Committee continues a provision requiring 

agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual before 

issuing the individual a government travel charge card and limits 

agency actions accordingly. 

Section 940. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

restricts the use of funds for federal law enforcement training facilities. 

Section 941. The Committee continues a provision that allows for 

transfer authority among certain offices of the Executive Office of 

the President. 

Section 942. The Committee includes a provision amending P.L. 

105–270. 

Section 943. The Committee includes a provision concerning the 

use of funds for the ‘‘e-gov’’ initiative that were not appropriated 

specifically for that purpose. 

Section 944. The Committee continues a provision, with modification, providing that the adjustment in rates of basic pay for employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in fiscal year 

2006 shall be an increase of 3.1 percent. 

Section 945. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

a credit card issuer from adjusting a card holder’s annual percentage rate based on information unrelated to the account. 

200 

Section 946. The Committee includes a provision that prohibits 

executive branch agencies from creating prepackaged news stories 

that are broadcast or distributed in the United States unless the 

story includes a clear notification within the text or audio of that 

news story that the prepackaged news story was prepared or funded by the executive branch agency. 

Section 947. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

funds from implementing a final rule published February 25, 2005 

regarding Cuba exports. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 

308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 

Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, which requires that 

the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the 

reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal 

year from the Committee’s section 302(a) allocation. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93– 

344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections 

associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying 

bill as provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office. 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93– 

344), as amended, the Congressional Budget Office has provided 

the following estimates of new budget authority and outlays provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to state and 

local governments. 

201 


Insert graphic folio 047 here HR153.011
202 


Insert graphic folio 048 here HR153.012
203 


Insert graphic folio 049 here HR153.013
204 


Insert graphic folio 050 here HR153.014
205 


Insert graphic folio 051 here HR153.015
206 


Insert graphic folio 052 here HR153.016
207 


Insert graphic folio 053 here HR153.017
208 


Insert graphic folio 054 here HR153.018
209 


Insert graphic folio 055 here HR153.019
210 


Insert graphic folio 056 here HR153.020
211 


Insert graphic folio 057 here HR153.021
212 


Insert graphic folio 058 here HR153.022
213 


Insert graphic folio 059 here HR153.023
214 


Insert graphic folio 060 here HR153.024
215 


Insert graphic folio 061 here HR153.025
216 


Insert graphic folio 062 here HR153.026
217 


Insert graphic folio 063 here HR153.027
218 


Insert graphic folio 064 here HR153.028
219 


Insert graphic folio 065 here HR153.029
220 


Insert graphic folio 066 here HR153.030
221 


Insert graphic folio 067 here HR153.031
222 


Insert graphic folio 068 here HR153.032
223 


Insert graphic folio 069 here HR153.033
224 


Insert graphic folio 070 here HR153.034
225 


Insert graphic folio 071 here HR153.035
226 


Insert graphic folio 072 here HR153.036
227 


Insert graphic folio 073 here HR153.037
228 


Insert graphic folio 074 here HR153.038
229 


Insert graphic folio 075 here HR153.039
230 


Insert graphic folio 076 here HR153.040
231 


Insert graphic folio 077 here HR153.041
232 


Insert graphic folio 078 here HR153.042
233 


Insert graphic folio 079 here HR153.043
234 


Insert graphic folio 080 here HR153.044
235 


Insert graphic folio 081 here HR153.045
236 


Insert graphic folio 082 here HR153.046
237 


Insert graphic folio 083 here HR153.047
238 


Insert graphic folio 084 here HR153.048
239 


Insert graphic folio 085 here HR153.049
240 


Insert graphic folio 086 here HR153.050
241 


Insert graphic folio 087 here HR153.051
242 


Insert graphic folio 088 here HR153.052
243 


Insert graphic folio 089 here HR153.053
244 


Insert graphic folio 090 here HR153.054
245 


Insert graphic folio 091 here HR153.055
246 


Insert graphic folio 092 here HR153.056
247 


Insert graphic folio 093 here HR153.057
(248) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. DAVID R. OBEY AND HON. 

JOHN W. OLVER 

Several factors contributed to a number of serious problems in 

the fiscal year 2006 Transportation, Treasury, HUD, Judiciary, 

District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Committee reported bill. 

PRESIDENT’S BUDGET WAS INADEQUATE

The President’s budget request inadequately funded numerous 

agencies. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) 

fund, and the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Agencies (HIDTA) 

program were all significantly under funded and proposed for 

transfer to other Departments. Amtrak was zeroed out creating a 

nearly $900 million reduction from the FY05 enacted level. His 

budget also featured hundreds of millions of dollars of fee increases 

and rescissions for which the Subcommittee also had to find funding. 

SUBCOMMITTEE ALLOCATION WAS ALSO INADEQUATE

Although the Subcommittee’s 302(b) allocation addressed some of 

the shortfalls and gimmicks, overall budget constraints kept the 

Appropriations Committee from fully making the Subcommittee 

whole. The overall lack of funds to address national needs such as 

Amtrak and community development is the direct result of the Majority’s 2006 Budget Resolution. As the Majority Leader pointed 

out: 

‘‘This is the budget that the American people voted for when they 

returned a Republican House, a Republican Senate and a Republican White House last November.’’ 

Based on the Majority Leader’s logic, the American people voted 

to kill Amtrak, to cut CDBG and to terminate the HOPE VI, 

Youthbuild and Brownfields initiatives at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION LED TO DIFFICULT TRADEOFFS

Under the reorganization proposal mandated by the Republican 

Leadership, a number of unrelated priorities are now grouped together in this bill. Instead of simplifying the process, as the Republican Leadership claimed it would, this reorganization created a bill 

that is made up of several disparate parts without any common 

theme among them. Departments and agencies that were key components of five separate Subcommittees as recently as three years 

ago have now been lumped together into a single bill. This structure inevitably leads to trade-offs among programs that will harm 

some agencies at the benefit of others. The Transportation, TreasVerDate Aug 04 2004 09:27 Jun 27, 2005 Jkt 021982 PO 00000 Frm 00248 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR153.XXX HR153
249 

ury, HUD, the Judiciary, District of Columbia and Independent 

Agencies reported bill has essentially become an Omnibus bill. 

The Committee’s reorganization placed this Subcommittee in the 

unenviable position of having to decide between funding transportation or housing programs, between funding for the judicial 

branch or funding for the White House, between funding for tax 

law compliance or election assistance. All are serious national responsibilities that we are obligated to meet. They will not all be 

met by this bill. 

Unfortunately, in their vote on the budget resolution earlier this 

year, the Majority decided that super-sized tax cuts for millionaires 

are more important than properly funding these priorities. As a result, Amtrak as well as several HUD programs are zeroed out or 

significantly under funded. 

THE COMMITTEE BILL WILL SHUT DOWN AMTRAK

National passenger rail as we know it will cease to exist if this 

bill becomes law. 

Taken at face value, the Majority’s proposal will shut down nearly half of the routes that Amtrak operates and deny more than 20 

states of Amtrak service. We believe, however, that it will be impossible for Amtrak to continue to operate even a limited number 

of routes under the funding levels and terms of this bill. 

If one were to play out what will happen if this Amtrak proposal 

is enacted, Amtrak will be placed in such a financial bind that it 

will terminate all intercity passenger rail service, including the 

Northeast Corridor. It will even have a ripple effect of disrupting 

commuter and freight rail services throughout the country. 

The Majority’s calculations with respect to the eighteen routes that would remain are overly optimistic. The $550 million provided 

is insufficient to maintain even a limited level of service. Of this 

amount, the bill sets forth $500 million for operating costs and $50 

million for capital. Fiscal year 2006 operating expenses cannot be covered for $500 

million—even if Amtrak only operates a reduced number of routes. 

The closure of some routes would result in the layoff of thousands 

of Amtrak workers. First year severance obligations to these employees would total as much as $300 million or more and severance 

costs would continue for several years. After mandatory debt service payments of $275 million to $287 million and mandatory labor 

payments of $300 million or more are made, no funds would be 

available to operate even a few routes and no funds would be available to invest in sorely needed capital upgrades. The $50 million set aside for Northeast Corridor capital projects 

is also wholly inadequate. The amount provided in the bill is less 

than ten percent of Amtrak’s fiscal year 2006 capital grant request 

of $787 million. It is also insufficient for covering mandatory life 

safety expenditures including work on the Penn Station tunnels 

and repairs on high-speed tracks required by Federal Railroad Administration track safety regulations. Under this bill, the Northeast Corridor would remain in a state of disrepair and Amtrak 

would continue to be vulnerable to a bridge or tunnel failure that 

could have catastrophic effects for Amtrak, commuter rail and 

freight rail operations throughout the Northeast. 

250 

The Committee reported bill also fails to provide any funding for 

other capital needs outside the Northeast Corridor, including legally required inspections and maintenance on equipment and 

tracks, infrastructure outside the Northeast and necessary Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility projects. 

If national passenger rail ceases to operate, it will be a tragedy 

caused by this Administration. The Amtrak board consists solely of 

Bush appointees. The so-called reform proposals that would obliterate the current system are all being pushed by President Bush’s 

Department of Transportation. The inadequate funding provided by 

this bill will be the final nail in Amtrak’s coffin. 

HOUSING PROGRAMS WILL BE SEVERELY IMPACTED

The Committee bill shortchanges many important housing and 

community development activities. To say that the Committee has 

placed a high priority on funding for our communities and for housing low-and moderate-income persons would be highly misleading. 

In what amounts to house cleaning, the Chairman chose to ‘‘clear 

out the underbrush’’ at HUD by eliminating or transferring several 

smaller programs. The Section 107 programs were transferred and 

merged with the activities under Policy Development and Research. 

Many other programs are zeroed out by the subcommittee including: Brownfields, Empowerment Zones, section 108 loan guarantees, and La Raza activities. All of these programs have contributed 

to the improvement of our communities. 

Another program zeroed out in the Chairman’s mark deserves 

special mention: Youthbuild. Youthbuild provides a valuable service by building or rehabilitating housing for homeless or low-income 

people in their own communities while helping young people complete their education. 

The President proposed that Youthbuild be transferred to the Department of Labor, but he has not presented to Congress legislation 

to carry this out. In the meantime, neither this Subcommittee, nor 

the Labor-HHS Subcommittee chose to fund the program. This very 

effective and worthwhile program was not funded simply because 

two subcommittee chairmen could not agree on jurisdiction and refused to take responsibility and pay for it. 

While the Committee provided an increase above the President’s 

request for public housing capital and operating funds, the amount 

for the public housing capital fund has decreased by more than 20 

percent since fiscal year 2000 and the public housing operating 

fund has increased a mere four percent in that same time period. 

The demand remains high and the need is great. Currently there 

is a backlog of around $20 billion in public housing capital funding 

needs and the operating fund needs continue to grow because of 

factors like the high costs of energy. 

Additionally, funding for the Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing—HOPE VI—has been eliminated by the 

Committee. HOPE VI transforms the nation’s worst public housing 

into mixed-income urban communities. These grants serve as the 

critical seed capital to leverage additional public and private sector 

investment in distressed neighborhoods. 

Finally, the two fair housing programs at the Department were 

cut in the President’s request and agreed to by the subcommittee— 

251 

Despite the fact that more than 3.7 million fair housing violations 

still occur annually. Incredibly, despite HUD’s advocacy and the 

fact that homeownership rates are at all-time high, the homeownership gap between white and blacks is worse now than in 

1940. 

OTHER ASPECTS OF THE BILL

Despite the Amtrak and housing problems identified above, the 

bill contains a number of items with which we strongly agree. The 

Subcommittee provided significant increases for surface transportation funding (excluding Amtrak) and aviation programs. Further 

investment in the transportation infrastructure is vital for the safety and well-being of all of our constituents. 

The Federal Courts received a significant increase over the FY05 

enacted levels. It is our hope that these funding levels can be sustained so that court personnel can remain at the current levels during fiscal year 2006. 

The Chairman included language precluding the IRS from closing Taxpayer Assistance Centers until all the Committee’s serious 

concerns about the proposal’s impact on customer service are addressed. The Administration’s plan to close 68 Taxpayer Assistance 

Centers seems to be an ill-conceived initiative driven by budget decisions rather than an exercise in good management and sound 

customer service. 

The provisions that allow the District of Columbia to administer 

locally generated funds are an important step and we applaud the 

Chairman for this effort. 

Within housing, the Chairman wisely rejected the President’s 

proposal to transfer the Community Development Block Grant program to the Department of Commerce and instead kept the program at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Unfortunately, the funding level for the CDBG formula grants is down 

by $250 million or six percent from last year’s level. 

We are also pleased that the Subcommittee chose to include direction to the Department regarding the public housing negotiated 

rule on operating subsidies. HUD proceeded in publishing a rule 

that blatantly disregarded the negotiations that occurred between 

stakeholders and HUD. The subcommittee instructed the Department to use this original negotiated rule. 

The Subcommittee also recognized that the ‘‘snapshot’’ funding 

formula used in fiscal year 2005 may have had an adverse impact 

on some agencies in the section 8 voucher program. The subcommittee is to be commended for their initial effort to correct 

some of those problems created in 2005 with a set-aside of $45 million. We look forward to working with the majority as guidelines 

for distributing fiscal year 2006 section 8 funds are drafted during 

conference. 

Among independent agencies, the National Historic Records and 

Preservation Commission grants program that is administered by 

the National Archives and Records Administration is funded at 

$7.5 million. This program that is important to historians and researchers had been zeroed out in the Bush budget. The Chairman 

also recognized the importance of the Udall Foundation by properly 

funding the environmental mediation and trust fund accounts. 

252 

CONCLUSION

It is difficult to imagine this is the budget for which the American people voted. On the whole, the Chairman did the best he 

could given the circumstances. But the circumstances were wholly 

avoidable. 

The President could have presented to the Congress a budget 

that was not riddled with gimmicks and new fees designed to hide 

the fact that his own fiscal policies are failing the nation. The Congress could have passed a sensible budget resolution that asked 

people making more than $1 million this year to do with a slightly 

smaller tax cut so we could fund important national priorities. That 

did not happen. So we are left with a bill that will shut down Amtrak, cut Community Development Block Grants, and terminate 

several effective housing programs, including HOPE VI, Youthbuild 

and Brownfields. 

We do not believe this is the budget for which the American people voted. Under the current leadership in the White House and 

the Congress, however, this is the budget the American people are 

going to get. 

DAVE OBEY. JOHN W. OLVER. 

Æ