39–006

105TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 105–61

FAA RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1997

APRIL 21, 1997.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of

the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, from the Committee on Science,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 1271]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.

1271) to authorize the Federal Aviation Administration’s research,

engineering, and development programs for Fiscal Years 1998

through 2000, and for other purposes, having considered the same,

report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that

the bill as amended do pass.

CONTENTS

Page

I. Amendment ................................................................................................. 2

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 4

III. Background and Need for Legislation ....................................................... 4

IV. Summary of Hearings ................................................................................. 5

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 6

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 6

VII. Section-By-Section Analysis and Committee Views ................................. 7

VIII. Committee Cost Estimate ........................................................................... 12

IX. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 13

X. Compliance with Public Law 104–4 .......................................................... 14

XI. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 15

XII. Oversight Findings and Recommendations by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight .............................................................. 15

XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 15

XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 15
2

XV. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 15

XVI. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 15

XVII. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 18

XVIII. Additional Views ......................................................................................... 19

I. AMENDMENT

The amendment is as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof

the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997’’.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

Section 48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (2)(J);

(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (3)(J) and inserting in lieu

thereof a semicolon; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(4) for fiscal year 1998, $217,406,000, including—

‘‘(A) $75,550,000 for system development and infrastructure projects and

activities;

‘‘(B) $19,614,000 for capacity and air traffic management technology

projects and activities;

‘‘(C) $15,132,000 for communications, navigation, and surveillance

projects and activities;

‘‘(D) $9,982,000 for weather projects and activities;

‘‘(E) $5,458,000 for airport technology projects and activities;

‘‘(F) $26,625,000 for aircraft safety technology projects and activities;

‘‘(G) $49,895,000 for system security technology projects and activities;

‘‘(H) $10,737,000 for human factors and aviation medicine projects and

activities;

‘‘(I) $3,291,000 for environment and energy projects and activities; and

‘‘(J) $1,122,000 for innovative/cooperative research projects and activities;

‘‘(5) for fiscal year 1999, $224,000,000; and

‘‘(6) for fiscal year 2000, $231,000,000.’’.

SEC. 3. BUDGET DESIGNATION FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.

Section 48102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end

the following new subsection:

‘‘(g) DESIGNATION OF ACTIVITIES.—(1) The amounts appropriated under subsection

(a) are for the support of all research and development activities carried out by the

Federal Aviation Administration that fall within the categories of basic research, applied research, and development, including the design and development of prototypes, in accordance with the classifications of the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–11 (Budget Formulation/Submission Process).

‘‘(2) The President’s annual budget request for the Federal Aviation Administration shall include all research and development activities within a single budget category. All of the activities carried out by the Administration within the categories

of basic research, applied research, and development, as classified by the Office of

Management and Budget Circular A–11, shall be placed in this single budget category.’’.

SEC. 4. NATIONAL AVIATION RESEARCH PLAN.

Section 44501(c)(2)(B) of title 49, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (iii);

(2) by striking the period at the end of clause (iv) and inserting in lieu thereof

‘‘; and’’; and

(3) by adding at the end the following new clause:

‘‘(v) highlight the research and development technology transfer activities

that promote technology sharing among government, industry, and academia

through the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980.’’.

SEC. 5. RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM INVOLVING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS.

(a) PROGRAM.—Section 48102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
3

‘‘(h) RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM INVOLVING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS.— ‘‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a program for awarding grants to researchers at primarily

undergraduate institutions who involve undergraduate students in their research on subjects of relevance to the Federal Aviation Administration. Grants

may be awarded under this subsection for—

‘‘(A) research projects to be carried out at primarily undergraduate institutions; or

‘‘(B) research projects that combine research at primarily undergraduate

institutions with other research supported by the Federal Aviation Administration.

‘‘(2) NOTICE OF CRITERIA.—Within 6 months after the date of the enactment

of the FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997,

the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish and

publish in the Federal Register criteria for the submittal of proposals for a

grant under this subsection, and for the awarding of such grants.

‘‘(3) PRINCIPAL CRITERIA.—The principal criteria for the awarding of grants

under this subsection shall be—

‘‘(A) the relevance of the proposed research to technical research needs

identified by the Federal Aviation Administration;

‘‘(B) the scientific and technical merit of the proposed research; and

‘‘(C) the potential for participation by undergraduate students in the proposed research.

‘‘(4) COMPETITIVE, MERIT-BASED EVALUATION.—Grants shall be awarded under

this subsection on the basis of evaluation of proposals through a competitive,

merit-based process.’’.

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 48102(a) of title 49, United

States Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘, of which $500,000 shall be for carrying out the grant program established under subsection (h)’’ after ‘‘projects and activities’’ in paragraph (4)(J);

(2) by inserting ‘‘, of which $500,000 shall be for carrying out the grant program established under subsection (h)’’ after ‘‘$224,000,000’’ in paragraph (5);

and

(3) by inserting ‘‘, of which $500,000 shall be for carrying out the grant program established under subsection (h)’’ after ‘‘$231,000,000’’ in paragraph (6).

SEC. 6. LIMITATIONS.

(a) PROHIBITION OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES.—None of the funds authorized by the

amendments made by this Act shall be available for any activity whose purpose is

to influence legislation pending before the Congress, except that this subsection

shall not prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its departments

or agencies from communicating to Members of Congress on the request of any

Member or to Congress, through the proper channels, requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business.

(b) LIMITATION ON APPROPRIATIONS.— No sums are authorized to be appropriated

to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration for fiscal years 1998,

1999, and 2000 for the Federal Aviation Administration Research, Engineering, and

Development account, unless such sums are specifically authorized to be appropriated by the amendments made by this Act.

(c) ELIGIBILITY FOR AWARDS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration

shall exclude from consideration for grant agreements made by that Administration after fiscal year 1997 any person who received funds, other than those

described in paragraph (2), appropriated for a fiscal year after fiscal year 1997,

under a grant agreement from any Federal funding source for a project that was

not subjected to a competitive, merit-based award process. Any exclusion from

consideration pursuant to this subsection shall be effective for a period of 5

years after the person receives such Federal funds.

(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the receipt of Federal funds

by a person due to the membership of that person in a class specified by law

for which assistance is awarded to members of the class according to a formula

provided by law.

(3) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘‘grant agreement’’

means a legal instrument whose principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value

to the recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States, and does not include the acquisition (by pur-
4

chase, lease, or barter) of property or services for the direct benefit or use of

the United States Government. Such term does not include a cooperative agreement (as such term is used in section 6305 of title 31, United States Code) or

a cooperative research and development agreement (as such term is defined in

section 12(d)(1) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15

U.S.C. 3710a(d)(1))).

SEC. 7. NOTICE.

(a) NOTICE OF REPROGRAMMING.—If any funds authorized by the amendments

made by this Act are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to be

provided to the Appropriations Committees of the House of Representatives and the

Senate, notice of such action shall concurrently be provided to the Committees on

Science and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.

(b) NOTICE OF REORGANIZATION.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall provide notice to the Committees on Science, Transportation and

Infrastructure, and Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and Appropriations of the Senate, not later than 15 days before any major reorganization of any program, project,

or activity of the Federal Aviation Administration for which funds are authorized

by this Act.

SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM.

With the year 2000 fast approaching, it is the sense of Congress that the Federal

Aviation Administration should—

(1) give high priority to correcting all 2-digit date-related problems in its computer systems to ensure that those systems continue to operate effectively in

the year 2000 and beyond;

(2) assess immediately the extent of the risk to the operations of the Federal

Aviation Administration posed by the problems referred to in paragraph (1), and

plan and budget for achieving Year 2000 compliance for all of its mission-critical systems; and

(3) develop contingency plans for those systems that the Federal Aviation Administration is unable to correct in time.

SEC. 9. BUY AMERICAN.

(a) COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.—No funds appropriated pursuant to

the amendments made by this Act may be expended by an entity unless the entity

agrees that in expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections 2

through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a–10c, popularly known as the

‘‘Buy American Act’’).

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—In the case of any equipment or products that may be

authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided under the amendments made by this Act, it is the sense of Congress that entities receiving such assistance should, in expending the assistance, purchase only American-made equipment and products.

(c) NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS OF ASSISTANCE.—In providing financial assistance

under the amendments made by this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation

Administration shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a notice describing

the statement made in subsection (a) by the Congress.

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of the bill is to authorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct research, engineering, and development activities for Fiscal Years (FY) 1998, 1999, and 2000. The activities improve the national airspace system by increasing its safety, security, capacity, and productivity to meet the expected air

traffic demands of the future.

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The FAA was created in 1958 to develop air commerce and promote safety in the air. As part of the Airport Development and Airway Trust fund established by Congress in 1982, it was decided

that a comprehensive research and development program was nec-
5

essary at FAA to maintain a safe, efficient air traffic system. In

order to fund both of these research and development programs

and improve airport and airways capital improvements, a series of

user fees and taxes were established.

The 100th Congress, seeking to strengthen the FAA research and

development programs, enacted the 1988 Aviation Safety Research

Act (P.L. 100–591). This bill created the FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Board. The terrorist bombing of Pan

Am Flight 103 demonstrated the need for new technology to detect

explosives; and Congress subsequently passed the Aviation Safety

Improvement Act of 1990 which required FAA to support activities

to accelerate the research and development of new technologies to

protect against terrorism.

The FY 1997 authorization for research, engineering, and development was enacted as part of the FAA Reauthorization Act (P.L.

104–264). Additional funding for Aviation System Security Technology was enacted through the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997 (P.L. 104–208). The current authorization for FAA

research, engineering, and development expires at the end of Fiscal

Year 1997.

IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS

On March 13, 1997, the Subcommittee on Technology held a

hearing to review the President’s FAA Research, Engineering, and

Development (RE&D) budget request for FY 1998 and beyond. The

President’s FY 1998 Budget request for FAA RE&D is $200 million,

$8.4 million less than the FY 1997 enacted level. According to the

budget request, the funding is needed to conduct research, engineering, and development programs that improve the national air

traffic control system by increasing its safety, security, capacity,

and productivity to meet the expected air traffic demands of the future. The panel consisted of two witnesses: Dr. George L. Donohue,

Associate Administrator for Research and Acquisitions, Federal

Aviation Administration and Mr. Ralph Eschenbach, Chair-FAA

RE&D Advisory Committee.

Dr. George L. Donohue testified that the FAA, as directed by the

1996 Reauthorization Act, has made sure that the RE&D Advisory

Committee is more involved in assessing FAA priorities. For FY

1999 programs, the FAA plans to increase the Advisory Committee’s role by using six standing subcommittees, and regularly

scheduled meetings of those subcommittees with FAA staff. He

stated that the new acquisition management system, which took effect April 1, 1996, provides a simplified and more flexible way to

meet the FAA’s acquisition needs. The White House Commission on

Aviation Safety and Security (also known as the Gore Commission)

recently issued its final report which included several recommendations that will involve the RE&D programs. He testified that the

FAA is now working to develop pertinent cost and resource information, as well as schedules and priorities, to determine how to

best achieve the needed results.

Mr. Ralph Eschenbach stated that the NAS modernization must

be sped up. However, with the current architectural plan and the

current level of funding it will be difficult to reach the year 2005

goal as established by the Gore Commission. He also emphasized
6

that prototypes are vital to rapid implementation. One of the critical components necessary for injecting new technology into a market is the ability to prototype and test those components. As an example, he cited the FLIGHT 2000 demonstration program in Alaska and Hawaii which affects just 1 percent of the airplanes in NAS

(National Airspace System), but provides much needed answers to

implementation and operation questions.

Chairwoman Morella raised the question of FAA’s computer and

information systems security, pointing out that the General Accounting Office had recently issued a report critical of many federal

agencies’ efforts in this area. Dr. Donohue stated that he is concerned with the current level of information security, especially as

the FAA moves from the older ‘‘closed’’ information systems to the

more modern systems that have an ‘‘open’’ architecture that are

susceptible to penetration. Mr. Eschenbach stated that he shared

Dr. Donohue’s concerns. Chairwoman Morella raised concerns over

reductions to the weather programs. Mr. Eschenbach stated that

the Advisory Committee has recommended that the FAA place a

higher priority on weather research. Dr. Donohue explained that he

was concerned about reductions to the program, but explained that

it was a time sequencing problem since some of the new technologies that have emerged in recent years are still in the acquisition and installation stage.

Mrs. Rivers expressed concern over the request in the area of the

aircraft noise reduction. Dr. Donohue acknowledged that there has

been a decrease from what was spent for noise abatement a few

years ago. He further noted that the FAA has been forced by budget constraints to rely to an unprecedented degree on cooperation

with other federal agencies to support noise abatement activities.

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

On April 16, 1997, the full committee marked up the legislation

(H.R. 1271) which was introduced by the Subcommittee Chair, Mrs.

Connie Morella. The legislation was adopted, as amended (by voice

vote) and ordered reported to the full House for consideration (by

voice vote). Amendments to the legislation were offered in the following order:

1. Manager’s En Bloc Amendment offered by Mrs. Morella and

Mr. Gordon to, among other things, strike Section 6, make certain

technical and clarifying corrections, and define that grants awarded

under the Act will be subject to merit based review (with the exception of CRADAs). The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

2. Amendment requiring the FAA to comply with the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a–10c) by purchasing only American-made

equipment and products with the funds appropriated pursuant to

this Act offered by Mr. Hastings for Mr. Traficant. The amendment

was adopted by voice vote.

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

The legislation authorizes Federal Aviation Administration Research, Engineering, and Development activities for Fiscal Years

1998, 1999, and 2000.
7

H.R. 1271 includes a provision requiring future FAA budgets to

include in a single budget category all research and development

activities that would be classified as basic research, applied research, or development under the guidelines established by OMB

Circular A–11.

H.R. 1271 includes a provision requiring the FAA to include R&D

technology transfer activities in the National Aviation Research

Plan.

H.R. 1271 includes a provision establishing a new research grant

program to support research at primarily undergraduate institutions.

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS (BY TITLE AND SECTION) AND

COMMITTEE VIEWS

Section 1. Short Title

Cites this title as the ‘‘FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997.’’

Section 2. Authorization of Appropriations

Authorizes appropriations for FY 1998 of $217,406,000 for Federal Aviation Administration RE&D activities as follows:

(A) Authorizes $75,550,000 for system development and

infrastructure projects and activities;

(B) Authorizes $19,614,000 for capacity and air traffic

management technology projects and activities;

(C) Authorizes $15,132,000 for communications, navigation, and surveillance projects and activities;

(D) Authorizes $9,982,000 for weather projects and activities;

(E) Authorizes $5,458,000 for airport technology projects

and activities;

(F) Authorizes $26,625,000 for aircraft safety technology

projects and activities;

(G) Authorizes $49,895,000 for system security technology projects and activities;

(H) Authorizes $10,737,000 for human factors and aviation medicine projects and activities;

(I) Authorizes $3,291,000 for environment and energy

projects and activities;

(J) Authorizes $1,122,000 for innovative/cooperative research projects and activities.

Authorizes lump-sum totals of $224,000,000 for FY 1999 and

$231,000,000 for FY 2000 to carry out RE&D projects and activities.

Committee View

The Committee suggests the following authorization level for FY

1998:
8

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT (RE&D)

[In millions of dollars]

FY 1997

enacted

FY 1998

request

FY 1998

authorization

Sys Dev/Infrastructure ..................................................................... 72.831– 75.550– 75.550

Capacity/ATM Technology– .............................................................. 19.614– 9.108– 19.614 –

Comm/Nav/Surveillance ................................................................... 10.770 15.132 15.132

Weather ............................................................................................ 10.927 3.982 9.982

Airport Technology ........................................................................... 2.804 5.458 5.458–

Air Safety Technology ...................................................................... 24.130 26.625 26.625

System Security – ............................................................................ 50.905 49.895 49.895

Human Factors/Aviation Medicine ................................................... 12.573 10.737 10.737

Environment/Energy ......................................................................... 3.600 2.891 3.291

Innovative/Cooperative Research ..................................................... .258 .622 1.122

Total FAA RE&D .................................................................. 208.412 200.000 217.406

Committee View

The legislation fully authorizes the Administration’s FY 1998

budget request and includes an increase of $17,406,000 over the FY

97 enacted level for the FAA RE&D program. Increases are targeted specifically to four of the ten RE&D accounts as follows:

1. Capacity and Air Traffic Management (an increase of

$10,506,000 over the request)—The increase is to enhance computer and information system security. With $11 billion targeted to

be spent by the FAA between FY 1998 and FY 2003 on air traffic

control system modernization, the Committee believes it is critical

that the FAA research information security risks and develop solutions to safeguard sensitive data from unauthorized disclosure.

2. Weather (an increase of $6,000,000 over the request)—Weather is the single largest contributor to delays and a major factor in

aircraft accidents and incidents. The increase reflects recommendations by the FAA RE&D Advisory Committee and the National

Academy of Sciences that the FAA consider weather research

projects and activities a higher priority. The increase represents

Committee concerns that despite the recommendations from ‘‘outside’’ experts, the FAA budget request for weather research represents a reduction of 64% from the FY1997 enacted level.

3. Environment and Energy (an increase of $400,000 over the request)—The Committee shares the goal the FAA has established of

reducing the impact of aircraft noise 80% by the year 2000. However, the Committee is concerned that the budget request includes

a reduction of almost 20% for environment and energy projects and

activities. The Committee supports using the increase for aircraft

noise reduction and control.

4. Innovative/Cooperative Research (an increase of $500,000 over

the request)—The Committee is concerned that current FAA university research agreements under-utilize the research capabilities

available at primarily undergraduate institutions. The increase is

for the FAA to establish a program for awarding grants to support

research projects to be carried out at primarily undergraduate institutions on subjects of relevance to the FAA.

The Committee recognizes the critical role the RE&D program

plays in researching and developing the new technologies necessary
9

for the FAA to perform its mission and authorizes a 3% increase

for FY 1999 and an additional 3.1% increase for FY 2000.

Section 3. Budget Designation for Research and Development Activities

Requires that future FAA budgets include in a single budget category all research and development activities that would be classified as basic research, applied research, or developmental under

the guidelines established by the Office of Management and Budget

Circular A–11.

Committee View

FAA’s R&D activities are funded from two major budget categories: the Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D) account; and ‘‘Engineering, Development, Test, and Evaluation’’ of

the Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account. Projects funded under

‘‘Engineering, Development, Test & Evaluation’’ of the F&E account can be classified as research and development as defined by

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB Circular A–11,

Budget Formation/Submission Processes, which provides guidelines

to the federal agencies used in reporting data on R&D budgets,

specifies that R&D budgets should be divided into the categories of

basic research, applied research, and development, where development is defined as ‘‘systematic use of the knowledge gained from

research for the production of useful materials, devices, systems, or

methods, including the design and development of prototypes and

processes.’’

The Committee believes that maintaining separate R&D accounts makes it considerably more difficult for Congress to track

overall FAA R&D investment and to assess the priorities among

areas of R&D. The current arrangement is confusing and lacks consistency, particularly since FAA does not include R&D activities

supported in Activity 1 of the F&E Account in the National Aviation Research Plan. The Committee expects future budget submissions from the FAA to include in a single account, which may include whatever internal subdivisions the agency determines to be

appropriate, all activities that would be classified as R&D under

the guidelines of OMB Circular A–11.

Section 4. National Aviation Research Plan

Revises the requirements for the National Aviation Research

Plan by requiring the plan to document the FAA’s research and development technology transfer activities.

Committee View

The Committee has a strong history of support for technology

transfer activities that improve United States competitiveness by

speeding commercialization of inventions developed through collaborative agreements between the government and industry. Pursuant to the Committee’s interest in this area, the legislation requires the FAA to include in the National Aviation Research Plan

a more detailed accounting of the agency’s R&D technology transfer

activities.
10

Section 5. Undergraduate Research Grants Program

Establishes a program for awarding grants to support research

at primarily undergraduate institutions through a competitive,

merit-based process.

Committee View

The Committee intends that the research grants program support research projects relevant to FAA’s technology needs and assist in developing the human resource base needed by the FAA to

carry out its mission. Each grant must be awarded on the basis of

the scientific and technical merit of the proposal made to the program, the potential of the project to involve undergraduate students, and the research credentials of the principal investigator of

the project. The process for selecting awards must be competitive

in the sense that proposals to the program are broadly solicited

and, based on the funding available in a given year, proposals

judged to have a relatively higher merit are funded in preference

to proposals of lower merit. The term ‘‘competitive’’ does not refer

to the rule of competition applicable to the federal contract awards

process.

Section 6. Limitations

(a) Prohibition of Lobbying Activities

Prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act for any activity

whose purpose is to influence legislation pending before the Congress. This section does not prevent employees of the departments

and agencies from communicating with Members of Congress to

conduct public business.

Committee View

The Committee is committed to ensuring that awards for research and education are used solely for those purposes. Funds

should not be used for any purpose, other than that specified in the

award. The Committee, however, does not exclude appropriate communications between the Executive Branch and the Congress.

Limitation on Appropriations

Disallows authorization of funds which are not specifically authorized to be appropriated by this Act for FY 1998, or by an Act

of Congress in succeeding fiscal years.

Committee View

This section emphasizes the Committee’s position that the only

funds authorized to be appropriated for the Federal Aviation Administration’s research, engineering, and development programs

are made available through this Act. It is the Committee’s position

that authorizations designating specific sums are required for appropriations of such sums to be authorized.

(c) Eligibility for Awards

Requires the head of each federal agency for which funds are authorized under this Act to exclude, for a period of 5 years, any person who received funds for a project not subject to competitive,
11

merit-based review process after FY 1997. This section is not applicable to the long-standing Cooperative Research and Development

Agreement program nor awards to persons who are members of a

class specified by law for which assistance is awarded according to

formula provided by law.

Committee View

The Committee has a long-standing position that awards should

be based on a competitive merit-based process. Merit review allows

taxpayers’ dollars to be spent in the most cost-effective manner.

Section 7. Notice

If any funds of this Act, or amendments made by this Act, are

subject to reprogramming which requires notice to be given to the

Appropriations Committees of the House of Representatives and

the Senate, notice of such action shall be concurrently provided to

the Committees on Science and Transportation and Infrastructure

of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation of the Senate.

If any program, project, or activity of the Federal Aviation Administration is preparing to undergo any major reorganization, the

Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall notify

the Committees on Science, Transportation and Infrastructure, and

Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the Committees on Appropriations and Commerce, Science, and Transportation

of the Senate of such preparation.

Committee View

The Committee believes that such notice must be given if it is

to carry out its oversight responsibilities under the Rules of the

House.

Section 8. Sense of the Congress on the Year 2000 Problem

It is the sense of Congress that the Federal Aviation Administration should give high priority to correcting the year 2000 problem

in all of its computer systems to ensure effective operation in the

year 2000 and beyond. The Federal Aviation Administration needs

to assess immediately the risk of the problem upon their systems

and develop a plan and a budget to correct the problem for its mission-critical programs. The Federal Aviation Administration also

needs to begin consideration of contingency plans, in the event that

certain systems are unable to be corrected in time.

Committee View

Despite knowing of the problem for years, the Federal Government has yet to adequately create strategies to address the year

2000 problem. The Committee believes Congress should continue to

take a leadership role in raising awareness about the issue with

both government and the private sector.

The potential impact on federal programs if the year 2000 problem is not corrected in an effective and timely manner is substantial and potentially serious. If federal computers are not prepared

to handle the change of date on January 1, 2000, there is a risk

to all government systems and the programs they support. It is im-
12

perative that such corrective action be taken to avert disruption to

critical Federal Government programs.

VIII. COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report accompanying each bill or

joint resolution of a public character to contain: (1) an estimate,

made by such Committee, of the costs which would be incurred in

carrying out such bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year in which

it is reported, and in each of the 5 fiscal years following such fiscal

year (or for the authorized duration of any program authorized by

such bill or joint resolution, if less than 5 years); (2) a comparison

of the estimate of costs described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph made by such Committee with an estimate of such costs

made by any government agency and submitted to such Committee;

and (3) when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the relevant program (or programs) with the appropriate levels under current law. However, clause 7(d) of that rule

provides that this requirement does not apply when a cost estimate

and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional

Budget Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act

of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the report

and included in the report pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI.

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the

Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the Congressional

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing

of this report and included in Section IX of this report pursuant to

clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI.

Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report that accompanies a

measure providing new budget authority (other than continuing appropriations), new spending authority, or new credit authority, or

changes in revenues or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate,

as required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of

1974 and, when practicable with respect to estimates of new budget

authority, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the

relevant program (or programs) to the appropriate levels under current law. H.R. 1271 does not contain any new budget authority,

credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated,

H.R. 1271 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which

is contained in Section IX of this report.
13

IX. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

U.S. CONGRESS,

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,

Washington, DC, April 18, 1997.

Hon. F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,

Chairman, Committee on Science,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1271, the FAA Research,

Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Clare Doherty (for federal costs) and Karen McVey (for the state and local impact).

Sincerely,

JUNE E. O’NEILL, Director.

Enclosure.

H.R. 1271—FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997

SUMMARY

H.R. 1271 would authorize appropriations for the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) research, engineering, and development program for fiscal years 1998 through 2000. The bill would

authorize appropriations of $217.4 million in 1998, $224.0 million

in 1999, and $231.0 million in 2000. In addition, the bill would revise the research, engineering, and development program to include a research grants program for researchers and students at

undergraduate institutions.

Enacting H.R. 1271 would not affect direct spending or receipts.

Therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply to the bill.

H.R. 1271 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(UMRA); it includes an authorization of grant funding for colleges

and universities, some of which are public entities.

ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, enacting

H.R. 1271 would result in new discretionary spending totaling $672

million over the 1998-2002 period. The estimated budgetary impact

is shown in the table on the following page. For purposes of this

estimate, CBO assumes that appropriations will be provided by the

start of each fiscal year and that outlays will occur at historical

spending rates for this FAA program.

In addition to reauthorizing the research, engineering, and development program, H.R. 1271 would establish research grants program for researchers and students at undergraduate institutions.

This bill would authorize $500,000 each year for the grant

program from the amounts made available to the research, engineering, and development program.
14

[In millions of dollars]

Fiscal year—

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending for FAA research, engineering, and development under current law:

Budget authority 1 ............................................................................. 187 0 0 0 0 0

Estimated outlays ............................................................................. 230 111 47 13 0 0

Proposed changes:

Authorization level ............................................................................ 0 217 224 231 0 0

Estimated outlays ............................................................................. 0 130 200 227 92 23

Spending for FAA research, engineering, and development under H.R.

1271:

Authorization level 1 .......................................................................... 187 217 224 231 0 0

Estimated outlays ............................................................................. 230 241 247 240 92 23

1 The 1997 level is the amount appropriated for that year.

The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 400

(transportation).

Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.

ESTIMATED IMPACT ON STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS

H.R. 1271 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in

UMRA and would not impose any costs on state, local, or tribal

governments. A portion of the funds authorized in the bill would

be available as research grants to colleges and universities, some

of which are public institutions. In 1996, FAA granted $30 million,

or approximately 15 percent of the program’s $185 million budget,

to colleges and universities. The bill would also set aside an additional $500,000 per year for a new aviation research grant program

targeting primarily undergraduate institutions.

Two provisions in the bill would affect eligibility for FAA research, engineering, and development grants. The first would require compliance with the ‘‘Buy American Act.’’ The second would

exclude grantees from consideration for awards if they had received

funds under any other federal grant program that was not subject

to a competitive, merit-based award process. The latter provision

could change the allocation of funds among grant recipients, including public colleges and universities. However, CBO cannot predict how the share of funding awarded to public colleges and universities would change because of this provision.

ESTIMATED IMPACT ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR

This bill would impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Clare Doherty; Impact on

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Karen McVey.

Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

X. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

H.R. 1271 contains no unfunded mandates.
15

XI. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report to include oversight

findings and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1)

of rule X. The Committee has no oversight findings.

XII. OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

Clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report to contain a summary

of the oversight findings and recommendations made by the House

Government Reform and Oversight Committee pursuant to clause

4(c)(2) of rule X, whenever such findings and recommendations

have been submitted to the Committee in a timely fashion. The

Committee on Science has received no such findings or recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and

Oversight.

XIII. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each report of a Committee on a bill or joint resolution of a public character to 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. Article I, section 8 of

the Constitution of the United States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1271.

XIV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 1271 does not establish or authorize the establishment of a

new advisory committee.

XV. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 1271 does not relate to the terms

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1).

XVI. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House

of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted

is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE

* * * * * * *
16

SUBTITLE VII—AVIATION PROGRAMS

PART A—AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY

* * * * * * *

SUBPART III—SAFETY

* * * * * * *

CHAPTER 445—FACILITIES, PERSONNEL, AND

RESEARCH

* * * * * * *

§ 44501. Plans and policy

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(c) NATIONAL AVIATION RESEARCH PLAN.—(1)***

(2)(A)***

(B) The plan shall—

(i) * * *

* * * * * * *

(iii) identify the allocation of resources among long-term research, near-term research, and development activities; øand¿

(iv) highlight the research and development activities that

address specific recommendations of the research advisory

committee established under section 44508 of this title, and

document the recommendations of the committee that are not

accepted, specifying the reasons for nonacceptanceø.¿; and

(v) highlight the research and development technology transfer activities that promote technology sharing among government, industry, and academia through the Stevenson-Wydler

Technology Innovation Act of 1980.

* * * * * * *

PART C—FINANCING

CHAPTER 481—AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND

AUTHORIZATIONS

* * * * * * *

§ 48102. Research and development

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Not more than the following amounts may be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation out of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund established under

section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9502)

to carry out sections 44504, 44505, 44507, 44509, and 44511–44513

of this title:

(1) * * *

(2) for fiscal year 1996—
17

(A) $8,056,000 for management and analysis projects

and activities;

* * * * * * *

(J) $5,459,000 for innovative/cooperative research

projects and activities; øand¿

(3) for fiscal year 1997—

(A) $13,660,000 for system development and infrastructure projects and activities;

* * * * * * *

(J) $2,000,000 for innovative/cooperative research

projects and activitiesø.¿;

(4) for fiscal year 1998, $217,406,000, including— (A) $75,550,000 for system development and infrastructure projects and activities; (B) $19,614,000 for capacity and air traffic management

technology projects and activities; (C) $15,132,000 for communications, navigation, and

surveillance projects and activities; (D) $9,982,000 for weather projects and activities;

(E) $5,458,000 for airport technology projects and activities;

(F) $26,625,000 for aircraft safety technology projects and

activities;

(G) $49,895,000 for system security technology projects

and activities;

(H) $10,737,000 for human factors and aviation medicine

projects and activities; (I) $3,291,000 for environment and energy projects and

activities; and

(J) $1,122,000 for innovative/cooperative research projects and activities, of which $500,000 shall be for carrying out the grant program established under subsection (h);

(5) for fiscal year 1999, $224,000,000, of which $500,000

shall be for carrying out the grant program established under

subsection (h); and

(6) for fiscal year 2000, $231,000,000, of which $500,000

shall be for carrying out the grant program established under

subsection (h).

* * * * * * *

(g) DESIGNATION OF ACTIVITIES.—(1) The amounts appropriated

under subsection (a) are for the support of all research and development activities carried out by the Federal Aviation Administration

that fall within the categories of basic research, applied research,

and development, including the design and development of prototypes, in accordance with the classifications of the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–11 (Budget Formulation/Submission

Process).

(2) The President’s annual budget request for the Federal Aviation

Administration shall include all research and development activities within a single budget category. All of the activities carried out

by the Administration within the categories of basic research, applied research, and development, as classified by the Office of Man-
18

agement and Budget Circular A–11, shall be placed in this single

budget category.

(h) RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM INVOLVING UNDERGRADUATE

STUDENTS.— (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a program for awarding

grants to researchers at primarily undergraduate institutions

who involve undergraduate students in their research on subjects of relevance to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Grants may be awarded under this subsection for—

(A) research projects to be carried out at primarily undergraduate institutions; or

(B) research projects that combine research at primarily

undergraduate institutions with other research supported

by the Federal Aviation Administration.

(2) NOTICE OF CRITERIA.—Within 6 months after the date of

the enactment of the FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish and publish in the

Federal Register criteria for the submittal of proposals for a

grant under this subsection, and for the awarding of such

grants.

(3) PRINCIPAL CRITERIA.—The principal criteria for the

awarding of grants under this subsection shall be—

(A) the relevance of the proposed research to technical research needs identified by the Federal Aviation Administration;

(B) the scientific and technical merit of the proposed research; and

(C) the potential for participation by undergraduate students in the proposed research.

(4) COMPETITIVE, MERIT-BASED EVALUATION.—Grants shall be

awarded under this subsection on the basis of evaluation of proposals through a competitive, merit-based process.

XVII. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On April 16, 1997, a quorum being present, the Committee favorably reported the FAA Research, Engineering, and Development

Authorization Act of 1997, by a voice vote, and recommends its enactment.
(19)

XVIII. ADDITIONAL VIEWS

While I support the merits and intent of H.R. 1271, the Federal

Aviation Administration Research, Engineering, and Development

Act, I cannot support the funding levels requested by this bill.

Air safety is crucial. With millions of air passengers traveling

during any given day, the FAA and all facets of air travel must

have access to the most advanced technology in order to ensure

safety in the skies.

However, during this time of financial uncertainty, I cannot support the proposed budgetary increase, regardless of how insignificant it might seem. Research and development thrives in the private sector, where competition fuels ingenuity, drives technology,

improves efficiency, and stimulates the economy. Acknowledging

this, I do not believe the FAA’s research and development truly

needs an 8% increase over the next two years. Instead, the FAA

should continue to support research and development endeavors

with the more than $208 million appropriated for FY 97, which is

$8 million more than the President requested.

TOM A. COBURN.

Æ