87–987 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 113–464 

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2015 

MAY 27, 2014.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. LATHAM, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY AND ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 4745] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

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

2015. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

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

Title II—Department of Housing and Urban Development ................... 70 67 

Title III—Related Agencies ....................................................................... 139 99 

Title IV—General Provisions .................................................................... 147 105 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2015, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget 

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

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

mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions providing continuing apVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

propriations) and accompanying reports of the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

This definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 

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

grants and discretionary grant allocations made through either bill 

or report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made 

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

in the budget justifications submitted to the House and Senate 

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

The Committee expects that the operating plans will speak to 

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

programs at levels contrary to the levels recommended and directed 

in these reports would not be advised. 

OPERATING PLANS AND REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

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

authority by which funding available to the agencies funded by this 

act may be reprogrammed for other purposes. The provision specifically requires the advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: 

—creates a new program; 

—eliminates a program, project, or activity (PPA); 

—increases funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds have 

been denied or restricted by the Congress; 

—redirects funds that were directed in such reports for a specific 

activity to a different purpose; —augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; —reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or 

—creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different from the 

congressional budget justifications or the table at the end of 

the Committee report, whichever is more detailed. 

The Committee retains the requirement that each agency submit 

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

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

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

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

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

submit a revised operating plan for approval or may direct changes 

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

The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a thorVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

ough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a detailed 

justification of increases and reductions and the specific impact of 

proposed changes on the budget request for the following fiscal 

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

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

previous appropriations Acts that are available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2015, and non-appropriated resources such 

as fee collections that are used to meet program requirements in 

fiscal year 2015. 

The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs and 

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

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

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

than June 28, 2015. Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency submits a reprogramming or transfer request 

to the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive identical 

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

Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before 

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

The Committee would also like to clarify that this section applies 

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

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

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

the amounts appropriated by this Act. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS 

Budget justifications are the primary tool used by the House and 

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

that the format and presentation of budget materials is largely left 

to the agency within presentation objectives set forth by the Office 

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

part 1 specifically instructs agencies to consult with your congressional committees beforehand. The Committee expects that all 

agencies funded under this Act will heed this directive. 

The Committee expects all of the budget justifications to provide 

the data needed to make appropriate and meaningful funding decisions.The Committee has made some specific suggestions for the 

2016 submission, and while the layout has improved, it seems the 

content has shrunk, especially in many salaries and expenses accounts. Every dollar, full-time equivalent/full-time position, and activity should be represented and accounted for. Grant and technical 

assistance accounts need more detail on how the funds were spent, 

and are proposed to be spent. 

The Committee continues the direction that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2016 budget request by agencies funded 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

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

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

discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the 

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

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

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

activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2016 to the fiscal year 

2015 enacted levels. 

The Committee is aware that the analytical materials required 

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

Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency will coordinate 

with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

SURFACE AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION 

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

Committee directs the Department of Transportation to report to 

the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 

and the Senate within 45 days of enactment of any surface extension or reauthorization on how the Department will enact the provisions of such extension or reauthorization, the allocations by 

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

The Committee notes that the Department of Transportation failed 

to provide this report following enactment of MAP–21 and expects 

better follow through on the next surface bill. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(5) 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $107,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 109,916,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥4,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥6,916,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill provides $103,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of 

the offices comprising the Office of the Secretary of Transportation 

(OST). The Committee’s recommendation is $4,000,000 below the 

2014 enacted level and $6,916,000 below the request. The Committee’s recommendation includes individual funding for each of these 

offices as has been done in prior years. The following table (dollars 

in thousands) compares the fiscal year 2014 enacted level to the fiscal year 2015 budget request and the Committee’s recommendation 

by office. The Committee assumes no increases in the number of 

full-time equivalents (FTE) in fiscal year 2015 and strongly urges 

the Department to manage hiring and attrition in 2014 to meet 

these levels for 2015. Reductions are also encouraged in the areas 

of travel and contracts. 

Fiscal year— 

2014 enacted 2015 request 2015 

recommendation 

Office of the Secretary .......................................................................... $2,652 $2,696 $2,600 

Deputy Secretary ................................................................................... 1,000 1,011 980 

Executive Secretariat ............................................................................ 1,714 1,746 1,700 

Policy ..................................................................................................... 10,271 10,417 9,500 

Small Business ..................................................................................... 1,386 1,414 1,400 

Intelligence and Security ...................................................................... 10,778 11,055 10,600 

Chief Information Officer ...................................................................... 15,695 16,106 15,500 

General Counsel .................................................................................... 19,900 20,312 19,000 

Government Affairs ............................................................................... 2,530 2,567 2,500 

Budget ................................................................................................... 12,676 13,111 12,500 

Administration ....................................................................................... 26,378 27,420 24,720 

Public Affairs ........................................................................................ 2,020 2,061 2,000 

Total Salaries and Expenses ................................................... 107,000 109,916 103,000 

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

Secretary has primary responsibility to provide overall planning, 

direction, and control of departmental affairs. 

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

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

The Deputy Secretary serves as the chief operating officer of the 

Department of Transportation. 

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

by controlling and coordinating internal and external documents. 

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

Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy serves as 

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

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

execution of the Essential Air Service program. 

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.—The 

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization is responsible for promoting small and disadvantaged business participation 

in the Department’s procurement and grants programs. 

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

Information Officer serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary 

on information resources and information systems management. 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs.—The 

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

and consumer activities of the Department. 

In addition, the bill continues a provision (Sec. 185) that requires 

the Department to notify the Committees on Appropriations no 

fewer than three business days before any discretionary grant 

award, letter of intent, loan, loan guarantee, line of credit commitment or full funding grant agreement is announced by the Department or its modal administrations from: (1) the Federal Highway 

Administration; (2) the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation Administration; (3) the Federal Railroad Administration; (4) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other 

than the formula grants; (5) the Maritime Administration; and (6) 

any grant funded with the National Infrastructure Investments account. Such notification shall include the date on which the official 

announcement of the grant is to be made and no such announcement shall involve funds that are not available for obligation. 

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

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

operating administrations. 

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

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

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

Management and Budget. 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.—The Office 

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

matters and the responsibilities include leadership in acquisition 

reform and human capital. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

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

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

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

Congressional budget justifications.—The Department is directed 

to include in the budget justification funding levels for the prior 

year, current year, and budget year for all programs, activities, initiatives, and program elements. Each budget submitted by the Department must also include a detailed justification for the incremental funding increases and additional FTEs being requested 

above the enacted level, by program, activity, or program element. 

OST must include a discussion in its justification of changes from 

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

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

each adjustment is identified, the Committee directs OST in future 

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

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

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

Operating plan.—The Committee directs the Department to submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2015 signed by the Secretary 

for review by the Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of 

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

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

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

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

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

Finally, the Department shall submit with the operating plan a 

summary of the DOT reporting requirements contained in the Act, 

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

The Committee requests a number of reports to gather information 

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

General provisions.—The Committee continues to direct DOT to 

justify each general provision proposed either in its relevant modal 

congressional justification or in the OST congressional justification. 

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

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

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

salaries and expenses. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $14,765,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 14,625,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 12,625,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,140,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥2,000,000 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary or Research and Technology 

coordinates, facilitates, and reviews the Department’s research and 

development programs and activities; coordinating and developing 

positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) technology; maintaining 

PNT policy, coordination and spectrum management; managing the 

Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System; and overseeing 

and providing direction to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 

the Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, the 

University Transportation Centers program, the Volpe National 

Transportation Systems Center and the Transportation Safety Institute. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $12,625,000 for research and technology activities, $2,000,000 below the budget request and $2,140,000 below fiscal year 2014. The recommendation 

does not include new bill language providing the Office of Research 

and Technology with the authority to receive funding from modal 

administrations to support Global Positioning System activities as 

requested in the budget proposal. The budget documents did not include a sufficient justification for the new authority. 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $600,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,250,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥500,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,150,000,000 

The National Infrastructure Investment program was created in 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to provide 

grants to state and local governments to improve the Nation’s 

transportation infrastructure. The infrastructure investment program awards funds on a competitive basis to grantees selected because of the significant impact they will have on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or region. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for National Infrastructure Investment grants, $500,000,000 below the 2014 level 

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

from the General Fund of the Treasury and available until September 30, 2017. 

The Committee provides funds specifically for highway and 

bridge projects, freight rail projects and port infrastructure investments—the most critical areas to preserving, expanding, and improving our Nation’s transportation infrastructure. The bill retains 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

language directing an equitable distribution of funds and stipulates 

that not less than 20 percent of the funds shall be for projects in 

rural areas. Further, not more than 20 percent of the funds may 

be awarded to projects in a single state. Up to 10 percent of the 

funds may be used for the subsidy and administrative costs of 

projects eligible for Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act assistance. Bill language is included to limit grants to 

a minimum of $2,000,000 and a maximum of $15,000,000 in urban 

areas, and a minimum of $1,000,000 in rural areas. The Federal 

share for projects funded under this header is limited to 50 percent 

of the project cost in urban areas, and 80 percent in rural areas. 

The Secretary is directed to give priority to projects that require a 

Federal contribution to complete overall financing. All projects 

must comply with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United 

States Code. 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CAPITAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Financial Management Capital program continues funding 

for a multi-year project to upgrade DOT’s financial systems and 

processes. The project will implement Treasury Department and 

Office of Management and Budget requirements. Deployment of the 

new system is anticipated in 2015. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $5,000,000, a 

reduction of $2,000,000 from the prior year for the financial management capital program. 

CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $4,455,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +545,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Cyber Security Initiative is a new effort to close performance 

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

breaches. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes the budget request of 

$5,000,000 to support the Secretary’s cyber security initiative, 

which is $545,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $9,551,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 9,600,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +49,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

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

the full implementation of the civil rights laws and departmental 

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

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $9,600,000 for the Office of Civil Rights, an increase of $49,000 over the prior 

year. 

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥2,000,000 

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

in the formulation of national transportation policies and plans. It 

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,000,000 for 

transportation planning, research, and development, which is 

$1,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $2,000,000 

below the level proposed in the fiscal year 2015 budget. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $178,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +181,000,000 

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

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

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

Working Capital Fund (WCF), a $3,000,000 increase over 2014. 

The Administration did not propose a WCF legislative limitation, 

however, if all of the WCF expenditures proposed in the budget are 

added up, WCF costs are anticipated to increase $9,000,000 over 

fiscal year 2014. The Committee continues to stipulate that the 

limitation is only for services provided to the Department of Transportation, not other entities. Further, the Committee directs that, 

as much as possible, services shall be provided on a competitive 

basis. 

The Committee continues the direction to update the WCF 

‘‘transparency paper’’ in the fiscal year 2016 budget justification. 

The Committee directs the Department to include in the budget 

justification an additional table detailing how much each mode is 

proposed to use through the WCF. 

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

Appropriation Limitation on 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ........................................................................................... $925,000 ($18,367,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................................................... 1,013,000 (18,367,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... 1,013,000 (18,367,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................. 88,000 – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .............................................................................. – – – – – – 

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

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

to 75 percent of the loan. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $1,013,000 for the resource center, the same as the budget request and $88,000 more 

than the 2014 amounts. Of the funds provided, $417,000 is to cover 

the subsidy costs of guaranteed loans and $596,000 is for administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan program. The 

Committee recommends a limitation on guaranteed loans of 

$18,367,000, the same as the budget request and the limitation in 

fiscal year 2014. 

MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $3,088,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 3,099,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,099,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +11,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The minority business outreach program provides contractual 

support to small and disadvantaged businesses by providing information dissemination and technical and financial assistance to emVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

power those businesses to compete for contracting opportunities 

with DOT and DOT-funded contracts or grants for transportationrelated projects. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $3,099,000 for 

the minority business outreach program, which is $11,000 more 

than the 2014 level. 

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $149,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 155,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 149,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥6,000,000 

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

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

serving small communities that meet certain criteria. 

The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 1996 

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

type of user fee collected by the Federal Aviation Administration 

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

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

$100,000,000 for the EAS program in fiscal year 2015. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

For fiscal year 2015, the Committee includes $149,000,000 in discretionary funding for the EAS program, which is equal to the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $6,000,000 below the budget request. 

The following table shows the discretionary, mandatory, and 

total program levels for the EAS program: 

Appropriation Mandatory Total Program 

FY 2014 Appropriation ................................................................................ $149,000,000 $100,000,000 $249,000,000 

FY 2015 Request ........................................................................................ 155,000,000 100,000,000 255,000,000 

Committee Recommendation ...................................................................... 149,000,000 100,000,000 249,000,000 

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

funding requirement for the program. 

The Committee includes bill language which prohibits a new contract with a community located less than 40 miles from a small 

hub airport before the community has negotiated a cost-share. 

The Committee also includes bill language which prohibits funds 

for communities with a per passenger subsidy which exceeds $500 

per passenger, unless the community negotiates a cost share. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF

TRANSPORTATION

Section 101. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

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

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

Section 102. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Secretary or his designee to work with States and State legislators 

to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. 

Section 103. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department to use the Working Capital Fund to provide transit 

benefits to Federal employees. 

Section 104. The Committee continues the provision regarding 

administrative requirements of DOT’s Credit Council. 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for the 

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

national system of airports. The Federal Government’s regulatory 

role in civil aviation began with the creation of an Aeronautics 

Branch within the Department of Commerce pursuant to the Air 

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

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

these activities were subsumed into a new, independent agency 

named the Civil Aeronautics Authority. 

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

agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency and the Civil Aeronautics 

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

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

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

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

Commercial Space Transportation from the Office of the Secretary 

and contracted in December 2001 with the transfer of civil aviation 

security activities to the new Transportation Security Administration. 

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorized FAA 

programs through 2015 with several new mandates to improve the 

National Airspace System (NAS), including provisions regarding 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

OPERATIONS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $9,651,422,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 9,750,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,750,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +98,578,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

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

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

engineering and development programs as well as policy oversight 

and overall management functions. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $9,750,000,000 for FAA operations, 

which is $98,578,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and 

the same as the budget request. 

The following table shows a comparison of the fiscal year 2014 

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

FY 2014 enacted FY 2015 request Committee recommendation 

Air Traffic Organization ............................................................ $7,311,790,000 $7,396,654,000 $7,396,654,000 

Aviation Safety .......................................................................... 1,204,777,000 1,215,458,000 1,218,458,000 

Commercial Space Transportation ............................................ 16,011,000 16,605,000 16,000,000 

Finance and Management ........................................................ 762,462,000 765,047,000 762,652,000 

NextGen and Operations Planning ............................................ 59,782,000 60,089,000 60,089,000 

Staff Offices .............................................................................. 296,600,000 296,147,000 296,147,000 

Total ................................................................................. 9,651,422,000 9,750,000,000 9,750,000,000

Justification of general provisions.—The Committee continues its 

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

budget to include adequate information on each proposed general 

provision. 

TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET

The bill derives $8,595,000,000 of the total operations appropriation from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The balance of the 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

appropriation, $1,155,000,000, will be drawn from the General 

Fund of the Treasury. 

AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

The bill provides $7,396,654,000 for the air traffic organization, which is $84,864,000 above the 2014 enacted level and the same as 

the budget request. 

Air traffic controller staffing.—The Federal Aviation Administration is planning to hire more than 1,700 new controllers in fiscal 

year 2015 to offset controller attrition and future retirements. This 

level of hiring is greater than any year since fiscal year 2009. The 

Committee has provided the full budget request for the Air Traffic 

Organization to support the hiring and training of these new controllers. The FAA received an overwhelming response to its most 

recent job announcement for new controllers. However, the Committee is concerned that the initial screening of those applications 

yielded a much smaller pool of candidates than is normally expected. The Committee understands FAA intends to solicit additional applications before the end of fiscal year 2014 if the agency 

determines it will not meet its stated hiring goals. The Committee 

directs the FAA to provide an update on its fiscal year 2014 controller hiring progress to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by November 5, 2014. This update should include hiring totals, academy completion totals, and an analysis of hiring and 

screening procedures. 

Last year, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) reported that the 

FAA has not been able to achieve many of its training goals under 

the current Air Traffic Control Optimum Training Solution 

(ATCOTS) Program, its contract for controller training. Specifically, 

the FAA has not met its goals to reduce controller training times, 

and the program has not been able to produce needed training innovations. The Committee directs the FAA to provide a training 

plan by March 31, 2015 for meeting its hiring goals in fiscal year 

2015 hires and, where appropriate, adjusting the ATCOTS contract 

to reduce training times and control costs. 

In 2010, the OIG reviewed FAA’s process for screening and assigning new controllers and found that it did not sufficiently evaluate the candidates’ aptitudes before placing them at air traffic control facilities. The Committee directs that the OIG conduct a followup review of its 2010 study of screening, placing, and training 

newly hired air traffic controllers. 

Contract tower program.—The Committee recommendation includes $140,000,000 for the contract tower program, including 

$9,500,000 to continue the contract tower cost-sharing program. 

The Committee continues to support the program as a safe, costefficient mechanism for providing air traffic services to pilots and 

local communities. 

AVIATION SAFETY

The Committee provides $1,218,458,000 for aviation safety, 

which is $13,681,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and 

$3,000,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee continues its direction requiring the Secretary to 

provide annual reports regarding the use of the funds provided, inVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

cluding, but not limited to, the total full-time equivalent staff years 

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

Inspector staffing.—The FAA has committed to developing and 

implementing a new approach to safety that prioritizes oversight 

based on risk, and seeking to identify emerging trends and hazards 

before they result in accidents. The Committee believes this is an 

important effort to improve on the Nation’s aviation safety record. 

However, the Committee is concerned that the FAA does not have 

reliable information on how many inspectors it needs or where they 

are needed most. A June 2013 report by the OIG found that although the FAA introduced a new staffing model in 2009, the 

Agency has not relied on the model’s results to drive budget requests, in part because the model’s data are incomplete, inaccurate, 

and outdated. The Committee understands that in response to the 

OIG’s concerns, the Agency obtained another independent review in 

September 2013, which confirmed once again that the model was 

not yet reliable. The Committee directs the FAA to provide a plan 

by July 1, 2015 with milestones for correcting problems with the 

model and a timeframe for when a reliable model will be in place. 

Air operator certification.—The Committee is concerned that 

delays in FAA certification of air operators can hinder the competitiveness of the U.S. aviation industry. Each year, hundreds of commercial air carriers, aircraft repair stations, pilot schools, and other 

entities apply to the FAA for certificates authorizing them to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Lengthy delays in certification approvals present real barriers to companies seeking to 

operate in the National Airspace System, limiting the economic 

growth of the aviation industry. As of October 2013, there were 

more than 1,000 entities awaiting certification across the United 

States, with 138 applicants delayed for more than 3 years. 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act section 312.—The Committee 

remains interested in the FAA’s progress on section 312 of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, which requires the FAA to 

identify ways to make its certification processes more efficient and 

its rulings more consistent among field offices. The Committee expects FAA to focus on areas that contribute to the greatest improvement in aviation safety while advancing new and emerging 

technologies and products into the marketplace in a timely manner. 

To determine its progress in implementing this provision, the Committee directs FAA to submit to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations a report on the FAA’s actions to meet its section 

312 implementation plan no later than April 1, 2015. The report 

should include: (1) measures the FAA is taking to implement section 312 and the extent to which they reflect progress in relying 

more fully on delegated authorities and developing a systems safety 

approach; (2) how the FAA will use data to improve the delegation 

process; and (3) the extent to which FAA plans to modify personnel 

expectations and training course content to communicate changes 

to the field. 

Aircraft certification workforce staffing.—The continued development and training of the inspector, engineer, and specialist workforce is key to certification streamlining and the full use of delegated authority. The Committee directs the FAA to include in its 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

annual Workforce Staffing Report a section devoted to the actions 

undertaken and planned by the FAA to further enhance aircraft 

certification workforce skills and training. This section of the Workforce Staffing Report should include a program and funding summary indicating the resources needed, by fiscal year, to fully implement an enhanced aircraft certification workforce and training program. 

International coordination on FAA certification activities.—The 

Committee expects the FAA to use such funds as may be necessary 

to coordinate with and educate other international aviation authorities about the FAA’s certification process. This effort is consistent with the FAA’s strategic plan and is critical to streamline 

and enhance the validation and acceptance of the FAA certifications globally. 

Small Airplane Revitalization Act.—Funding should be utilized, 

as requested by the FAA, to support regulatory action consistent 

with the Small Airplane Revitalization Act (P.L. 113–53). 

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS).—The FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 directed the FAA to integrate UAS into the National Airspace System by 2015. However, it is uncertain when the 

FAA can integrate UAS into the Nation’s airspace and what will 

be required to achieve the goal. The lack of an overall framework 

for the new systems may be inhibiting progress on UAS integration. The Committee is concerned that the FAA may not be well 

positioned to manage effectively the introduction of UAS in the 

United States, particularly in light of a recent ruling by a National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) administrative judge regarding the use of a small UAS for commercial purposes. Given these 

challenges, the Committee has provided an additional $3,000,000 

in the Aviation Safety Activity to expedite the integration of UAS 

into commercial airspace. 

UAS budgeting.—The Committee understands that UAS have 

very different operating characteristics, communications and flight 

planning system requirements than traditional air traffic operations. However, the resource requirements for integrating UAS 

into airspace and the corresponding impacts on the FAA’s capital 

and operating budgets remains unclear. The Committee directs the 

FAA to develop an integrated budget for UAS in the fiscal year 

2016 budget request that clearly identifies research and development needs and the requirements for air traffic control systems 

and operations. 

Global tracking of airline flights.—In the aftermath of the disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 370, the International 

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) announced its intention to convene a special meeting on May 12–13, 2014 of state and industry 

representatives on the global tracking of airline flights. The Committee supports this effort and expects FAA to work collaboratively 

with its ICAO partners to identify and implement international 

standards that will help avoid the circumstances that have surrounded the disappearance of MH 370. In this regard, the Committee understands that ICAO recently established new guidance 

on underwater locator beacons which will become effective in 2018. 

In addition, ICAO’s flight recorder panel intends to review additional means for expediting the location of accident sites, including 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

the use of deployable flight data recorders and the triggered transmission of flight data. This report follows a Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) study that concluded that additional technology solutions in the recovery of flight data are both viable and 

preferred. The Committee underscores the importance of identifying universally adopted measures that will provide improved 

tracking of flights. The Committee directs FAA to provide an update to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the 

agency’s efforts to support ICAO’s work in this area, including 

ICAO’s evaluation of the costs and benefits of installing automatic 

deployable flight data recorders and other relevant technologies 

under consideration. 

One engine inoperative policy.—On April 28, 2014, the FAA published a notice of proposed policy regarding the impact of one engine inoperative procedures in obstruction evaluation aeronautical 

studies. The Committee directs FAA to carefully consider all comments that are submitted on this proposed policy and to work with 

relevant stakeholders to preserve safety and efficiency while balancing the important needs of communities, airports and airport 

users. The Committee urges FAA to consider whether a cost benefit 

analysis should be required in the final policy on obstruction evaluation aeronautical studies. 

COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

The Committee recommends $16,000,000 for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, which is $11,000 below the fiscal 

year 2014 enacted level and $605,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of commercial space 

transportation to the Nation and is committed to fostering a viable, 

healthy, and competitive industry. U.S. commercial space activity 

has increased and operations have become more complex presenting vexing challenges for the FAA. When the Commercial 

Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 was enacted, only certain 

types of vehicles were available for private sector use primarily to 

lift satellites and other types of cargo into space. The use of reusable launch vehicles—vehicles designed to return to Earth from 

space—was in its infancy. This includes suborbital reusable vehicles (SRV) capable of carrying people and cargo. Since then, SRVs 

that carry cargo are now operational and those capable of carrying 

humans are planned for operations in the next few years. In fiscal 

year 2013, the FAA reported that launches licensed and permitted 

by the Agency grew six-fold, and FAA expects demand will continue to rise.Given the challenges of emerging space transportation 

activities, the Committee directs the FAA to focus its commercial 

space activities on operational requirements and to meet the modest funding reduction in this account through savings from nonsafety related activities. 

The Committee supports utilizing heavy-lift launch capability, including the Space Launch System, to execute commercial missions 

to low earth orbit and beyond low earth orbit destinations. Therefore, the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation is urged 

to leverage its existing launch licensing authority to encourage private sector investment in systems by ensuring that commercial activities can be conducted on a non-interference basis. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $762,652,000 for finance and management activities, which is $190,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $2,395,000 below the budget request. 

FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI).—The FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI) is the telecommunications 

network that provides voice, data, and video communication for national airspace (NAS) operations and mission support functions. 

The executive branch has issued an order allowing commercial telecommunication carriers to conduct trials to transition air traffic 

control voice communication services from circuit switched voice 

services to internet protocol (IP) transition trials, while ensuring 

that NAS operations are not disrupted. The Committee commends 

the FAA for its efforts to complete an investment analysis of a 

transition to IP services, and directs the FAA to report to the committee on the status of this investment analysis no later than 

March 31, 2015. 

Workforce diversity report.—The Committee directs FAA to continue to provide workforce diversity reports to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as required in previous committee reports. The Committee understands that FAA has implemented a new process for hiring additional controllers and is interested in whether this new process yields a more diverse workforce 

that is well-equipped to succeed as an air traffic controller. 

NEXTGEN AND OPERATIONS PLANNING

The Committee recommends $60,089,000 for NextGen and Operations Planning, which is $307,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

BILL LANGUAGE

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

This prohibition has been in annual appropriations Acts for many 

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

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

Aeronautical charting and cartography.—The bill maintains the 

provision prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to conduct 

aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities through 

the working capital fund (WCF). 

Credits.—This bill includes language allowing funds received 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $2,600,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 2,603,700,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,600,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥3,700,000 

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

means for modernizing and improving air traffic control and airway 

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

and development facilities, and other improvements to enhance the 

safety and capacity of the airspace system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,600,000,000, 

for the FAA’s facilities and equipment program, the same as the 

level provided in fiscal year 2014 and a decrease of $3,700,000 

below the budget request. The bill provides that, of the total 

amount recommended, $2,137,000,000 is available for obligation 

until September 30, 2017 and $463,000,000 (the amount for personnel and related expenses) is available until September 30, 2015. 

These obligation availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts. 

The following table provides funding levels for facilities and 

equipment activities and budget line items. 

Program FY 2015 Budget 

Request FY 2015 House Bill 

Activity 1—Engineering, Development, Test and Evaluation 

Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping ................................................. $29,900,000 $29,900,000 

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

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

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

Separation Management Portfolio .............................................................................. 13,000,000 13,000,000 

Improved Surface/TFDM Portfolio ............................................................................... 38,808,000 38,808,000 

On Demand NAS Portfolio ........................................................................................... 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Environment Portfolio ................................................................................................. 2,500,000 2,500,000 

Improved Multiple Runway Operations Portfolio ........................................................ 3,500,000 5,500,000 

NAS Infrastructure Portfolio ........................................................................................ 13,480,000 14,480,000 

NextGen Support Portfolio ........................................................................................... 13,000,000 13,000,000 

Performance Based Navigation & Metroplex Portfolio ............................................... 25,500,000 27,500,000 

Total Activity 1 .................................................................................................. 170,937,000 172,937,000 

Activity 2—Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment 

a. En Route Programs 

En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) ............................................................. 10,500,000 10,500,000 

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

Refresh ................................................................................................................... 45,200,000 45,200,000 

En Route Communications Gateway (ECG) ................................................................ 6,600,000 6,600,000 

Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)—Provide ................................................ 7,100,000 7,100,000 

ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements ................................................. 63,700,000 63,700,000 

Air Traffic Management (ATM) ................................................................................... 5,729,000 5,729,000 

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

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

Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS) ............................................................. 13,800,000 13,800,000 

Oceanic Automation System ....................................................................................... 3,508,000 3,508,000 

Next Generation Very High Frequency Air/Ground Comm (NEXCOM) ......................... 40,000,000 40,000,000 

System-Wide Information Management ...................................................................... 60,261,000 60,261,000 

ADS–B NAS Wide Implementation .............................................................................. 247,200,000 252,200,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

Program FY 2015 Budget 

Request 

FY 2015 

House Bill 

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

Collaborative Air Traffic Management Technologies WP2 & WP3 ............................. 13,491,000 13,491,000 

Time Based Flow Management Portfolio .................................................................... 21,000,000 21,000,000 

NextGen Weather Processors ...................................................................................... 23,320,000 23,320,000 

Airborne Collision Avoidance System X (ACASX) ........................................................ 12,000,000 12,000,000 

Data Communications in Support of NG Air Transportation System ........................ 147,340,000 150,340,000 

Subtotal En Route Programs ............................................................................. 734,049,000 742,049,000 

b. Terminal Programs 

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

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

Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS) (TAMR Phase 1) ...... 50,700,000 50,700,000 

Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement Program (TAMR Phase 3) ........... 136,150,000 156,150,000 

Terminal Automation Program .................................................................................... 1,600,000 1,600,000 

Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities—Replace ....................................................... 29,800,000 29,800,000 

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

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

NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards Compliance .............................. 43,501,000 43,501,000 

Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR–9) ........................................................................... 13,600,000 13,600,000 

Terminal Digital Radar (ASR–11) Technology Refresh and Mobile Airport Surveillance Radar (MASR) ............................................................................................... 21,100,000 21,100,000 

Runway Status Lights ................................................................................................ 41,710,000 41,710,000 

National Airspace System Voice System (NVS) .......................................................... 20,550,000 20,550,000 

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

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

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

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

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

Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) ............................................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

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

Subtotal Terminal Programs .............................................................................. 452,434,000 472,434,000

c. Flight Service Programs 

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

Future Flight Service Program .................................................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Alaska Flight Service Facility Modernization (AFSFM) ............................................... 2,800,000 2,800,000 

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

Subtotal Flight Service Programs ...................................................................... 12,000,000 12,000,000 

d. Landing and Navigational Aids Program 

VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) with Distance Measuring Equipment 

(DME) ...................................................................................................................... 8,300,000 8,300,000 

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

Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) for GPS ..................................................... 103,600,000 103,600,000 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GPS Civil Requirements .............................................................................................. 27,000,000 0 

Runway Safety Areas—Navigational Mitigation ........................................................ 35,000,000 35,000,000 

Subtotal Landing and Navigational Aids Programs ......................................... 205,300,000 178,300,000 

e. Other ATC Facilities Programs 

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Management ................................................... 15,500,000 15,500,000 

Unstaffed Infrastructure Sustainment ....................................................................... 32,300,000 32,300,000 

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

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

Alaskan Satellite Telecommunications Infrastructure (ASTI) ..................................... 11,400,000 11,400,000 

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

Electrical Power Systems—Sustain/Support .............................................................. 102,000,000 92,300,000 

Energy Management and Compliance (EMC) ............................................................. 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Subtotal Other ATC Facilities Programs ............................................................ 181,900,000 175,200,000 

Total Activity 2 ......................................................................................... 1,585,683,000 1,579,983,000 

Activity 3—Non-Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment 

a. Support Equipment 

Hazardous Materials Management ............................................................................. 22,000,000 22,000,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

Program FY 2015 Budget 

Request 

FY 2015 

House Bill 

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

Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF) ....................................................... 8,000,000 8,000,000 

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

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

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

System Approach for Safety Oversight (SASO) .......................................................... 22,500,000 22,500,000 

Aviation Safety Knowledge Management Environment (ASKME) ............................... 10,200,000 10,200,000 

System Safety Management Portfolio ......................................................................... 18,700,000 18,700,000 

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

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

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

Tower Simulation System (TSS) Technology Refresh ................................................. 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Subtotal Support Equipment ............................................................................. 143,600,000 143,600,000 

b. Training, Equipment and Facilities 

Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization ..................................................... 13,180,000 13,180,000 

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

Undistributed Amount (FY13 Sequester).

Subtotal Training, Equipment and Facilities .................................................... 14,680,000 14,680,000 

Total Activity 3 ......................................................................................... 158,280,000 158,280,000 

Activity 4—Facilities and Equipment Mission Support 

a. System Support and Services 

System Engineering and Development Support ......................................................... 34,504,000 34,504,000 

Program Support Leases ............................................................................................ 43,200,000 43,200,000 

Logistics Support Services (LSS) ................................................................................ 11,500,000 11,500,000 

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

Transition Engineering Support .................................................................................. 16,596,000 16,596,000 

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

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

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

Aeronautical Information Management Program ....................................................... 12,650,000 12,650,000 

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

Total Activity 4 ......................................................................................... 225,800,000 225,800,000 

Activity 5—Personnel and Related Expenses .......................................... 463,000,000 463,000,000 

SUB-TOTAL ALL ACTIVITIES ....................................................................... 2,603,700,000 2,600,000,000 

NextGen priorities.—The FAA is approaching the 10-year mark 

for planning, developing, and implementing the Next Generation 

Air Transportation System (NextGen). As noted by stakeholders, 

the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the OIG, the effort has often not met with expectations. Problems with advancing 

NextGen have been linked to unrealistic plans, evolving requirements, and an agency culture that is resistant to new ways of 

doing business. The Committee is pleased that the FAA is responding to the recent investment priorities recommended by the 

NextGen Advisory Committee last September. This is a much needed and long overdue step. Investment priorities include performance-based navigation (PBN), improving airport surface operations, 

and making better use of parallel and closely spaced runways at 

the Nation’s most active airports. The Committee expects that the 

FAA will develop a plan that outlines specifically how it is addressing investment priorities with details on timelines, milestones and 

resource requirements. 

NextGen transformational programs.—The FAA continues to invest in several NextGen transformational programs that are expected to fundamentally change the way air traffic is managed in 

the United States. FAA should clearly articulate the benefits of 

each program and associated capabilities with respect to reduction 

in flight delays, improvements in airport arrival rates, productivity 

enhancements, and reduced Agency operating costs. In the current 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

budget environment, the Committee will require a better understanding of what investments will deliver in the near-, middle-, and 

long-term. 

NextGen—improved multiple runway operations.—The Committee provides $5,500,000 for FAA’s program to improve multiple 

runway operations. The Committee recommendation includes 

$2,000,000 to enhance procedures to allow operations on closely 

spaced parallel runways; $1,500,000 to help mitigate wake turbulence for arrival operations; and, $2,000,000 to support Category III 

development and certification efforts needed for FAA’s groundbased augmentation system. 

Multi-function Phased Array Radar (MPAR).—The Committee 

recognizes the importance of the MPAR program in the development and implementation of the next generation weather and aircraft radars, and has provided $14,800,000 within the NAS Infrastructure Portfolio activity, a $1,000,000 increase above the budget 

request, to advance MPAR program efforts. MPAR is expected to 

extend tornado warning lead times from 14 minutes to 20 minutes, 

reduce false alarm rates, and improve detection and warning of 

high-impact severe weather. The Committee wishes to ensure that 

the FAA continues to prioritize the MPAR research and development effort and directs the FAA to provide a report no later than 

180 days after enactment of this Act regarding timeframes for determining the operational feasibility of MPAR, including annual 

costs and schedule milestones. FAA should consult with its government and academic research partners in developing this report. 

Performance-Based Navigation (PBN)—The Committee provides $27,500,000 for Performance-Based Navigation, which is $2,000,000 

above the budget request, to advance PBN activities. The Committee recognizes that PBN is an essential stepping stone to 

NextGen and building stakeholder confidence as well as a top investment priority for the NextGen Advisory Committee. However, 

progress on the implementation of new routes and the realization 

of benefits has been limited. The OIG has testified that at the large 

airports where the FAA has implemented advanced PBN procedures with curved approaches to runways, only about 3 percent of 

eligible airline flights actually used them. To increase PBN use, the 

FAA needs to address several barriers, including adjustments to 

the controller handbook, new automated controller tools, and controller training. The Committee expects the FAA keep it informed 

on how and when these barriers will be addressed to realize the 

benefits of new routes. Further, the Committee continues to support the third-party procedure development program to utilize 

qualified third parties to design, deploy, and maintain public use 

of Required Navigation Procedures (RNP) at airports across the 

country. 

En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM).—The FAA originally planned to deploy ERAM at 20 of its en route facilities by the 

end of 2010, but experienced significant delays and cost increases 

which delayed deployment by more than 4 years. The FAA has 

made significant recent progress implementing ERAM, and controllers are now using the system at 18 of 20 sites. The FAA now expects that ERAM will be fully operational at all 20 sites in 2015. 

While ERAM deployment is nearly complete, it is uncertain when 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

the legacy systems can be decommissioned and when all site-specific issues will be addressed. The Committee will continue to monitor the deployment of ERAM and expects to be kept informed of 

how future software enhancements will support new air traffic control capabilities. 

Automatic dependent surveillance—broadcast (ADS–B) implementation.—The Committee provides $252,500,000 for the continued implementation of ADS–B, which is $5,000,000 above the budget 

request. The ADS–B program is one of the critical NextGen technologies needed to transition air traffic control from a ground-based 

to a satellite-based navigation system. FAA has made notable 

progress in deploying more than 600 ground stations and completing the development and testing of key surveillance capabilities. The Committee remains concerned that significant work is 

needed to ensure that required aircraft are adequately equipped 

with the avionics necessary to fully utilize ADS–B capabilities. In 

addition, the Committee believes there are opportunities for air 

traffic control efficiency improvements in oceanic areas, particularly in light of the recent Malaysian flight disappearance. The possibility of providing continuous real time tracking of flight operations in areas not covered by radar surveillance is of importance 

to the Committee and in the interest of improving the overall safety of the system. Within the amount provided, the Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 to evaluate and advance the use 

of space based ADS–B for air traffic control separation services. 

The recommendation will also support the collection and validation 

of surveillance data and help assess the impact on FAA’s oceanic 

automation system. Since FAA manages nearly 20 percent of the 

oceanic airspace, the Committee believes it is prudent to explore 

opportunities to bring the benefits of satellite-based navigation to 

all areas managed by FAA air traffic controllers. Within the first 

quarter of fiscal year 2015, the Committee directs the FAA to brief 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the agency’s progress on and barriers to implementing the ADS–B technology for all air traffic controlled by the FAA. 

Data communications.—The Committee has provided 

$150,340,000 for Data Communications (Data Comm), an increase 

of $3,000,000 above the budget request. This additional funding 

will support the expansion of new en route trials to additional locations and increase incentives for users to adopt to Data Comm equipage in trial locations. 

Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement Program 

(TAMR).—The Committee provides $156,150,000 for the Terminal 

Automation Modernization Replacement (TAMR) Program, an increase of $20,000,000 above the budget request. Additional funding 

will accelerate the deployment of TAMR at the medium-sized Common Automated Radar Tracking System IIE locations, which will 

advance the availability of Automated Dependent Surveillance— 

Broadcast (ADS–B) or satellite-based navigation capability, and increase the adoption of ADS–B equipage to aviation users in those 

areas across the national airspace. The Committee also wishes to 

ensure that the new capabilities enabled by the Standard Terminal 

Automation Replacement System (STARS) provide measurable improvements to the legacy it replaces. The Committee directs the 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

OIG to provide an update on progress with implementing STARS 

at the 11 large sites and how the effort will support NextGen capabilities. 

VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) with Distance Measuring Equipment (DME).—The Committee is aware of FAA’s efforts 

to evaluate the feasibility of extending the service life of the nation’s aging VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range with Distance 

Measuring Equipment systems by moving to a service based procurement. The Committee is supportive of this approach and directs the FAA to provide a report to the Committee on progress 

made on this program no later than March 31, 2015. 

BILL LANGUAGE

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

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $158,792,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 156,750,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,042,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

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 $156,750,000, a decrease of 

$2,042,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes the following funding 

levels for Research, Engineering, and Development programs. 

Program FY 2015 Budget 

Request 

FY 2015 House 

Bill 

A11—Safety ........................................................................................................................ $94,484,000 $90,984,000 

Fire Research and Safety .................................................................................................... 6,929,000 6,929,000 

Propulsion and Fuel Systems .............................................................................................. 2,413,000 2,413,000 

Advanced Materials/Structural Safety ................................................................................. 2,909,000 2,909,000 

Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety .................................................................................... 5,889,000 5,889,000 

Continued Airworthiness ...................................................................................................... 9,619,000 9,619,000 

Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research ............................................................. 1,567,000 1,567,000 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors .............................................. 9,897,000 6,000,000 

System Safety Management ................................................................................................ 7,970,000 7,970,000 

Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors ................................................... 5,898,000 5,898,000 

Aeromedical Research ......................................................................................................... 8,919,000 8,919,000 

Weather Program ................................................................................................................. 17,800,000 15,897,000 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research ................................................................................ 8,974,000 10,974,000 

NextGen—Alternative Fuels for General Aviation ............................................................... 5,700,000 6,000,000 

A12—Economic Competitiveness ........................................................................................ 22,286,000 22,286,000 

NextGen—Wake Turbulence ................................................................................................ 8,541,000 8,541,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

Program FY 2015 Budget 

Request 

FY 2015 House 

Bill 

NextGen—Air Ground Integration Human Factors .............................................................. 9,697,000 9,697,000 

NextGen—Weather Technology in the Cockpit .................................................................... 4,048,000 4,048,000 

A13—Environmental Sustainability .................................................................................... 34,435,000 37,935,000 

Environment and Energy ..................................................................................................... 14,921,000 14,921,000 

NextGen—Environmental Research—Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics .............. 19,514,000 23,014,000 

A14—Mission Support ........................................................................................................ 5,545,000 5,545,000 

System Planning and Resource Management ..................................................................... 2,135,000 2,135,000

William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility ..................................................... 3,410,000 3,410,000 

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

Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) research.—The FAA has established six UAS test sites, which are expected to provide valuable 

information for developing the regulatory framework for UAS integration. However, the FAA will need to develop a comprehensive 

plan to identify research priorities, including how data from test 

site operations will be gathered, analyzed, and used. The Committee recognizes these challenges and provides $10,974,000 for 

UAS research, which is $2,000,000 above the budget request. These 

additional funds are provided to help meet the FAA’s UAS research 

goals of system safety and data gathering, aircraft certification, 

command and control link challenges, control station layout and 

certification, sense and avoid, and environmental impacts. 

Unmanned aerial systems data sharing.—Issues with defining 

the safety data the FAA needs from the Department of Defense 

(DoD) remain a barrier in its efforts to develop safety standards. 

The Committee directs the FAA to develop a plan to resolve these 

data-sharing issues with the DoD and to identify what data is 

needed, why it is needed, and how it will be used. 

NextGen—Alternative fuels for general aviation.—The Committee 

provides $6,000,000 for alternative fuels research for general aviation, which is $300,000 above the budget request. During the complex transition of the general aviation piston fleet to an unleaded 

fuel, an increase in funding above last year is merited to move from 

research to a phase focused on coordinating and facilitating the 

fleet-wide evaluation, certification and deployment of an unleaded 

fuel and to help overcome any market issues that prevent it from 

moving forward. The Committee recognizes this is a multi-year effort and looks forward to updates on the continued progress on this 

initiative as it effectively balances environmental improvement 

with aviation safety, technical challenges, and economic impact. 

NextGen environmental research—aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics.—The Committee provides $23,014,000 for the FAA’s 

NextGen environmental research aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics program, which is $3,500,000 above the budget request. 

Over the last few years, the Committee has provided additional resources for the FAA’s environmental research program in an effort 

to expedite the development of viable alternative fuels that can be 

used in aircraft. Recognizing that fuel costs continue to consume 

the largest portion of airline operating budgets and in an effort to 

reduce the aviation sector’s emissions footprint, the Committee provides additional resources to continue the research, development 

and testing of alternative fuels. Now that the United States Air 

Force Research Laboratory is no longer able to support alternative 

fuels testing, it is expected that the FAA will use some of these reVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

sources to produce fit for purpose chemical-analytical, fuel-property 

and material compatibility testing for many of the new chemical 

processes that produce alternative jet fuel. In addition, the Committee provides resources to continue the FAA’s Continuous, Lower 

Energy Emission, and Noise Program. 

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ................................................................................... $3,200,000,000 $3,350,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................................... 3,200,000,000 2,900,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ............................................................................................ 3,200,000,000 3,350,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .......................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ...................................................................... – – – +450,000,000 

The bill includes a liquidating cash appropriation of 

$3,200,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended. This funding provides for liquidation of obligations 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. 

LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

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

fiscal year 2015, which is the same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted 

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

ADMINISTRATION AND RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Airport administrative expenses.—Within the overall obligation 

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

the airports program by the FAA. This funding level is equal to the 

budget request and $500,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted 

level. 

Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP).—The recommendation includes $15,000,000 which is the same level as the 

budget request and the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. The ACRP 

was established through Section 712 of the Vision 100—Century of 

Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108–176) to identify shared 

problem areas facing airports that can be solved through applied 

research but are not adequately addressed by existing Federal research programs. 

Airport technology research.—The recommendation includes a 

minimum of $29,750,000 for the FAA’s airport technology research 

program which is equal to the budget request and $250,000 above 

the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. The funds provided for this program are utilized to conduct research in the areas of airport pavement; airport marking and lighting; airport rescue and firefighting; 

airport planning and design; wildlife hazard mitigation; and visual 

guidance. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

Small Community Air Service Development Program.—The recommendation includes $3,000,000 for the Small Community Air 

Service Development Program and directs the FAA to transfer 

funds to the Office of the Secretary salaries and expenses appropriation for this activity. 

Runway safety areas (RSAs).—The FAA has been engaged in a 

multi-year effort to improve RSAs at certificated airports across the 

country in order to meet the 2015 statutory deadline. To date, not 

including moving FAA owned NAVAIDS, FAA has completed RSA 

improvements at roughly 93 percent of certificated airports. Strategies to improve runway safety include land acquisition, the use of 

declared distances, removing or making frangible objects that must 

be in the RSA, and the installation of engineered materials arresting systems (EMAS). However, the Committee remains concerned 

about FAA’s progress to relocate and modify navigational aids that 

present hazards at the end of runways. The Committee expects the 

air traffic organization to work collaboratively with the airports organization to ensure that every effort is made to complete the RSA 

mandate in a timely manner. The Committee directs FAA to brief 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 16, 

2015 on the status of completed RSAs and cost and timeline for removing navigational aids that pose a hazard to unfinished RSAs. 

Airport revenue diversion.—Federal law requires that airport revenue be used only for the capital and operating costs of an airport. 

As such, the FAA is responsible for effective oversight of airport 

revenue at those airports that receive grants under the Airport Improvement Program. Because airport revenue diversion continues 

to be a problem at the nation’s airports, the Committee directed the 

Inspector General to undertake an audit of revenue diversion activities. The Report found inadequacies in FAA’s oversight of airport revenues. Given the limited funding available for airport improvement projects, it is important that the FAA enhance its oversight of airport revenues, particularly at airports with a history of 

revenue diversion violations. The Committee directs FAA to 

strengthen its oversight of airport revenue uses to ensure that the 

use of airport revenue is only for airport capital and operating 

costs. Further, the Committee directs the FAA to follow up on any 

Inspector General revenue diversion audits or reports carried out 

in the past 18 months, and provide the House and Senate Appropriations Committee with the results of such follow-up activity not 

later than March 1, 2015. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Runway incursion prevention systems and devices.—Consistent 

with prior year appropriations Acts, the bill allows funds under 

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

incursion prevention systems and devices. 

CANCELLATION

The Committee recommendation cancels $260,000,000 of amount 

authorized under sections 48103 and 48112 of Title 49, U.S.C. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Section 110. The Committee retains a provision limiting the 

number of technical workyears at the Center for Advanced Aviation 

Systems Development to 600 in fiscal year 2015. 

Section 111. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting FAA 

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

building construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space 

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

exceptions. 

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

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

aviation authorities to be credited to the operations account. 

Section 114. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting the 

FAA from paying Sunday premium pay except in those cases where 

the individual actually worked on a Sunday. 

Section 115. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting FAA 

from using funds to purchase store gift cards or gift certificates 

through a government-issued credit card. 

Section 116. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

approval from the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration of 

the Department of Transportation for retention bonuses for any 

FAA employee. 

Section 117. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

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

registration number in the Aircraft Situational Display to Industry 

program, upon the request of an owner or operator. 

Section 118. The Committee includes a provision that limits the 

number of FAA political appointees to 9. 

Section 119. The Committee includes a provision that prohibits 

funds for any increase in fees for navigational products until the 

FAA has reported a justification for such fees to the Committees 

on Appropriations. 

Section 119A. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting 

funds to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules at 

Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New Jersey. 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides financial 

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

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

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

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

FHWA’s current activities are authorized under MAP–21, which 

expires on September 30, 2014. The administration as well as the 

House and Senate authorizing committeesare currently working on 

surface transportation authorization legislation. However, at this 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
30 

time, it remains unclear what authorization law (or laws) will be 

effective during fiscal year 2015. Therefore, the Committee must 

recommend appropriations for programs without authorization and 

the Committee’s recommendations for FHWA are contingent upon 

reauthorization. 

The Committee therefore provides only minimal bill language 

that sets the overall FHWA obligation limitation for fiscal year 

2015, contingent upon authorization. It is the Committee’s intention that appropriations made by this bill will be wholly contingent 

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

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $416,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 439,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 426,100,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥12,900,000 

The limitation on administrative expenses caps the amount, from 

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

other federal highway programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $426,100,000, which 

is $10,000,000 above fiscal year 2014, and $12,900,000 below the 

budget request. The amount reflects a modest increase adequate to 

continue work already underway to modernize and maintain information technology systems and also to keep pace with inflation 

within baseline program operations. In addition, $3,248,000 is 

transferred to the Appalachian Regional Commission. 

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

[In thousands of dollars] 

Program Fiscal year 2014 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2015 

request 

Recommended 

in the bill 

Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation) ........................... $40,256,000 $47,323,248 $40,256,000 

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

Total program level ................................................. 40,995,000 48,062,248 40,995,000 

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

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

global economy, and to move people and goods safely. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
31 

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

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

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

and repair through matching grants. 

Programs included within the federal-aid highways program are 

financed from the Highway Trust Fund. The federal-aid highways 

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

from obligations incurred under contract authority. The Committee 

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

program in a given year. 

Because the structure of the federal-aid highways program for 

fiscal year 2015 is unknown at this time due to lack of authorizing 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total program level of $40,995,000,000 for the activities of the FHWA in fiscal year 2015, 

contingent upon reauthorization. This amount is the same as fiscal 

year 2014 and $7,067,248,000 below the budget request. Included 

within the recommended amount is an obligation limitation of 

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

Loan fees.—The Committee continues bill language allowing 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 services of expert firms performed on behalf of the Department. These 

fees are not subject to the obligation limitation or the limitation on 

administrative expenses set for the Transportation Infrastructure 

Finance and Innovation program under section 608 of title 23, 

United States Code. 

Innovative financing.—The committee notes the significant role 

of Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act 

(TIFIA) credit assistance in expanding the capacity of the federalaid highways program to deliver projects. The Committee encourages the FHWA to fully obligate amounts available for credit assistance, contingent upon authorization, and complete new credit 

agreements with eligible project sponsors in a timely manner. To 

ensure an equitable geographic distribution of these resources, the 

Committee recommends a provision prohibiting any single state 

from receiving more than 33 percent of the loan subsidy provided 

for TIFIA under this Act. 

Safety performance measures and reporting requirements.—On 

March 11, 2014, FHWA published an NPRM to establish safety 

performance measures for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as required by section 1203 of MAP–21. The NPRM 

proposes to establish one measure for each of the following areas 

as mandated by MAP–21: number of fatalities; fatality rate; numVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
32 

ber of serious injuries; and serious injury rate. In addition, while 

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) already uses performance measures for pedestrian fatalities in administering NHTSA’s highway traffic safety grant program, the 

Committee understands that NHTSA intends to establish performance measures for bicycle fatalities when it administers its fiscal 

year 2015 traffic safety grants. Recognizing the increase in pedestrian and bicycle fatalities, the Secretary of Transportation should 

establish separate non-motorized safety performance measures for 

the purpose of carrying out HSIP requirements. The FHWA should 

define these performance measures specifically to evaluate the 

number of fatalities and serious injuries for pedestrian and bicycle 

crashes. The statutory deadline for completing the rulemaking has 

come and gone. The Committee directs FHWA to publish its final 

rule on safety performance measures no later than 60 days after 

the enactment of this Act. 

This issue demonstrates the importance of coordination across 

modal administrations, and their state and local counterparts, on 

safety planning, reporting, and performance measurement especially in light of the intersection between emerging vehicle-to-vehicle communications technologies and intelligent transportation systems infrastructure. The Committee directs FHWA and NHTSA, 

and other modes as recommended by DOT’s safety council, to report to the Committee within 60 days of enactment on a plan to 

improve coordination on cross-cutting performance measurements 

and reporting requirements, identify opportunities to streamline 

and consolidate grantee reporting and performance tracking activities, and delineate steps the agencies and the grantees can take to 

improve coordination at the federal, state and local level on safety 

planning mandates, reporting requirements and performance measurements. 

Innovative project implementation and funding.—The Department is encouraged to use funds authorized to carry out section 

503(b) of title 23, United States Code, to carry out the activities 

listed in paragraph (3)(C)(v) of such section and to support regional 

pilot programs that would promote accelerated construction of 

transportation infrastructure including public private partnership 

programs that seek to connect public entities with private capital. 

When funding such activities, the Secretary shall give stronger consideration to existing multi-state or multi-jurisdictional programs 

or other similar proposals that demonstrate geographic and regional collaboration. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 

coordinate with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and the Army Corp of Engineers in identifying 

local, state and regional infrastructure and infrastructure planning 

deficiencies. 

Technology and innovation deployment program.—The Committee supports the technology and innovation deployment program’s efforts to improve safety, efficiency, reliability, and performance of our nation’s transportation infrastructure. The Committee 

understands that through this program States can apply for accelerated innovation deployment demonstration grants and state 

transportation innovation council incentives to demonstrate and deploy advanced composite material and carbon fiber composite mateVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
33 

rials in bridge replacement and rehabilitation. The Committee 

notes the growing need to accelerate the adoption of proven, highpayoff, and innovative practices, technologies, and materials that 

lead to faster construction such as the use of fiber reinforced composite materials and carbon fiber composite materials in bridge replacement and rehabilitation, and encourages the administration to 

continue to support these innovative technologies. 

Geosynthetics.—The Committee encourages the Federal Highway 

Administration to actively review and incorporate geosynthetics for 

highway and civil infrastructure applications, due to their cost savings, longevity, and environmental benefits. The Committee also 

encourages the Department of Transportation to thoroughly review 

the Government Accountability Office (GAO) study entitled, Information on Materials and Practices for Improving Highway Pavement Performance that investigated the benefits of incorporating 

innovative materials into pavements. 

Chehalis Basin flood mitigation plan.—The Committee understands the State of Washington is developing a comprehensive 

flood mitigation plan for the Chehalis Basin. The Department is directed to assist the Governor’s Chehalis work group in their efforts 

to develop a basin-wide flood mitigation plan that protects Interstate 5 from catastrophic flooding and achieves the work group’s 

objectives. 

Tamiami Trail project.—The Committee has strongly supported 

Everglades restoration for twenty years and was pleased to see the 

Governor of Florida pledge $90,000,000 to support the completion 

of the Tamiami Trail 2.6 mile bridge segment. The Committee also 

notes that the National Parks Service has pledged in their fiscal 

year 2015 budget, a matching investment of $30,000,000 per year 

for three years, from their non-appropriated Federal Lands Transportation Program starting in fiscal year 2015 to cover 50 percent 

of the cost of contract payments. The Committee commends DOT 

for its efforts to support federal and state coordination on important projects like the Tamiami Trail. 

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $40,995,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 48,062,248,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥7,067,248,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation of 

$40,995,000,000, which is the same as fiscal year 2014 and 

$7,067,248,000 below the budget request. This is the amount required to pay the outstanding obligations of the highway program 

at levels provided in this Act or any other Act. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
34 

FIXING AND ACCELERATING SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... $500,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥500,000,000 

The FY 2015 budget proposes the Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation (FAST) program. This new, unauthorized program, jointly managed by the Federal Highway Administration and 

Federal Transit Administration, would competitively award grants 

and financial incentives for transportation policy innovations and 

reforms. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not provide funding for this proposal. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

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

The provision has been updated to be consistent with changes to 

the underlying authorizing statute made by MAP–21 and is contingent upon reauthorization. 

Section 121. The Committee continues a provision that credits 

funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the 

federal-aid highways account. 

Section 122. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

requirements for any waiver of the Buy America Act. 

Section 123. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

tolling in Texas, with exceptions. 

Section 124. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

congressional notification before the Department approves credit 

assistance under the TIFIA program. 

Section 125. The Committee adds a provision that aligns certain 

federal and state truck weight requirements. 

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) was 

established within the Department of Transportation (DOT) by 

Congress through the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 

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

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

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

FMCSA resources are used to prevent and mitigate commercial 

vehicle accidents through regulation, enforcement, stakeholder 

training, technological innovation, and improved information systems. FMCSA also is responsible for enforcing Federal motor carVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
35 

rier safety and hazardous materials regulations for all commercial 

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

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

FMCSA’s current activities are authorized under MAP–21, which 

expires on September 30, 2014. The administration as well as the 

House and Senate authorizing committees are currently working 

on surface transportation authorization legislation. However, at 

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

be effective during fiscal year 2015. Therefore, the Committee must 

recommend appropriations for programs without authorization and 

the Committee’s recommendations for FMCSA are contingent upon 

reauthorization. 

For purposes of determining authorized programs and funding 

levels for fiscal year 2015, the Committee assumes an extension of 

MAP–21 through fiscal year 2015. However, it is the Committee’s 

intention that appropriations made by this bill will be wholly contingent on reauthorization and will be distributed only in accordance with the new authorization law. 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract authorization Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 1 ...................................................................... $272,000,000 ($272,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ..................................................................... 315,770,000 (315,770,000) 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ................................................................ ¥13,000,000 (¥13,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ............................................................ ¥56,770,000 (¥56,770,000) 

1 Amounts include $13,000,000 provided for border facilities under the heading ‘‘National Motor Carrier Safety’’ in fiscal year 2014. 

This limitation controls FMCSA spending on salaries, operating 

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

carrier safety and consumer enforcement efforts, including the compliance, safety, and accountability program, regulation and enforcement of freight transport, and federal safety enforcement at the 

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

and implementation, information management, research and technology, grants to state and local partners, safety education and outreach, and the safety and consumer telephone hotline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

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

motor carrier safety operations and programs. The Committee also 

recommends limiting obligations from the highway trust fund to 

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

fiscal year 2015. These levels, which are contingent upon reauthorVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
36 

ization, are $13,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 and $56,770,000 

below the budget request. 

Within the amounts provided for operations and programs, the Committee recommends $1,000,000 for commercial motor vehicle 

operator’s grants, which provide commercial motor vehicle operators with critical safety training. This amount, which is contingent 

upon reauthorization, is the same as fiscal year 2014 and the budget request. These funds are not moved into the Motor Carrier Safety Grants account as requested. 

The Committee continues bill language specifying funding 

amounts for the research and technology program and for information management, and making those amounts available until September 30, 2017. 

Hazardous materials safety permits.—FMCSA does not currently 

have a reasonable means of evaluating Hazardous Materials Safety 

Permit (HMSP) holders with inspection disqualifications which 

leaves operators no recourse beyond ‘‘aging out’’ of their disqualification. Because of the special nature of these carriers and because 

many are small businesses, a few violations combined with a low 

number of inspections can force a safe operator out of business 

with no opportunity for a second level of review. Further, because 

of the timing and methodology of the HMSP renewal cycle, this 

‘‘out-of-business’’ event can sometimes come with little to no warning. To prevent federal bureaucracy from unnecessarily hurting 

small businesses, bill language is included which prohibits FMCSA 

from denying an application to renew a HMSP permit application 

based solely on a carrier’s Out-of-Service (OOS) rate unless: (1) the 

carrier has been given a reasonable opportunity to provide evidence 

of corrective actions taken or a corrective action plan underway; 

and (2) the Secretary finds that those actions or plan would be insufficient to address specific and apparent safety concerns raised 

by the carrier’s inspection citations. 

Compliance, safety, accountability program.—The Committee directs FMCSA to carry out recommendations for its Compliance, 

Safety, Accountability program (CSA) as outlined in the Government Accountability Office’s February 2014 report. FMCSA shall 

revise Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology to better 

account for data limitations that undermine meaningful comparisons of safety performance information across carriers. FMCSA is 

directed to conduct a formal analysis that specifically identifies 

what are the limitations in data used to calculate SMS scores as 

well as limitations in resulting SMS scores and report that analysis 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180 

days of enactment. Such analysis shall also identify, for each purpose for which SMS scores are used, what data sufficiency standard 

is necessary to ensure SMS is reliable enough to serve that purpose. FMCSA is also directed to demonstrate that any use of data, 

including SMS, to determine a carrier’s fitness to operate has adequately accounted for data limitations. 

Hours of Service.—In July of 2013 several changes to the truck 

driver hours of service regulations went into effect including revisions to the ‘‘restart’’ provision. Under the new regulations, the 34 

consecutive hours of off-duty time required to reset a driver’s onduty time tracking was modified in two important ways. First, the 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
37 

off-duty period was changed to require two consecutive 1am-to-5am 

overnight periods. Second, the restart option was restricted to one 

use every 168 hours (once per week). Per MAP–21, FMCSA conducted a field study of the impact of the new requirements on driver fatigue and released those findings on January 30, 2014. The 

study provided no insight into the impact of one of the two critical 

changes to the restart provision, the 168-hour rule. Further, in its 

review of the 1am-to-5am requirement, FMCSA failed to consider 

important consequences of such a rule including whether or not 

truckers are driving more during the day in order to accommodate 

mandated off-duty time at night, and, if so, what are the consequences for safety and traffic of putting more commercial trucks 

on the road during peak travel times. FMCSA also failed to evaluate the work habits of drivers since July 2013 to assess whether 

drivers have been more frequently combining night shifts with day 

shifts in a single week, and, if so, what impact this irregular scheduling has on driver fatigue. The Committee directs FMCSA to provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment that catalogues the scientific evidence which supports the safety benefits of the 168-hour rule. The 

report should also include an assessment of effects on safety and 

traffic of the consequences outlined above and any other unintended consequences of the new restart provision that were not addressed by the FMCSA field study. 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract 

authorization 

Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... $313,000,000 ($313,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................... 352,753,000 (352,753,000) 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................. ¥39,753,000 (¥39,753,000) 

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

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

enforcement at the U.S. borders, improvement of state commercial 

driver’s license oversight activities, and improvements in linking 

states’ motor vehicle registration systems and carrier safety data. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $313,000,000 in liquidating cash for 

this program, as well as a $313,000,000 limitation on obligations, 

in fiscal year 2015. These levels, which are contingent upon reauthorization, are the same as fiscal year 2014 and $39,753,000 below 

the budget request. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
38 

The Committee recommends the following obligation limitations 

for grants funded under this account: 

Motor carrier safety assistance program ............................................................................. ($218,000,000) 

Commercial driver’s license improvements program ........................................................... (30,000,000) 

Border enforcement grants ................................................................................................... (32,000,000) 

Performance and registration information system management program .......................... (5,000,000) 

Commercial vehicle information systems and networks deployment program ................... (25,000,000) 

Safety data improvement program ....................................................................................... (3,000,000) 

New entrant audits.—Of the funds made available for the motor 

carrier safety assistance program, the Committee recommends 

$32,000,000 for audits of new entrant motor carriers, which is the 

same as fiscal year 2014. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 130. The Committee continues language subjecting the funds 

appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions included in 

prior appropriations Acts regarding Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

Sec. 131. The Committee adds language requiring FMCSA to 

send notices of 49 C.F.R. section 385.308 violations in such a way 

that receipt of the notice is confirmed. 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

was established in March of 1970 to administer motor vehicle and 

highway safety programs. It was the successor agency to the National Highway Safety Bureau, which was housed in the Federal 

Highway Administration. 

NHTSA’s mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce 

economic costs due to road traffic crashes, through education, research, safety standards and enforcement activity. To accomplish 

these goals, NHTSA establishes and enforces safety performance 

standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, investigates safety defects in motor vehicles, and conducts research on 

driver behavior and traffic safety. 

NHTSA provides grants and technical assistance to state and 

local governments to enable them to conduct effective local highway 

safety programs. Together with state and local partners, NHTSA 

works to reduce the threat of drunk, impaired, and distracted drivers, and to promote policies and devices with demonstrated safety 

benefits including helmets, child safety seats, airbags, and graduated licenses. 

NHTSA establishes and ensures compliance with fuel economy 

standards, investigates odometer fraud, establishes and enforces 

vehicle anti-theft regulations, and provides consumer information 

on a variety of motor vehicle safety topics. 

AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

NHTSA’s current programs have been authorized under a series 

of laws, and the most recent authorization, MAP–21, expires on 

September 30, 2014. The administration as well as the House and 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
39 

Senate authorizing committees are currently working on surface 

transportation authorization legislation. However, at this time, it 

remains unclear what authorization law (or laws) will be effective 

during fiscal year 2015. Therefore, the Committee must recommend 

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

In the absence of a 2015 authorization for surface transportation 

programs, including highway safety programs, the Committee assumes a continuation of the current program structure. However, 

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $824,000,000, which is $5,000,000 

more than fiscal year 2014 and $27,000,000 below the budget request. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations: 

2014 enacted 2015 request Committee 

recommendation 

Operations and research (general fund and highway trust fund) ...... $257,500,000 $274,000,000 $262,500,000 

Highway traffic safety grants (highway trust fund) ............................ 561,500,000 577,000,000 561,500,000 

Total ............................................................................................. 819,000,000 851,000,000 824,000,000 

The Committee recommends funding levels that provide NHTSA 

with sufficient resources to continue its critical work improving the 

safety of passenger travel on the nation’s highway system. 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(General fund) 1 (Highway trust 

fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................ $134,000,000 $123,500,000 $257,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ......................................................... 152,000,000 122,000,000 274,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ..................................................................... 134,000,000 128,500,000 262,500,000

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ................................................... – – – +5,000,000 +5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥18,000,000 +6,500,000 ¥11,500,000 

1 For comparison purposes, the table does not reflect the budget proposal to fund all of NHTSA’s Operations and Research activities with mandatory budget authority. 

The operations and research appropriations support research, 

demonstrations, technical assistance, and national leadership for 

highway safety programs. Many of these programs are conducted 

in partnership with state and local governments, the private sector, 

universities, research units, and various safety associations and organizations. These programs address alcohol and drug countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law enforcement, 

emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic records and liVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
40 

censing, traffic safety evaluations, motorcycle safety, pedestrian 

and bicycle safety, pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy 

driving, young and older driver safety programs, and development 

of improved accident investigation procedures. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $262,500,000, which is $5,000,000 

more than fiscal year 2014 and $11,500,000 below the budget request. Of this total, $134,000,000 is from the General Fund for operations and vehicle safety research, and $128,500,000 is from the 

highway trust fund for operations and behavioral highway safety 

research. The Committee rejects the administration’s request to 

fund vehicle safety activities out of the Highway Trust Fund, rather than the General Fund. 

Emerging technology research.—As vehicle safety features continue to advance, it is imperative that NHTSA has a clear understanding of the various new technologies including those related to 

autonomous driving and vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Understanding how these advances are evolving and converging will ensure that consumers, regulators, and safety advocates are best able 

to navigate and implement these technologies going forward. To 

forward this understanding, the Committee recommendation funds 

the requested increases for vehicle electronics and emerging technology research and for advanced testing of emergent technologies 

at the Vehicle Research and Test Center in East Liberty, Ohio. 

Heavy duty vehicle research.—In an effort to further increase the 

safety of heavy trucks and buses, the Committee encourages 

NHTSA to fund research that will provide needed insight for fleets 

and owner-operators on how available safety technologies may better enhance their ability to operate safely. 

National roadside survey.—NHTSA recently sponsored the fifth 

National Roadside Survey (NRS) conducted since the original survey in 1973. This national field survey of nighttime weekend drivers seeks to estimate the prevalence of alcohol and drugs in drivers 

on our Nation’s roadways. The survey involves stopping drivers at 

approximately 300 randomly selected locations across the continental United States. While participation in the survey is random, 

voluntary, and compensated, civil libertarians have raised concerns 

about the presence of uniformed officers at the survey sites as the 

driving public may confuse survey sites with mandatory law enforcement checkpoints. In addition, passive collection of personal 

information, including blood alcohol content, has raised privacy 

concerns. The Committee directs NHTSA to provide a report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of 

enactment that details the survey methodology of the most recent 

NRS including what characteristics distinguish NRS sites from 

mandatory law enforcement checkpoints and what steps are taken 

to make clear that either pulling over or participating in the survey 

are both completely voluntary. The report should also describe 

what steps are taken to protect the privacy of both participants and 

drivers that come upon NRS sites. The Committee also directs the 

Government Accountability Office to review and report on the overall value of the NRS to researchers and other public safety stakeholders, the differences between an NRS site and a typical law enVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
41 

forcement checkpoint, and the effectiveness of the NRS survey 

methodology at protecting the privacy of the driving public. 

Tire fuel efficiency consumer information program.—NHTSA has 

not yet published the final rule for the Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program (TFECIP) despite having published a 

proposed rule in 2009, obtaining comments from a full range of 

stakeholders, and publishing a proposed final rule in 2010. This 

rulemaking is pursuant to statutory requirements contained in the 

Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. The proposed rule could help inform decisions about the purchase of replacement tires that could save consumers hundreds of dollars annually. Nearly seven years after Congress acted, NHTSA has not 

been able to complete this rule. The Committee directs NHTSA to 

provide a schedule for completion of the TFECIP rule within 60 

days of enactment. 

Materials research.—The Committee is encouraged by the development of, and important findings related to, those materials which 

have played important roles in the improvement of fuel efficiency 

and the enhancement of automobile performance. The Committee 

commends NHTSA for its study of light vehicles, and encourages 

the agency to continue its work to advance the state of the art of 

predictive engineering for plastics and polymer-based composites in 

the automotive field. 

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract 

authorization 

Limitation on obligation 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... $561,500,000 ($561,500,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................... 577,000,000 (577,000,000) 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 561,500,000 (561,500,000) 

Bill compared with:.

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................. ¥15,500,000 (¥15,500,000) 

The highway traffic safety grant programs authorized under 

MAP–21 include: Highway Safety Programs, National Priority 

Safety Programs, and the High Visibility Enforcement Program. 

These grant programs provide resources to states for highway 

safety programs that are data-driven and that meet states’ most 

pressing highway safety problems. They are a critical asset in reducing highway traffic fatalities and injuries. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $561,500,000 in liquidating cash 

from the Highway Trust Fund to pay outstanding obligations of the 

highway safety grant programs at the levels provided in this Act 

and prior appropriations Acts. The Committee also recommends 

limiting the obligations from the Highway Trust Fund in fiscal year 

2015 for the highway traffic safety grants programs to 

$561,500,000. These levels are the same as fiscal year 2014 and 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
42 

$15,500,000 below the budget request. The Committee’s recommendations are contingent upon reauthorization. 

The Committee recommends the following funding allocations for 

grant programs: 

Highway safety programs ..................................................................................................... ($235,000,000) 

Occupant protection .............................................................................................................. (43,520,000) 

State traffic safety information system improvements ....................................................... (39,440,000) 

Impaired driving countermeasures ....................................................................................... (145,520,000) 

Distracted driver incentive ................................................................................................... (23,120,000) 

Motorcyclist safety ................................................................................................................ (4,080,000) 

State graduated driver licensing laws ................................................................................. (13,600,000) 

In-vehicle alcohol detection device research ....................................................................... (2,720,000) 

High visibility enforcement program .................................................................................... (29,000,000) 

Administrative expenses ....................................................................................................... (25,500,000) 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 140. The Committee continues a provision that, contingent upon reauthorization, provides limited funding for travel and 

related expenses associated with state management reviews and 

highway safety core competency development training. 

Section 141. The Committee continues a provision that exempts 

from the current fiscal year’s obligation limitation any obligation 

authority that was made available in previous public laws. 

Section 142. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funding for the National Highway Safety Advisory Committee. 

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) was established by 

the Department of Transportation Act, on October 15, 1966. The 

FRA plans, develops, and administers programs and regulations to 

promote the safe operation of freight and passenger rail transportation in the United States. The U.S. railroad system consists of 

over 550 railroads with over 187,000 freight employees, 171,000 

miles of track, and 1.35 million freight cars. In addition, the FRA 

continues to oversee grants to the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation (Amtrak) with the goal of assisting Amtrak with improvements to its passenger service and physical infrastructure. 

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $184,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 185,250,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 185,250,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +750,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The safety and operations account provides funding for FRA’s 

safety program activities related to passenger and freight railroads. 

Funding also supports salaries and expenses and other operating 

costs related to FRA staff and programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $185,250,000 for safety and operations, which is $750,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
43 

and equal to the budget request. Of the amount provided under 

this heading, $12,400,000 is available until expended. 

Congestion at international rail crossings.—The Committee understands that there are a number of international rail crossings 

where the switching of train operators has caused unnecessary 

delays and blocked city crossings causing long periods of traffic congestion and delaying freight shipments. The Committee directs 

GAO to conduct an assessment of best practices that can be used 

to reduce rail border crossing times and especially the blockage of 

street crossings on the U.S. side. This review should examine the 

impact of reduced staff changing times, pre-clearance for train operators, and possible changing in train operator location. The Committee directs GAO to provide its findings to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations no later than 180 days after enactment. 

Positive train control.—Section 104 of the Rail Safety Improvement Act required the implementation of positive train control systems on railroads by December 31, 2015. The Committee directs 

FRA to provide a progress report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 180 days of enactment on the status 

of railroad compliance with positive train control requirements included in section 20157 of title 49, United States Code. 

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $35,250,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 35,100,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,250,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +150,000 

The railroad research and development program provides science 

and technology support for FRA’s policy and regulatory efforts. The 

program’s objectives are to reduce the frequency and severity of 

railroad accidents through scientific advancement, and to support 

technological innovations in conventional and high speed railroads. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,250,000 for 

railroad research and development, which is $150,000 above the 

budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes the following allocation 

for FRA’s Railroad Research and Development account: 

Railroad System Issues ................................................................................................................ $3,871,000 

Human Factors .............................................................................................................................. 3,692,000 

Track Program ............................................................................................................................... 11,279,000 

Rolling Stock Program .................................................................................................................. 8,322,000 

Train Control and Communication ............................................................................................... 8,086,000 

In addition, the Committee provides an increase to Human Factors and allows funds to be used to improve safety practices and 

safety training for Class II and Class III freight railroads. The 

Committee understands that FRA will expend $500,000 for this effort in fiscal year 2014. 

Transportation of energy products.—The Committee underscores 

the importance of utilizing a multi-modal approach to the safety 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
44 

oversight of the transportation of energy products. The Committee 

expects FRA to work collaboratively with PHMSA to ensure that 

oversight is comprehensive but not duplicative. The Committee directs FRA to adhere to appropriate direction detailed this Committee report within the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration account. 

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM

The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) 

program was established by Public Law 109–178 to provide direct 

loans and loan guarantees to state and local governments, government-sponsored entities, and railroads. Credit assistance under the 

program may be used for rehabilitating or developing rail equipment and facilities. No federal appropriation is required to implement the program, because a non-federal partner may contribute 

the subsidy amount required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in 

the form of a credit risk premium. 

The Committee maintains bill language specifying that no new 

direct loans or loan guarantee commitments may be made using 

federal funds for the payment of any credit premium amount during fiscal year 2015. Further, to ensure regional diversity, the Committee directs that no state shall receive more than $5,600,000,000 

in direct loans or loan guarantee commitments made during fiscal 

year 2015. This is 20 percent of the $28,000,000,000 available in 

the program, excluding the $7,000,000,000 set aside for short line 

railroad projects. 

RAIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1 $2,325,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥2,325,000,000 1The Administration’s budget requested $2,325,000,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust 

Fund for a new rail service improvement program. 

The FRA budget documents include a new rail service improvement program. The program is a new, unauthorized program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the rail service improvement program in fiscal year 2015. The recommendation is the 

same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted level, and $2,325,000,000 

below the budget request. 

CURRENT PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ..................................................... $– – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................... 1 2,450,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .............................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ............................................ ¥2,450,000,000 1The Administration requested $2,450,000,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust Fund for a 

new rail service improvement program, which includes both capital and operating grants. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
45 

In fiscal year 2015, the FRA budget documents include a new 

Current Passenger Rail Service Program that replaces the National 

Passenger Railroad program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the current passenger rail service program in fiscal year 2015, instead, the Committee provides funds for this purpose under the heading Grants 

to the National Passenger Railroad Program. The recommendation 

is the same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted level, and 

$2,450,000,000 below the budget request. 

GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

(AMTRAK) 

Amtrak operates trains over 20,000 miles of track owned by 

freight railroad carriers, and over about 654 miles of its own track, 

most of which is on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) from Washington, D.C., to Boston, Massachusetts. Amtrak operates both electrified trains, which can achieve speeds of up to 150 mph on the 

highest quality track on the NEC, and diesel locomotives, which 

currently can achieve speeds between 74–110 miles per hour. 

Congressional budget justification.—The Committee appreciates 

the level of detail in the fiscal year 2015 budget justifications and 

directs Amtrak to continue to submit justifications requesting 

funds by lines of business with a similar level of detail in all future 

budget years. 

OPERATING GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER

CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... 1 $340,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2 340,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +340,000,000 1The appropriation allows transfers of up to $40,000,000 from capital grants to the extent that Amtrak operating losses exceed $340,000,000. 2FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested $2,450,000,000 for the Current Passenger Rail account, which includes both operating and capital funds for 

Amtrak, by line of business. According to FRA, the amount it requested for operating grants equates to 

$383,000,000. 3The appropriation allows transfers of up to $20,000,000 from capital grants to the extent that Amtrak operating losses exceed $340,000,000. 

Amtrak runs a deficit each year and requires a federal subsidy 

to cover both operating losses and capital investments. Prior to this 

year, however, it was impossible to discern from Amtrak’s or FRA’s 

budget requests or other publically available data, federal funding 

required to operate Amtrak’s network by line of business. In fact, 

FRA’s requests for operating funds did not break-out requirements 

by business line and consistently exceeded operating losses by onethird. This year, Amtrak presented its budget in a clearer structure, by four lines of business. Amtrak’s budget request details revenues and expenses by each line of business. It is now transparent 

to Congress and American taxpayers where Amtrak is using its 

federal appropriations. 

The Committee looks forward to receiving additional break-outs 

by each Amtrak route and by type of revenue and expenses by 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
46 

route (such as food and beverage) in the near future. Further, the 

Committee encourages the authorizing committee to adopt the lines 

of business structure when it reauthorizes Amtrak. 

Although the Northeast Corridor is profitable, the federally mandated services such as long-distance and state-supported routes 

sustain large losses that cannot be overcome by Amtrak’s profitable 

services. The table below reflects the profitability, or lack thereof, 

of Amtrak’s lines of businesses. In order to sustain operations on 

all lines, Amtrak subsidizes its long distance service with profits 

from its Northeast Corridor operations and also relies on federal 

subsidies. 

AMTRAK’S OPERATING PROFIT/(LOSS) 

BY LINE OF BUSINESS 

FY 2011–FY 2015 

Line of Business FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

(Forecast) 1

FY 2014 

(Forecast) 

FY 2015 

(Forecast) 

Northeast Corridor ................... $255,000,000 $283,000,000 $289,600,000 $286,300,000 $290,000,000 

State Corridors ........................ (148,000,000) (156,000,000) (161,400,000) (88,600,000) (83,000,000) 

Long Distance Routes ............. (554,000,000) (558,000,000) (587,000,000) (614,700,000) (618,000,000) 

National Assets ....................... 1,000,000 69,000,000 100,400,000 77,000,000 79,000,000 

Total Profit/Loss ...................... (446,000,000) (362,000,000) (358,400,000) (340,000,000) (333,000,000) 

1 The fiscal year 2013 figures include Hurricane Sandy impacts, which resulted in operating losses of $50,000,000. 

Source: Amtrak. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $340,000,000 for operating grants 

for Amtrak, which is equal to the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. 

The Committee includes a provision allowing Amtrak to transfer 

up to $20,000,000 in capital funds to the extent that the corporation’s operating losses exceed $340,000,000. 

Food, beverage and first class services.—Amtrak consistently incurs a loss on its food and beverage and first class service. As the 

table below demonstrates, Amtrak’s net loss totaled $387,700,000 

from fiscal years 2010 through fiscal year 2014 (forecast). In fiscal 

year 2014, Amtrak estimates that expenses will exceed revenue by 

$75,800,000, reflecting a cost recovery of only 65 percent. The 

losses do not reflect amounts that Amtrak transfers from sleeperclass and Acela first-class tickets to the food and beverage account, 

reducing the appearance of food and beverage losses. The Amtrak 

OIG reported that these transfers increased by $22,100,000 from 

fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2012. 

AMTRAK’S FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES AND COST RECOVERY

FY 2009–FY 2014 

[In millions of dollars] 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2010– 

FY 2014 

Revenue ................ $109,300,000 $121,500,000 $132,900,000 $134,400,000 138,600,000 $636,700,000 

Expenses ............... 191,700,000 206,000,000 204,900,000 207,400,000 214,400,000 1,024,400,000 

Total Loss ............. (82,400,000) (84,600,000) (72,000,000) (73,000,000) (75,800,000) (387,700,000) 

Cost 

Recovery ........... 57% 59% 65% 65% 65% 61% 

Note: Food and beverage losses reflect an offset from sleeper and Acela first-class service transfers, reducing the appearance of losses. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
47 

Although total revenue has increased, labor costs dwarf these increases. Food and beverage labor costs have increased mainly due 

to wage increases. Under Amtrak’s last negotiated labor agreement 

in 2010, the average fully loaded compensation for the nearly 1,200 

food and beverage employees was $106,600 in fiscal year 2012. 

These employees were guaranteed a 3 percent wage increase in two 

compounded installments per year until 2014. The current labor 

contract expires this summer, but will automatically extend until 

a new contract is signed. 

As the chart below shows, long distance routes accounted for a 

total of 90 percent of food and beverage service losses. The main 

cost driver is on board staffing (labor costs), representing 55 percent of the total direct costs. 

FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES BY ROUTE TYPE

FY 2014 (Forecast) 

Routes 

Revenue Expenses 

Profit/loss Food and 

beverage On-board labor Commissary Total direct costs 

Northeast Corridor ............................. $38,000,000 $25,100,000 $20,900,000 $46,000,000 (7,900,000) 

State-supported ................................. 37,700,000 18,900,000 18,200,000 37,100,000 600,000 

Long-Distance ................................... 62,900,000 74,000,000 57,300,000 131,300,000 (68,400,000) 

Total .................................................. 138,600,000 118,000,000 96,400,000 214,400,000 (75,800,000) 

Recently, Amtrak implemented some efficiency improvements. 

The Corporation signed a new warehouse management contract 

with greater volume discounts and cost control incentives, reduced 

some on-board report times, and established a loss prevention unit. 

The Amtrak OIG, in its report dated October 31, 2013, stated that 

these actions resulted in limited efficiency gains because they were 

applied to the existing food and beverage business model. Further, 

efficiencies were balanced with increased labor costs. 

The Committee is concerned that the taxpayer continues to foot 

the bill for Amtrak’s long-standing unprofitable food, beverage and 

first class service. On October 3, 2013, Amtrak announced that it 

would include a food and beverage performance metric in its 5 year 

financial plan to eliminate losses in five years. 

The Committee directs Amtrak to take actions identified in the 

October 31, 2013 OIG report, including the following: 

Staffing Efficiencies.—Base the food and beverage staffing guidance on actual dining car usage rates, rather than the number of 

and types of cars; require route managers to adjust staffing with 

ridership, demand, and seasonal changes; reduce staff reporting 

times; eliminate the practice of double-counting food stocks by directing the food supply contractor to load trains directly. 

Financial performance.—Develop food and beverage cost and revenue data by train, car and departure date; ensure that the onboard point of sale system can generate relevant business management data. 

Service.—Charge Amtrak employees traveling free for the cost of 

food and beverage services they consume; use available revenue information to monitor onboard staff performance and identify opportunities to increase revenues. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
48 

Inventory Management.—Base the level of food and beverage 

service on ridership and customer demand patterns for individual 

routes; reduce spoilage rates and reduce backordering by clarifying 

backordering policy. 

Amtrak overtime.—The Committee commends Amtrak for making progress in reducing overtime expenses. Overtime expenses decreased from $209,091,000 in calendar year 2010 to $185,559,000 

in calendar year 2013, a reduction of 11 percent. In addition, Amtrak contained the number of employees that exceed $35,000 in 

overtime payments to 1,022 in calendar year 2013. These employees were paid a total of $49,082,000, representing 26 percent of the 

total overtime paid to all employees. 

AMTRAK OVERTIME

CY 2010–CY 2013 

CY 2010 CY 2011 CY 2012 CY 2013 

Total Overtime Wages, all employees .... $209,091,000 $200,781,000 $162,461,000 $185,559,000 

Number of Employees with Overtime Exceeding $35,000 per year ................. 1,288 1,123 703 1,022 

Total Overtime Wages, employees exceeding $35,000 per year ................. Not Available 54,818,000 32,681,000 49,082,000 

To ensure the Corporation continues to make progress managing 

its personnel and focusing on overtime reduction, the Committee 

includes bill language consistent with prior years, directing Amtrak’s president to approve all overtime that exceeds $35,000 for 

employees that exceed $35,000 per year, and provide that information to the Committee. In addition, it requires Amtrak to provide 

documentation associated with the overtime and requires Amtrak’s 

president to certify documentation is accurate and correct. 

Reduced price fares.—The bill continues a provision that prohibits funding on routes where Amtrak is offering 50 percent or 

more off the normal, peak fare. 

CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD

PASSENGER CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,050,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 1 ..................................................... – – – Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 850,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥200,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 1FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested 

$2,450,000,000 for the Current Passenger Rail account, which includes both operating and capital funds for 

Amtrak. According to FRA, the amount it requested for capital equates to $1,288,000,000. Amtrak requested 

Y. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $850,000,000 for capital grants, 

debt service, and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities 

Act. The Committee’s recommendation is $200,000,000 below the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2014. 

Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission.—The Committee recommends up to $5,000,000, equal to 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee directs the 

Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory ComVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
49 

mission to submit its fiscal year 2016 budget request to the Appropriations Committees in similar format and substance as those submitted by other executive agencies of the federal government. 

The Committee includes bill language allowing the Secretary to 

retain up to one-half of one percent for FRA to implement Amtrak 

operating and capital grants as authorized by section 103 of the 

Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA). FRA requires such funds to oversee all federal grants to Amtrak, to ensure 

prudent use of federal funds and to foster transparency. 

Capital planning.—Amtrak OIG’s report dated September 27, 

2013 identified significant weaknesses in Amtrak’s capital planning 

processes. The OIG found that Amtrak has not consistently used 

sound business practices in developing proposals for capital 

projects, nor did it identify how a project would relate to the financial and non-financial goals of the organization. The Committee understands that Amtrak will issue a corporate-wide policy providing 

guidance on developing sound project proposals. This is significant 

since there is a correlation between the use of sound business practices in developing proposals and the outcome of the project. The 

Committee requires Amtrak to conduct a business case analysis on 

rolling stock, track and signaling equipment, and major capital acquisitions. Further, the Committee directs Amtrak to take steps to 

increase transparency regarding capital projects in its budget submissions including providing a list of major projects it proposes to 

fund in priority order. 

Business case analysis on CAF cars.—On August 3, 2010, Amtrak 

executed a contract with CAF USA for 130 baggage, sleeping, and 

dining cars for $298,132,648 that will be deployed on Amtrak’s long 

distance routes. Despite the fact that Amtrak will require federal 

appropriations to pay for this procurement, amounts for these cars 

were not visible in Amtrak’s prior budget request documents. Amtrak representatives admitted that the Corporation did not perform 

a business case or cost benefit analysis before deciding to execute 

this contract, nor did it determine if funds would be better used 

elsewhere. This purchase, which now totals $349,800,000, was justified based solely on the age of the fleet. 

The Committee directed Amtrak to submit a business case analysis that explored the impact of continuing, terminating, or reducing the scope of the contract. Amtrak’s analysis concluded that proceeding with the CAF USA order will generate a positive contribution of approximately $2,500,000 annually, depending on order 

quantities. 

Business case analysis on locomotive purchase.—A September 27, 

2013 Amtrak OIG report noted that Amtrak’s mechanical department proposed a procurement of 20 new electric locomotives with 

2 option orders for 20 additional units each to replace some existing locomotives. Amtrak approved the purchase of 70 locomotives 

without assessing whether 70 locomotives were needed. Without an 

adequate needs assessment, Amtrak did not have assurance that 

purchasing the additional locomotives was a better alternative to 

achieving its goal than using funds for other capital investments. 

The Committee directs Amtrak to submit to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of enactment of this 

Act the following: (1) a determination of how many locomotives it 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
50 

needs, and (2) if it needs fewer than 70 locomotives, perform a 

business case analysis on continuing the contract or reducing the 

contract’s scope. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

Section 150. The Committee retains a provision which allows 

FRA to receive and use cash or spare parts to repair and replace 

damaged automated track inspection cars and equipment in connection with the automated track inspection program. 

Section 151. The Committee continues a provision which authorizes the Secretary to allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem 

or repurchase such stock sold to the Department. 

Section 152. The Committee continues and amends a provision 

that limits overtime to $35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak’s 

president to waive this restriction for specific employees for safety 

or operational efficiency reasons, requires quarterly reporting to 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the number of employees receiving waivers granted and amounts paid to 

those employees, and provide documentation, certified by the president, of the specific activities of each employee during the paid 

overtime that exceeded $35,000 and how the work resulted in increased safety or efficiency. It also requires Amtrak to submit a report by March 1, 2015 summarizing for calendar year 2014, and 

each of the two prior years: (1) all overtime payments incurred by 

the corporation, (2) the number of employees that received waivers 

by department, and (3) the amounts paid to the employees that received waivers by department. 

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) was established as a 

component of the Department of Transportation on July 1, 1968, 

when most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit Act (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) were transferred from 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Known as the 

Urban Mass Transportation Administration until enactment of the 

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Federal Transit Administration administers federal financial assistance programs for planning, developing, and improving comprehensive mass transportation systems in both urban and non-urban 

areas. 

The most recent authorization for the programs under the Federal Transit Administration is contained in the Moving Ahead for 

Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21) (P.L. 112–141). Annual 

Appropriations Acts included annual limitations on obligations for 

the transit formula grants programs, and direct appropriations of 

budget authority from the General Fund of the Treasury for the 

FTA’s administrative expenses, research programs, and capital investment grants. The transit programs authorized under MAP–21 

expire on September 30, 2014. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
51 

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $105,933,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 114,400,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,933,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥11,400,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $103,000,000 for FTA’s administrative expenses, a decrease of $11,400,000 below the budget 

request and $2,933,000 below the 2014 enacted level. Of the funds 

provided, up to $3,000,000 is for authorized safety activities and 

not less than $1,000,000 is for asset management activities. The 

Committee’s recommendation provides these funds from the General Fund, as usual, and rejects the proposal to fund basic salaries 

and expenses from a trust fund. 

Operating plans.—The Committee reiterates its direction from 

previous years which requires the FTA’s operating plan to include 

a specific allocation of administrative expenses resources. The operating plan should include a delineation of full time equivalent employees, for the following offices: Office of the Administrator; Office 

of Administration; Office of Chief Counsel; Office of Communications and Congressional Affairs; Office of Program Management; 

Office of Budget and Policy; Office of Research, Demonstration and 

Innovation; Office of Civil Rights; Office of Planning and Environment; and Regional Offices plus the new safety office. Further, the 

operating plan must include any new programs or changes to the 

budget request, including new grant programs. In addition, the 

Committee directs the FTA to notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations at least thirty days in advance of any 

change that results in an increase or decrease of more than five 

percent from the initial operating plan submitted to the Committees for fiscal year 2015. 

Budget justifications and annual new starts report.—The Committee also continues the direction to FTA to submit future budget 

justifications in a format consistent with the instruction provided 

in House Report 109–153. FTA is free to submit a budget in alternate formats, but must also include the information required by 

the Committee. The Committee has again included bill language 

requiring FTA to submit the annual New Starts report with the 

initial submission of the budget request due in February, 2015. 

Transit security.—The Committee continues bill language prohibiting FTA from creating a permanent office of transit security. The 

Committee’s position remains that the Department of Homeland 

Security is the lead agency on transportation security and has 

overall responsibility among all modes of transportation, including 

rail and transit lines. 

Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).—TEA–21 required that 

the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Banking sixty days before 

executing a full funding grant agreement. In its notification to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the Committee 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
52 

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 2017; (4) a detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and anticipated FFGAs 

against the program authorization; (5) an evaluation of whether 

the alternatives analysis made by the applicant fully assessed all 

viable alternatives; (6) a financial analysis of the project’s cost and 

sponsor’s ability to finance the project, which shall be conducted by 

an independent examiner and which shall include an assessment 

of the capital cost estimate and the finance plan; (7) the source and 

security of all public- and private-sector financial instruments; (8) 

the project’s operating plan, which enumerates the project’s future 

revenue and ridership forecasts; and (9) a listing of all planned contingencies and possible risks associated with the project. 

The Committee continues the direction to FTA to inform the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing thirty 

days before approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any 

full funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to changes 

shall include any budget revisions or program changes that materially alter the project as originally stipulated in the full funding 

grant agreement, including any proposed change in rail car procurements. 

In addition, the Committee directs FTA to continue reporting 

monthly to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on 

the status of each project with a full funding grant agreement or 

that is within two years of a full funding grant agreement. Considering the scale of the proposed projects, the changes to the program 

in MAP–21, and the massive growth in this account, the Committee finds monthly oversight reports particularly useful. 

TRANSIT FORMULA GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of contract 

authorization 

Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................... $9,500,000,000 $8,595,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................... 13,800,000,000 13,800,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................ 9,500,000,000 8,595,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................. ¥4,300,000,000 ¥5,205,000,000 

MAP–21 provided contract authority for the transit formula 

grant programs from the mass transit account of the highway trust 

fund. These programs include: urbanized area formula, state safety 

oversight program, state of good repair grants, formula grants for 

rural areas, growing states and high density states, mobility for 

seniors and persons with disabilities, bus and bus facility formula 

grants, the bus testing facility, planning programs, transit oriented 

development, National Transit Institute, and the National Transit 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
53 

Database. The Appropriations Act sets an annual obligation limitation for such authority. This account is the only FTA account funded from the Highway Trust Fund. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an obligation limitation of 

$8,595,000,000 for the formula programs and activities which is the 

same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. The Committee’s recommendation also includes $9,500,000,000 in liquidating funds. 

Funds are consistent with the final year of MAP–21 and contingent 

on authorization. 

Transit formula allocations.—The Committee continues to have 

significant concerns over the number of localities that are negatively impacted by changes to the transit formula grants program 

funds distribution methodology as contained in MAP–21. Under the 

current formula, the funds for bus replacement, purchase, and rehabilitation are severely reduced from previous years. Some transit 

experts estimate the program-wide loss could be as much as 

$1,000,000,000 when compared to prior surface authorization Acts. 

This reduction is disproportionately impacting transit agencies in 

medium and smaller-sized cities, and in those regions and states 

with older bus fleets. The Committee strongly urges the Department to work with the authorizing committees of jurisdiction when 

crafting the next surface bill to either reinstate the bus and bus facilities program, or create a program similar to the rail state of 

good repair program to help these impacted communities with their 

bus replacement needs. 

The Committee is still awaiting the report requested in H. Report 113–136 regarding the transit formula allocation to medium 

and small cities. The Committee directs FTA to submit the report 

by October 1, 2014. 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... $25,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥25,000,000 

MAP–21 authorized a new program to provide funds to transit 

agencies after disaster events to restore service. Both capital and 

operating costs are eligible. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for this 

new account. The Committee will make funding determinations for 

emergency funds on a case-by-case basis. 

TRANSIT RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $43,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥28,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +15,000,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
54 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to provide funds to the National Academy of Sciences to conduct investigative research on subjects related to public transportation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for transit research, 

$28,000,000 below last year. The 2015 budget proposed $60,000,000 

in one research account instead of the two account structure provided last year and in this bill. 

The Committee requires FTA to report by May 15, 2015, on all 

FTA-sponsored research projects from fiscal year 2014 and 2015 at 

the National Academy of Sciences. 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +3,000,000 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to provide technical assistance to the 

public transportation industry and to develop standards for transit 

service provision, with an emphasis on improving access for all individuals and transportation equity. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for technical assistance 

and training, $2,000,000 below the 2014 level. The 2015 budget 

proposed $60,000,000 in one research account instead of the two account structure provided last year and in this year’s bill. 

The Committee recognizes the continuing need for a strong technical assistance, education, and research program on the mobility 

needs of people with disabilities and older adults. The Committee 

strongly supports ongoing partnerships with organizations that 

have experience and a successful track record in providing technical assistance for these special needs populations. 

Public transportation options for seniors.—The Committee encourages FTA to continue exploring improvements for the transportation options for seniors, including public transportation options 

where available, but also including software programs that leverage unused private transportation capacity to promote transportation for seniors in small and rural communities. Through increased attention to these multiple options for private senior transport, the FTA can improve highway safety and the quality of life 

for seniors nationwide. 

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,942,938,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 2,500,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,691,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥251,938,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥809,000,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
55 

Grants for capital investment to rail or other fixed guideway 

transit systems are awarded to public bodies and agencies (transit 

authorities and other state and local public bodies and agencies 

thereof) including states, municipalities, other political subdivisions 

of states; public agencies and instrumentalities of one or more 

states; and certain public corporations, boards and commissions 

under state law. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,691,000,000 for capital investment grants which is $251,938,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $809,000,000 below the budget request. 

The fiscal year 2015 recommendation provides $1,510,000,000 for 

all current and on-going full funding grant agreements (FFGA) as 

requested in the budget, plus another $25,000,000 for a project (or 

projects) that will be signed under a FFGA by September 30, 2014. 

No funds are provided for new FFGAs that are not under a signed 

grant agreement at the start of fiscal year 2015. In addition, 

$173,000,000 is provided for five new small start projects proposed 

in the budget. 

Further, the Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the core capacity program authorized in MAP–21, provides a total $18,000,000 

(about 1 percent) for oversight activities related to the investments 

of this account, and rescinds $65,000,000 in unobligated prior year 

funds. 

The Committee continues the direction that FTA only further 

projects to a full funding grant agreement if the project requires a 

less than 50 percent new starts share and rates medium high or 

high in the categories related to finance and reducing congestion. 

WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $150,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 150,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 150,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Section 601 of Division B of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–432) authorized $1.5 billion over a ten-year period for preventive maintenance and capital 

grants for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA). The law requires that the federal funds be 

matched dollar-for-dollar by Virginia, Maryland and the District of 

Columbia in equal proportions. The compact required under the 

law has been established and Virginia, Maryland and the District 

of Columbia have all committed to providing $50 million each in 

local matching funds. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes $150,000,000 for preventive maintenance and capital grants for WMATA, which equal 

to the budget request and last year’s enacted level. The Committee 

directs WMATA to continue addressing the safety issues within the 

agency, specifically, those identified by the National Transportation 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
56 

Safety Board (NTSB). Further, the Committee directs WMATA to 

continue with its capital improvement plans and not defer capital 

and safety investments in order to offset operating costs. 

WMATA oversight.—The Federal Transit Administration recently 

released a draft audit report on the financial management oversight (FMO) of WMATA. The draft report identified some material 

weaknesses and significant deficiencies in a number of WMATA’s 

financial and internal management controls. WMATA responded to 

the audit report with a detailed series of corrective actions to address the findings of the FMO review. Once the report has been finalized by the Federal Transit Administration, the Committee directs GAO to conduct a review of WMATA’s progress implementing 

its corrective action plan and to identify additional corrective actions that WMATA may take to address the FMO findings. In addition, the Committee directs GAO to review WMATA’s progress to 

address safety weaknesses identified by the National Transportation Safety Board. The Committee directs GAO to submit a report on its findings to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than 180 days after enactment. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

Section 160. The Committee continues the provision that exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on obligations. 

Section 161. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

funds appropriated for capital investment grants and bus and bus 

facilities not obligated by September 30, 2015, plus other recoveries 

to be available for other projects under 49 U.S.C. 5309. 

Section 162. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

for the transfer of prior year appropriations from older accounts to 

be merged into new accounts with similar, current activities. 

Section 163. The Committee continues the provision that permits 

the Secretary to consider significant private contributions when 

calculating the non-federal share of new starts projects. 

Section 164. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project with a new 

starts share greater than 50 percent. 

Section 165. The Committee includes a provision regarding a certain fixed guideway project in Houston, Texas. 

Section 166. The Committee includes a provision which allows 

unobligated and unexpended section 5339 funds from fiscal years 

2010 through 2012 to be used for new starts activities. 

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $31,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 31,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 32,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +1,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +1,000,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
57 

The Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System, located between Montreal and Lake Erie, is a binational, 15-lock system 

jointly operated by the U.S. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 

Corporation (SLSDC) and its Canadian counterpart, the Canadian 

St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation. The SLSDC was 

established by the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of 1954 and is a wholly owned government corporation and an operating administration 

of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The SLSDC is 

charged with operating and maintaining the U.S. portion of the St. 

Lawrence Seaway. This responsibility includes the two U.S. locks 

in Massena, New York, vessel traffic control in portions of the St. 

Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, and trade development functions to enhance the utilization of the St. Lawrence Seaway. 

The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorized the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund as a source of appropriations for 

SLSDC operations and maintenance. Additionally, the SLSDC generates non-federal revenues which can then be used for operations 

and maintenance. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $32,500,000 

to fund the operations, maintenance, and capital asset renewal 

needs of the SLSDC. This funding level is $1,500,000 higher than 

the fiscal year 2014 appropriation and $1,000,000 above the President’s budget request. The Committee continues the requirement 

that the SLSDC provides semiannual reports consistent with the 

requirements stated in the Explanatory Statement of the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2009. 

Economic and trade development.—The Committee includes an 

additional $1,000,000 to support the economic and trade development mission of the SLSDC. 

MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is responsible for programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime industry in support of the 

Nation’s security and economic needs, as authorized by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936. MARAD’s mission is to promote the development and maintenance of an adequate, well-balanced United 

States merchant marine, sufficient to carry the Nation’s domestic 

waterborne commerce and a substantial portion of its waterborne 

foreign commerce, and capable of serving as a naval and military 

auxiliary in time of war or national emergency. MARAD, working 

with the Department of Defense (DoD), helps provide a seamless, 

time-phased transition from peacetime to wartime operations, 

while balancing the defense and commercial elements of the maritime transportation system. MARAD also manages the maritime 

security program, the voluntary intermodal sealift agreement program and the ready reserve force, which assures DoD access to 

commercial and strategic sealift and associated intermodal capability. Further, MARAD’s education and training programs through 

the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and six state maritime academies help create skilled U.S. merchant marine officers. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
58 

MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $186,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 211,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 166,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥20,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥45,000,000 

The purpose of the Maritime Security Program (MSP) is to maintain and preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet to serve the national 

security needs of the United States. The MSP provides direct payments to U.S. flagship operators engaged in U.S.-foreign trade. 

Participating operators are required to keep the vessels in active 

commercial service and are required to provide intermodal sealift 

support to the Department of Defense in times of war or national 

emergency. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $166,000,000 for this account, 

$20,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 funding level and 

$45,000,000 below the request. The Committee’s recommendation is 

equal to the allocation provided for the Defense 050 function activities in this bill. Funds are available until expended. 

This recommendation provides funding directly to MARAD and 

assumes that MARAD will continue to administer the program 

with support and consultation from the Department of Defense. 

Should MARAD determine a smaller roster of ships is called for in 

2015, the Committee directs the Secretary to give priority to ships 

owned by U.S.-based companies that meet the Department of Defense requirements. The budget documents represent the program 

exceeds DOD capacity requirements and program goals. 

The Committee does not provide $25,000,000 requested for new 

payments to shippers as the Congress has not adopted changes to 

the food aid program. 

OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $148,003,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 148,400,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 132,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥16,003,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥16,400,000 

The operations and training account provides funding for headquarters and field offices to administer and direct MARAD operations and programs. The account also provides funding for the operation of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and financial assistance to the six state maritime academies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $132,000,000 for MARAD operations 

and training expenses, $16,003,000 less than the fiscal year 2014 

funding level and $16,400,000 below the fiscal year 2015 budget request. 

MARAD operations.—Of the funds provided, $49,000,000 is for 

headquarters and regional office operations, and maritime program 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
59 

expenses. The Committee notes improvement in the budget documents, and hopefully the improvement will continue. The Committee continues the reporting requirement that MARAD submit 

information on the number of vacancies at MARAD headquarters 

and regional offices, and the duties associated with each vacancy 

concurrent with the fiscal year 2016 budget submission. 

United States Merchant Marine Academy.—The U.S. Merchant 

Marine Academy (the Academy or USMMA) provides educational 

programs for men and women to become shipboard officers and 

leaders in the maritime industry. The Committee continues to include language requiring all funding for the Academy go directly to 

the Secretary, and that 50 percent of the funding will not be available until MARAD submits a plan detailing how the funding will 

be spent. The Committee’s funding recommendation includes a 

total of $65,700,000 in fiscal year 2015 for the USMMA, of which 

up to $64,200,000 is for Academy operations and not less than 

$1,500,000 is for capital improvements. The committee’s recommendation does not include $13,000,000 requested for Bowditch 

Hall renovation. The Committee recommends this reduction without prejudice. 

The Committee urges MARAD to support the USMMA Board of 

Visitors, including the annual visit required in section 51312 of 

title 46, United States Code. 

State maritime academies.—The Committee recommends 

$17,300,000 for the state maritime academies. Of the funds provided, $3,600,000 is for direct payments, $2,400,000 is for student 

payments, and $11,300,000 is for schoolship maintenance and repair. 

Schoolships.—Looking at the schoolship inventory, it appears 

many, if not most of the training ships at the various maritime 

academies are nearing the end of their useful life. Schoolships are 

vital to a quality maritime education. The Committee directs 

MARAD to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 180 days after enactment of this Act on the opportunities 

and efficiencies of a common schoolship design for all maritime 

academies under MARAD, and the costs associated with design and 

construction. The Committee encourages MARAD to include funds 

in the 2016 budget request for design costs. 

Ready reserve force transfer.—Should the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations provide for a transfer of 

their Ready Reserve Force funds to MARAD, MARAD is approved 

to administer the funds as requested. 

SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $4,800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 4,800,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥800,000 

MARAD serves as the federal government’s disposal agent for 

government-owned merchant vessels weighing 1,500 gross tons or 

more. The ship disposal program provides resources to dispose of 

obsolete merchant-type vessels in the National Defense Reserve 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
60 

Fleet (NDRF). The Maritime Administration was required by Public Law 106–398 to dispose of its obsolete inventory by the end of 

2006. These vessels pose a significant environmental threat due to 

the presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid 

and liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). As reported in the fiscal year 2015 budget documents, MARAD currently has custody of 

approximately 25 obsolete vessels that are not yet under contract 

for disposal. By the end of 2014, MARAD anticipates an inventory 

of 20 obsolete ships located at: the James River Reserve Fleet site 

in Virginia (9 ships), and the Suisun Bay Reserve Fleet (SBRF) site 

in California (5 ships), and the Beaumont Reserve Fleet site in 

Texas (2 ships—3 less than the prior year), plus 4 decommissioned 

Navy Vessels located in Hawaii and Pennsylvania. MARAD anticipates removing another 8 ships from the SBRF during fiscal year 

2014, with only 5 vessels remaining for disposal beyond 2015. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for this account, 

$800,000 below the fiscal year 2014 funding level and the budget 

request. Funds are available until expended. The fiscal year 2015 

proposed funding level reflects the Committee’s confidence that 

MARAD can continue moving a significant number of ships out of 

the NDRF by sales rather than by contract. Considering MARAD 

has routinely exceeded its own performance goals for ship disposal, 

this funding level should be sufficient to still meet the long term 

goals of the program. 

MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI PROGRAM)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER AND RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $3,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 3,100,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,100,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, as provided for by 

Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, provides for guaranteed loans for purchasers of ships from the U.S. shipbuilding industry and for modernization of U.S. shipyards. Funds for administrative expenses for the Title XI program are appropriated to this account, and then paid to operations and training to be obligated and 

expended. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of $3,100,000 for 

the Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program, which is 

$400,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Further, 

the Committee recommends rescinding $29,000,000 in unobligated 

funds provided in fiscal year 2014. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Section 170. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
61 

make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD and rental payments 

shall be paid into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. 

Section 171. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

MARAD ship disposal. 

PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) administers nationwide safety programs designed to protect the public and the environment from risks inherent to the commercial transportation of hazardous materials by pipeline, air, rail, 

vessel, and highway. Many of these materials are essential to the 

national economy. The agency’s highest priority is safety, and it 

uses safety management principles and security assessments to 

promote the safe transport of hazardous materials and the security 

of the nation’s pipelines. 

OPERATIONAL EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $21,654,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 22,225,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,654,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥571,000 

This appropriation finances the operational support costs for 

PHMSA, including agency-wide functions of administration, management, policy development, legal counsel, budget, financial management, civil rights, human resources, acquisition services, information technology, and governmental and public affairs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $21,654,000 for PHMSA operational 

expenses. This is the same as fiscal year 2014, and $571,000 below 

the budget request. The Committee includes bill language directing 

PHMSA to transfer $1,500,000 to the pipeline safety program to 

fund the pipeline information grants to communities. 

Transportation of energy products.—The transportation of domestically produced energy products, including ethanol and crude oil, 

has grown dramatically in the last few years. The Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA) estimates that the volume of crude oil transported by rail increased from 65,600 carloads in 2011 to more than 

255,000 carloads in 2012, an increase of nearly 300 percent. The 

Committee is greatly concerned about recent train accidents that 

have resulted in releases of crude oil and ethanol, forced evacuations, millions of dollars in damage, and, in the case of the Lac 

Me ́gantic, Quebec incident, massive fires and the loss of 47 lives. 

With the expected increases in domestic production of crude oil and 

other energy-related products, a multi-faceted and comprehensive 

approach is necessary to ensure the safe and efficient transport of 

these products. Specifically, DOT should consider the following activities: improving the design of tank cars, developing emergency 

response plans; promoting first responder training, and estabVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
62 

lishing adequate oversight of railroad, pipeline, and shipper operations. 

The Committee is concerned that PHMSA only requires comprehensive response plans for oil shipments larger than 42,000 gallons per tanker. Most tankers used to transport crude oil typically 

hold close to 34,000 gallons but are transported in unit train configurations that dramatically exceed the 42,000 gallon threshold. 

The Committee directs PHSMA to review the spill response planning thresholds contained in 49 C.F.R. Part 130 and to update 

those thresholds as necessary to ensure carriers have the ability to 

respond to worst-case discharges resulting from accidents involving 

both unit trains and blocks of tank cars transporting oil and petroleum products. In addition, the Committee directs PHMSA to update the Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness curriculum 

guidelines to include training protocols unique to crude oil and ethanol incident response. 

The Committee expects DOT to take a systemic approach in its 

oversight to reduce the risks associated with the transport of crude 

oil and other energy-related materials. The Committee recommendation includes increases for PHMSA’s hazardous materials 

program to support research and development activities on emerging oil and gas transportation safetyissues and to increase training 

and outreach activities to improveincident response. The recommendation also includes increases for pipeline safety to support 

additional inspection, oversight and enforcement activities, and to 

increase training and outreach on accident investigation and response. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $45,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 52,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 52,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The hazardous materials safety program advances the safe and 

secure transport of hazardous materials (hazmat) in commerce by 

air, truck, railroad and vessel. PHMSA evaluates hazmat safety 

risks, develops and enforces regulations for transporting hazmat, 

educates shippers and carriers, investigates hazmat incidents and 

failures, conducts research, and provides grants to improve emergency response to transportation incidents involving hazmat. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $52,000,000, the same as the request and $7,000,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level, to 

fund the agency’s existing hazardous materials safety program and 

to provide increases requested for research, training, and outreach 

related to emerging oil and gas transportation safety. The Committee recommends $7,000,000 of the total to remain available for 

three years for long-term research and development contracts. 

Special permits and approvals fee proposal.—The Committee 

does not include the request for new special permits and approvals 

fees. Additional fees within this account should be considered in 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
63 

the context of authorizing legislation originating in the committees 

of jurisdiction. 

Tank car design.—The Committee urges PHMSA to work expeditiously to finalize a rule improving safety standards for rail cars 

carrying crude no later than September 30, 2014. The National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has identified a number of 

vulnerabilities in DOT–111 tank cars and has recommended immediate action to improve puncture resistance, thermal resistance, 

and overall integrity. Due to several derailments involving crude 

oil and ethanol, the Committee is concerned about the timeline for 

the rulemaking on the DOT–111 tank car fleet and directs PHMSA 

to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

on a timeline for publication of a final rule within 30 days of enactment. 

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

(PIPELINE SAFETY DESIGN REVIEW FUND)

(Pipeline safety 

fund) 

(Oil spill liability 

trust fund) 

(Design review 

fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................. $98,514,000 $18,573,000 $2,000,000 $119,087,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .......................... 136,500,000 19,500,000 2,000,000 158,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ...................................... 110,000,000 19,500,000 2,000,000 131,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................... +11,486,000 +927,000 – – – +12,413,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................. ¥26,500,000 – – – – – – ¥26,500,000 

PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage prevention, education and training, development and enforcement of regulations 

and policies, research and development, grants for state pipeline 

safety programs, and emergency planning and response to accidents. The pipeline safety program is responsible for a national 

regulatory program to protect the public against the risks to life 

and property in the transportation of natural gas, petroleum, and 

other hazardous materials by pipeline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $131,500,000 to continue pipeline 

safety operations, research and development, and state grants-inaid, which is $12,413,000 above fiscal year 2014 and $26,500,000 

below the budget request. Of the total, $19,500,000 is from the Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund, $110,000,000 is from the Pipeline Safety 

Fund, and $2,000,000 is from the Pipeline Safety Design Review 

Fund. 

The Committee recommends $1,058,000 of the funds provided to 

be used for the one-call state grant program. The Committee recommends $54,436,000 of the funds provided to remain available 

until September 30, 2017. 

The Committee recommendation provides increases adequate to 

support the additional resources requested for the emergency and 

preparedness information for communities program, the onshore faVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
64 

cilities response plan initiatives, and FTE increases for safety 

training, standards and rulemaking activities, accident investigations, human resources, and inspection and enforcement. Funding 

increases requested for state grants, grants management, and an 

expansion of IT modernization activities are not provided. PHMSA 

shall deliver a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 120 days of enactment that details staffing and 

hiring plans for fiscal year 2015 as well as actual turnover and hiring in fiscal year 2014. 

Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund.—The Committee allows 

$2,000,000 in budgetary resources to be derived from fees collected 

by the Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund as authorized. If no 

qualifying projects are, initiated in fiscal year 2015, then no fees 

will be collected and these funds will not be expended. 

Pipeline emergencies training.—Given the aging U.S. pipeline infrastructure and its vulnerability to emergency events, the Committee reiterates the need to ensure that individuals charged with 

responding to pipeline and pipeline-related emergencies are properly trained. The Committee directs PHMSA to leverage some portion of the increases provided for fiscal year 2015 to take a more 

proactive role in promoting pipeline emergency response training 

and outreach to state and local first responders. The Committee 

further directs PHMSA to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment with an assessment of pipeline emergency training and preparedness including 

identification of where improvements can be made. 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

(Emergency preparedness fund) 

(Emergency preparedness grants 

program) 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ........................................................................................... ($188,000) ($28,318,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................................................... (188,000) (28,318,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... (188,000) (28,318,000) 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................. – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .............................................................................. – – – – – – 

The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 

1990 (Public Law 101–615) requires PHMSA to: (1) develop and implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grant program; 

(2) monitor public sector emergency response training and planning 

and provide technical assistance to states, political subdivisions 

and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update periodically a mandatory training curriculum for emergency responders. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $28,318,000 for the emergency preparedness grants program, which is the same as fiscal year 2014 

and the budget request. These amounts reflect the maximum authorized funding levels. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
65 

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 2014 ......................................................... $85,605,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 86,223,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 86,223,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +618,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $86,223,000 for the Office of Inspector General, which is $618,000 above the fiscal year 

2014 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee continues to highly value the work of the IG in oversight of 

departmental programs and activities. 

Unfair business practices.—The bill maintains language first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the OIG to investigate 

allegations of fraud and unfair or deceptive practices and unfair 

methods of competition by air carriers and ticket agents. 

Audit reports.—The Committee requests the IG to continue forwarding copies of all audit reports to the Committee immediately 

after they are issued, and to continue to make the Committee 

aware immediately of any review that recommends cancellation or 

modifications to any major acquisition project or grant, or which 

recommends significant budgetary savings. The OIG is also directed to withhold from public distribution for a period of 15 days 

any final audit or investigative report which was requested by the 

House or Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Oversight of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority.— 

The Committee has continuing concerns about the lack of oversight 

of the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority (MWAA). A recent investigation by the DOT Inspector General (IG) found a number of cases of questionable sole source contracting practices, a lack 

of ethical disclosure requirements for board members, and an overall lack of accountability and transparency. In order to improve the 

oversight of MWAA, the Committee recommendation includes a 

new provision that provides the DOT IG with oversight responsibilities for MWAA, and requires that MWAA reimburse the DOT IG 

for this new responsibility. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
66 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $31,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 31,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 31,250,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +250,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥250,000 

The Surface Transportation Board (STB) was created in the 

Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 and is 

the successor agency to the Interstate Commerce Commission. The 

STB is an economic regulatory and adjudicatory body charged by 

Congress with resolving railroad rate and service disputes and reviewing proposed railroad mergers. The STB is decisionally independent, although it is administratively affiliated with the Department of Transportation. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–432, (PRIIA), included new responsibilities for the STB. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,250,000 for 

fiscal year 2015, which is $250,000 more than the fiscal year 2014 

enacted level and 250,000 less than the request. The STB is estimated to collect $1,250,000 in fees which will offset the appropriation for a total program cost of $30,000,000. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Section 180. The Committee continues the provision allowing the 

Department of Transportation (DOT) to use funds for aircraft; 

motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances, as authorized by law. 

Section 181. The Committee continues the provision limiting appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for 

an Executive Level IV. 

Section 182. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this act for salaries and expenses of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees in the DOT and prohibits political 

and Presidential personnel from being assigned on temporary detail outside the DOT. 

Section 183. 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 184. 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. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
67 

Section 185. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used to make a loan, loan guarantee, line of credit, or grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 

three full business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement is announced by the 

Department or its modal administrations, and directs the Secretary 

to give concurrent notification for any ‘‘quick release’’ of funds from 

the Federal Highway Administration’s emergency relief program. 

Section 186. The Committee continues a provision allowing funds 

received from rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be credited 

to appropriations of the DOT. 

Section 187. The Committee continues a provision allowing 

amounts from improper payments to a third party contractor that 

are lawfully recovered by the DOT to be available to cover expenses 

incurred in the recovery of such payments. 

Section 188. The Committee mandates that reprogramming actions are to be approved or denied solely by the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 189. The Committee caps the amount of fees the Surface 

Transportation Board can charge and collect for rate complaints 

filed at the amount authorized for court civil suit filing fees. 

Section 190. The Committee includes a provision allowing funds 

to the modal administrations to be obligated to the Office of the 

Secretary for the costs related to assessments or reimbursable 

agreements only when such amounts are for the costs of goods and 

services that are purchased to provide a direct benefit to the applicable modal administration or administration. 

Section 191. The Committee includes a provision regarding agency transit benefits. 

Section 192. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds for the Surface Transportation Board to take action on a 

high speed rail project in California unless the Board has jurisdiction over the entire project and considers the project in its entirety. 

Section 193. The Committee includes a provision which limits 

Federal credit awarded to any individual state. 

Section 194. The Committee includes a provision that limits 

funding from being used to deny a hazardous material safety program permit. 

Section 195. The Committee includes a new provision which allows $710,477 in unexpended funds from fiscal year 2005 to increase the safety oversight of rail routes that carry energy products 

and provides $10,000,000 to make grade crossing improvements on 

rail routes that carry energy products. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(68) 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Management and Administration accounts provide operating support to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s 

(HUD) Executive Offices, Administrative Support Offices, and Program Office Salaries and Expenses. Funding under these accounts 

supports the salaries and expenses of nearly all HUD employees as 

well as certain non-personnel expenses critical to carrying out 

HUD’s mission. The Committee supports the Department’s efforts 

to transform the way it does business and encourages the Department to continue efforts to streamline operations while making targeted technology and human capital investments. 

Budgetary resource levels.—HUD must have systems in place to 

track fundamental budgetary resource data including budget authority and FTE levels. A lack of essential information at HUD has 

in the past led to Anti-Deficiency Act violations in which HUD 

hired more people than it had resources to pay. While the Committee recognizes deficiencies caused by antiquated enterprise systems and acknowledges HUD’s efforts to address these deficiencies, 

proper management of agency resources is a fundamental responsibility and antiquated systems are no excuse for violations of Federal law. The Committee directs HUD to continue working toward 

improving its ability to manage and track budgetary resource data. 

The Committee also directs HUD to clearly identify in its budget 

justifications the movement or transfer of budgetary resources from 

one account, program, project, or activity to another account, program, project, or activity so that year-over-year comparisons are 

possible. Any programs, projects, or activities that are newly requested shall also be clearly identified as program increases and 

any other increases should be clearly identified as adjustments to 

baseline spending. 

Reorganizations.—The Committee includes language to make 

clear that any office, program, or activity reorganizations require 

advance approval from the Committee prior to the Department taking steps to implement reorganizations including any negotiations 

with affected employees or their representatives. Unless otherwise 

identified in the bill or report, any reorganization proposed by the 

budget and clearly presented in the budget justifications is approved. Additionally, the Committee requires notice on a monthly 

basis of all ongoing litigation, including any negotiations or discussions, planned or ongoing, regarding a consent decree between the 

Department and any other entity, including the estimated costs of 

such decrees. 

New initiatives.—The Committee reiterates that the Department 

must limit the reprogramming of funds between the programs, 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
69 

projects, and activities within each account and that no changes 

may be made to any program, project, or activity without prior approval of the Committees on Appropriations. Unless otherwise 

identified in the bill or report, the most detailed allocation of budgetary resources presented in the budget justifications is approved. 

Any deviation from such approved allocation is subject to reprogramming requirements. All carryover funds, including recaptures and de-obligations, are also subject to reprogramming requirements. 

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $14,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 15,234,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 14,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,234,000 

The Executive Offices account funds the salaries and expenses of 

the Immediate Office of the Secretary, the Immediate Office of the 

Deputy Secretary, the Office of Adjudicatory Services, the Office of 

Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, the Office of Public Affairs, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, and the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. 

The Immediate Office of the Secretary provides program and policy guidance, and operations management and oversight in administering all programs, functions and authorities of the Department. 

The Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary provides operations management and helps the Department achieve its strategic 

goals by providing management support to program offices under 

the direction of the Office of the Secretary. 

The Office of Adjudicatory Services conducts hearings and makes 

determinations regarding formal complaints or adverse actions initiated by HUD based upon alleged violations of federal statutes 

and implementing regulations. 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and 

Intergovernmental Relations is responsible for coordinating Congressional and intergovernmental relations activities involving program offices to ensure the effective and accurate presentation of 

the Department’s views. 

The Office of Public Affairs educates the American people about 

the Department’s mission through media outreach and other communication tools such as press releases, press conferences, the 

Internet, media interviews, social networking and community outreach. 

The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization provides small business program design and outreach to the business 

community and serves as the central referral point for small business regulatory compliance information. 

The Center for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships conducts outreach, recommends changes to HUD policies and programs that present barriers to grassroots organizations, and initiates special projects, such as grant writing training. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
70 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $14,000,000 which is $500,000 

below fiscal year 2014 enacted and $1,234,000 below the budget request. The bill provides that no more than $25,000 provided under the 

immediate Office of the Secretary shall be available for the official 

reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may determine. The Department is directed to find efficiencies adequate to 

reduce travel and contracting expenses within this account by at 

least 10 percent. 

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OFFICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $506,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 530,783,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥30,783,000 

The Administrative Support Offices account funds the salaries 

and expenses of the Office of Administration, the Office of the Chief 

Human Capital Officer, the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, the Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, the Office of Field Policy and Management, the Office of 

Strategic Planning and Management, and the Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

The Office of Administration provides general operational support services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. These 

services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure 

in the following areas: nationwide management and operation of 

buildings, Freedom of Information Act processing, records management, Privacy Act administration, protective and physical security 

for HUD’s Secretary and Deputy Secretary, and disaster and emergency response coordination. 

The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer provides human 

resource services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. 

These services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure in the following areas: strategic human capital management, enterprise level training and learning, recruitment and staffing, workforce planning, retention, engagement, succession planning and Departmental performance management. 

The Office of Field Policy and Management serves as the principal advisor providing oversight and communicating Secretarial 

priorities and policies to field office staff and HUD clients. The Regional and Field Office Directors act as the operational managers 

in each of the field offices and manage and coordinate cross-program delivery in the field. 

The Office of the Chief Procurement Officer’s mission is to provide high-quality acquisition support services to all HUD program 

offices by purchasing necessary operational and mission-related 

goods and services; provide advice, guidance and technical assistance to all departmental offices on matters concerning procurement; assist program offices in defining and specifying their procurement needs; develop and maintain all procurement guidance 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
71 

including regulations, policies, and procedures; and assist in the 

development of sound acquisition strategies. 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) provides leadership in instituting financial integrity, fiscal responsibility and accountability. The OCFO is responsible for all aspects of financial 

management, accounting and budgetary matters; ensuring the Department establishes and meets financial management goals and 

objectives; ensuring the Department is in compliance with financial 

management legislation and directives; analyzing budgetary implications of policy and legislative proposals; and providing technical 

oversight with respect to all budget activities throughout the Department. 

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is led by the 

Chief Information Officer (CIO) who reports to the Office of the 

Secretary/Deputy Secretary. HUD’s CIO advises senior managers 

on the strategic use of information technology to support core business processes and to achieve mission critical goals. OCIO is responsible for providing modern information technology that is secure, accessible and cost effective while ensuring compliance with 

applicable regulatory requirements. 

The Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is the legal adviser to 

the Secretary and other principal staff of the Department. It is the 

responsibility of OGC to provide legal opinions, advice and services 

with respect to all programs and activities, and to provide counsel 

and assistance in the development of the Department’s programs 

and policies. 

The mission of the Office of Departmental Equal Employment 

Opportunity is to ensure the enforcement of Federal laws relating 

to the elimination of all forms of discrimination in the Department’s employment practices. The mission is carried out through 

the functions of three divisions: the affirmative employment division, the alternative dispute resolution division, and the equal employment opportunity division. 

The Office of Strategic Planning and Management drives organizational, programmatic, and operational change across the Department to maximize efficiency and performance. The office will facilitate HUD’s strategic planning process by identifying the Department’s strategic priorities and transformational change initiatives, 

create and manage work plans for targeted transformation projects, 

and develop key program performance measures and targets for 

monitoring. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $500,000,000 for this account, which 

is $6,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 enacted and $30,783,000 below 

the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation reflects reduced funding for 

non-personnel expenses and the expectation that HUD will find 

ways to lower contracting and travel expenses by at least 10 percent in 2015. The Committee recommendation provides no funding 

for non-personnel expenses requested for the ‘‘Broadcasting’’ function and expects the Department to fund media and video contract 

expenses through offsetting efficiencies in funds requested elsewhere for travel, training, and public affairs. The recommendation 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
72 

also reflects the transfer of resources previously requested under 

the Information Technology Fund. 

Funding shall be distributed as follows: 

Office Total Funding 

Office of Administration ....................................................................................................................................... $194,000,000 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................................................................................... 45,000,000 

Office of the General Counsel .............................................................................................................................. 93,000,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer .......................................................................................................... 52,000,000 

Office of Field Policy and Management ............................................................................................................... 49,000,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer .............................................................................................................. 16,000,000 

Office of the Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity ............................................................................... 2,500,000 

Office Strategic Planning and Management ....................................................................................................... 3,500,000 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ................................................................................................................ 45,000,000 

PROGRAM OFFICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $205,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 213,664,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 200,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥13,664,000 

The Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) oversees the administration of HUD’s Public Housing, Housing Choice Voucher, 

and Native American Programs. PIH is responsible for administering and managing programs authorized and funded by Congress under the basic provisions of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for this account, which 

is $5,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014, and 

$13,664,000 below the fiscal year 2015 budget request. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $102,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 110,535,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥10,535,000 

The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) assists communities in their efforts to provide affordable housing and 

expanded economic opportunities for low and moderate-income persons. The primary means toward this end is the development of 

partnerships among all levels of government and the private sector. 

This Office is responsible for the effective administration of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), the Home Investment 

Partnership (HOME), Homeless Assistance Grants and other HUD 

community development programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for this account, which 

is $2,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014, and 

$10,535,000 below the budget request. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
73 

Regulatory compliance oversight and voluntary compliance agreements.—The Committee expects the Department to follow requirements as specified in the Code of Federal Regulation with respect 

to the implementation and enforcement of voluntary compliance 

agreements including agreements related to compliance with Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968. Further, CPD is directed to be the lead office responsible for regulatory 

compliance determinations related to funds that it administers including the community development block grant program. HUD 

shall not establish requirements or require compliance agreements 

in a manner that is inconsistent with federal regulations. 

HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $381,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 386,677,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 370,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥11,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥16,677,000 

The Office of Housing implements programmatic, regulatory, financial, and operational responsibilities under the leadership of six 

deputy assistant secretaries and the field staff for activities related 

to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) multifamily and single 

family homeownership programs, and assisted rental housing programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $370,000,000 for this account, which 

is $11,500,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014, and 

$16,677,000 below the budget request. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $22,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 23,248,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥3,248,000 

The Office of Policy Development and Research directs the Department’s annual research agenda to support the research and 

evaluation of housing and other departmental initiatives to improve HUD’s effectiveness and operational efficiencies. Research 

proposals are determined through consultation with senior staff 

from each HUD program office, the Office of Management and 

Budget, and Congress. The office also addresses inquiries regarding 

key housing and economic information. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for this account, which 

is $2,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014 and 

$3,248,000 below the budget request. The Department is directed 

to provide any data requested by the Committees on Appropriations within seven days of the request. Failure to respond promptly 

to Congressional inquiry undermines the Committee’s ability to 

oversee and support funding for these activities. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
74 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $68,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 77,629,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 68,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥9,629,000 

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) is responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for providing 

technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and the 

civil rights statutes. FHEO serves as the central point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information related to fair housing 

issues. FHEO receives, investigates, conciliates and recommends 

the issuance of charges of discrimination and determinations of 

non-compliance for complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil 

rights authorities. Additionally, FHEO conducts civil rights compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $68,000,000 for this account, which 

is $1,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014 and 

$9,629,000 below the budget request. 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 7,879,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥879,000 

The Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control 

(OHHLHC) is directly responsible for the administration of the 

Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction program authorized by Title X 

of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The office also addresses multiple housing-related hazards affecting the 

health of residents, particularly children. The office develops leadbased paint regulations, guidelines, and policies applicable to HUD 

programs, and enforces the Lead Disclosure Rule issued under 

Title X. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for this account, which is 

the same as fiscal year 2014 and $879,000 below the budget request. 

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $19,177,218,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 20,045,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 19,356,529,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +179,311,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥688,471,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
75 

In fiscal year 2005, the Housing Certificate Fund was separated 

into two new accounts: Tenant-Based Rental Assistance and 

Project-Based Rental Assistance. This account administers the tenant-based Section 8 rental assistance program otherwise known as 

the Housing Choice Voucher program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $19,356,529,000 for tenant-based 

rental assistance, which is $179,311,000 above the fiscal year 2014 

enacted level and $688,471,000 below the budget request. Consistent with the budget request, the Committee continues the advance of $4,000,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading for Section 8 programs to October 1, 2015. 

Voucher renewals.—The Committee provides $17,693,079,000 for the renewal of tenant-based vouchers. This level is $327,552,000 

above the enacted level and $313,471,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee directs the Department to monitor and report to 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter 

on the trends in Section 8 subsidies and to report on the required 

program alterations due to changes in rent or changes in tenant income. 

Tenant protection.—The Committee provides $130,000,000 for 

tenant protection vouchers, which is the same as the fiscal year 

2014 enacted level and $20,000,000 below the budget request. 

Administrative fees.—The Committee provides $1,350,000,000 for 

allocations to Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) to conduct activities associated with placing and maintaining individuals under Section 8 assistance. This amount is $150,000,000 below the fiscal 

year 2014 enacted level and $355,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs HUD to evaluate the effect of voucher portability on administrative costs to PHAs experiencing a large 

number of vouchers that are ported in from other jurisdictions. The 

Secretary is directed to report to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations and the authorizing committees of jurisdiction 

on the findings, and possible remedies to address any inequities in 

the administrative fee formula, 180 days after enactment of this 

Act. 

Mainstream voucher renewals.—The Committee provides $108,450,000 to renew expiring Section 811 tenant-based subsidies. 

This level is $1,759,000 above the fiscal year and equal to the 

budget request. The Committee directs HUD to issue guidance to 

the housing agencies administering these vouchers to continue to 

serve people with disabilities upon turnover. 

Veterans affairs supportive housing.—The Committee provides $75,000,000 for incremental voucher assistance through the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) program. This funding 

level is equal to the budget request and the same as the level provided in fiscal year 2012. This program is administered in conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs. These vouchers shall 

remain available for homeless veterans upon turnover. This funding will add 10,000 new vouchers for this program, and will support the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) goal of ending homelessness among veterans within five years. The Committee directs 

HUD to report on VASH utilization rates, challenges encountered 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
76 

in the program, and increases in veteran self-sufficiency by March 

1, 2015. 

The Committee continues in bill language the direction to the 

Department to communicate to each PHA, within 60 days of enactment, the fixed amount that will be made available to each PHA 

for fiscal year 2015. The amount provided in this account is the 

only source of federal funds that may be used to renew tenantbased vouchers. The amounts appropriated here may not be augmented from any other source. 

Section 8 reforms.—The budget request includes a number of authorizing provisions to reform the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) 

program, including provisions that result in cost-saving measures 

that provide administrative relief to PHAs. HUD has also committed to submitting a more comprehensive Section 8 reform proposal to Congress in the spring of 2014. The Committee is fully 

supportive of any reforms that relieve administrative burdens and 

enable housing authorities to serve more families and lead to greater self-sufficiency. The Committee strongly urges the authorizing 

committee to address reforms of the HCV program expeditiously, as 

a failure to reform this program could result in significant reductions to the number of leased vouchers and deep cuts to other HUD 

programs, especially considering the current fiscal environment. 

The Committee urges the administration to continue to work with 

the authorizing committees on a reform bill, with the goal of enactment prior to the beginning of fiscal year 2015 so that the amounts 

provided in this bill more efficiently and effectively serve individuals and families in need of housing assistance. The Committee 

also strongly encourages HUD to pursue regulatory and administrative reforms that do not require new authorizations, but that relieve the administrative burdens on PHAs. 

PHA consortia.—The Committee encourages the Department to 

reduce administrative burdens for public housing agencies. The 

Committee notes language in Division L the Fiscal Year 2014 Omnibus Appropriations Act, adding a consortium of PHAs to the definition of a PHA. The Committee urges the Department to complete 

the necessary changes to its internal systems and relevant regulations to allow consortia to fully consolidate their reporting requirements. 

Enhanced vouchers.—The Committee is concerned about reported 

accounts of local Housing Authorities issuing vouchers in excess of 

levels stipulated in Department regulations. HUD regulations provide that the local housing authority has the authority to issue 

vouchers up to 110 percent of the published Fair Market Rent with 

the HUD filed office having the authority to approve up to 120 percent. The Committee has received reports of the issuance of vouchers far in excess of those amounts. Such vouchers divert scarce resources to fewer recipients and generate benefits for only a selected 

few. Issuance of such vouchers depletes limited funds that could 

otherwise be used to fill the shortfall in voucher recipients or make 

improvements to rental properties themselves. The Committee directs the Secretary to review such instances and work with local 

housing authorities to limit voucher value issuance to the levels 

stipulated in Department regulations. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
77 

Public Housing Assessment System.—The Committee urges HUD 

to study potential changes to the Public Housing Assessment System for PHAs that operate 550 or fewer public housing units and 

Housing Choice Vouchers combined by taking into consideration 

physical inspections and an annual financial assessment based on 

current assets and liabilities. 

Physical needs assessment prohibition.—The Committee has included bill language prohibiting funds for HUD’s physical needs assessment (PNA) requirement for PHAs. Implementation of PNA requirements on PHAs unnecessarily increases administrative burdens on PHAs and appears to have no operational benefit for local 

housing programs. 

RENTAL ASSISTANCE DEMONSTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... $10,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 

The Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) was authorized in 

fiscal year 2012 to preserve public housing by enabling Public 

Housing Authorities to use a portion of their operating and capital 

funds to leverage private sector funding to recapitalize their housing stock and maintain their units of affordable housing primarily 

through the conversion to long-term Section 8 rental assistance 

contracts. The budget request includes a request of $10,000,000 for 

a targeted expansion of the program to public housing properties 

that cannot convert their housing under this program at their existing funding levels. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not provide funding for this program, and 

does not include the proposal in the budget request to eliminate the 

unit cap from the currently authorized level of 60,000 units. The 

Committee has concerns about the impact new RAD conversions 

would have on the Project Based Rental Assistance account. Further, the Committee would expect the authorizing committees to 

undertake a full review of this program before taking measures to 

expand the program. 

HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS)

The Housing Certificate Fund, until fiscal year 2005, provided 

funding for both the project-based and tenant-based components of 

the Section 8 program. Project-Based Rental Assistance and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance are now separately funded accounts. 

The Housing Certificate Fund retains balances from previous years’ 

appropriations. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
78 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Language is included to allow unobligated balances from specific 

accounts to be used to renew or amend project-based rental assistance contracts. 

PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,875,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,925,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,775,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥100,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥150,000,000 

The Public Housing Capital Fund provides funding for public 

housing capital programs, including public housing development 

and modernization. Examples of capital modernization projects include replacing roofs and windows, improving common spaces, upgrading electrical and plumbing systems, and renovating the interior of an apartment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,775,000,000 for the Public Housing Capital Fund, which is $100,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 

enacted level and $150,000,000 below the budget request. 

Within the amounts provided the Committee directs that: 

—No more than $8,000,000 is directed to support the ongoing 

public housing financial and physical assessment activities; 

—Up to $5,000,000 is for administrative and judicial receiverships; 

—Up to $20,000,000 is made available for emergency capital 

needs, excluding Presidentially-declared disasters. The Committee continues to include language to ensure that funds are 

used only for repairs needed due to an unforeseen and unanticipated emergency event or natural disaster that occurs during fiscal year 2015; 

—$45,000,000 is for the Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program; and 

—$15,000,000 is provided for the Jobs-Plus program to improve 

employment opportunities and earnings of public housing residents. 

PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $4,400,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 4,600,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,400,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥200,000,000 

The Public Housing Operating Fund subsidizes the costs associated with operating and maintaining public housing. This subsidy 

supplements funding received by public housing authorities (PHA) 

from tenant rent contributions and other income. In accordance 

with section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula to public housing authorities for 

the following purposes: utility costs; anti-crime and anti-drug acVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
79 

tivities, including the costs of providing adequate security; routine 

maintenance cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,400,000,000 for the federal share 

of PHA operating expenses. This amount is the same as the fiscal 

year 2014 enacted level and $200,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee does not include language in the budget request that would allow PHAs to entirely merge their capital and 

operating funds and use those funds for either purpose. While the 

Committee supports the idea of giving high performing PHAs regulatory relief so they can operate more efficiently, HUD has provided 

limited information on how it would identify and budget for capital 

and operating needs in the future if this authority to merge funds 

were approved. 

CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $90,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥65,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥95,000,000 

This appropriation funds grants to communities to rehabilitate 

and replace blighted housing and support the revitalization of 

neighborhoods with concentrated poverty. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Program, which is $65,000,000 below the 2014 

enacted level and $95,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee has included language which prohibits funds to 

any grantee that has previously received a Choice Neighborhoods 

Implementation grant. 

FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $75,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 75,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 75,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The budget request proposes to create a consolidated program to 

help HUD-assisted residents achieve economic independence, rather than continue separate programs for Housing Choice Voucher 

and public housing families. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee agrees with this proposal and provides $75,000,000 to support the Family Self-Sufficiency program. This is 

the same as the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and equal to the 

budget request. The Committee expects the Department to 

prioritize assistance to individuals and families that results in job 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
80 

stability, increased tenant incomes, and greater rent contributions. 

The Committee also expects the Department to report to the Committees on Appropriations the best practices of the program that 

result in increased rent contributions of program participants, and 

practices that result in residence achieving full self-sufficiency in 

meeting their housing needs, no later than March 31, 2015. 

NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $650,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 650,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 650,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Native American Housing Block Grants program, authorized 

by the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), provides funds to American Indian tribes and their Tribally Designated Housing Entities 

(TDHEs) to address affordable housing needs within their communities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $650,000,000 for Native American 

Housing Block Grants, which is the same as the fiscal year 2014 

enacted level and the same as the budget request. —$2,000,000 is for Title VI loan guarantees up to $16,530,000. 

—$3,000,000 is for organizations representing Native American 

housing interests to provide training and technical assistance 

to Indian housing authorities and Tribal Designated Housing 

Entities (TDHEs). Of this amount, no less than $2,000,000 is 

for a national organization as authorized under NAHASDA. 

Timely Expenditure of Funds.—The Committee continues language requiring fiscal year 2015 funds to be spent within 10 years. 

Bill language is included to withhold funding from any grantee that receives an allocation larger than $5,000,000 and that has an 

unexpended balance greater than three times its formula allocation. 

NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 13,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥13,000,000 

The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program provides 

grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home 

Lands for housing and housing-related assistance to develop, maintain and operate affordable housing for eligible low-income native 

Hawaiian families. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not recommend funding for this program, 

which is $10,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and 

$13,000,000 below the budget request. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
81 

INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Credit subsidy: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... $6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................................... 8,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................................... – – – 

Limitation on guaranteed loans: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... 1,818,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................................... 1,200,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................................................ 1,200,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... ¥618,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................................... – – – 

Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 

1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native American individuals and housing authorities to build new housing or purchase 

existing housing on trust land. This program provides access to private financing that otherwise might be unavailable because of the 

unique legal status of Indian trust land. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 in new credit subsidy for the Section 184 loan guarantee program, which is $2,000,000 above 

the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and the same as the budget request. This will guarantee a loan volume of $1,200,000,000, which 

is $618,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and the 

same as the budget request. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $6,588,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 6,578,400,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,205,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥383,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥373,400,000 

The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) is responsible for administering the Community Development Block 

Grant program (CDBG), the Home Investment Partnership 

(HOME), Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA), 

Homeless Assistance Grants (HAG), and other HUD community development programs. Most of these programs pass Federal funds 

through to state and local governments and other entities to address housing and development needs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $6,205,000,000 for this office, which 

is $383,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 and $373,400,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee acknowledges that at reduced funding levels communities will need to be innovative in finding ways 

to do more with less by leveraging State, local and private sector 

partnership. To help facilitate this innovation, the Committee fully 

funds the request for Section 4 capacity building grants and also 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
82 

supports the request to increase the borrowing authority under the 

Section 108 loan guarantee program. 

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $330,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 332,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 305,900,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥24,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥26,100,000 

The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program provides states and localities with resources to address the 

housing needs of low-income persons living with HIV/AIDS. Funding is distributed by formula to qualifying states and metropolitan 

areas based on the cumulative incidences of AIDS reported to the 

Centers for Disease Control. Government recipients are required to 

have a HUD-approved Comprehensive Plan or Comprehensive 

Housing Affordability Strategy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $305,900,000 for the 

HOPWA program, which is the $24,100,000 below fiscal year 2014 

and $26,100,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes formula grants and 

funding for the renewal of certain expiring contracts that were previously funded under HOPWA competitive grants. The Committee 

encourages ongoing efforts at the Department for stronger coordination between HOPWA and the Department’s other homeless prevention and support programs. 

Formula funding methodology.—The current HOPWA formula, 

which is based on cumulative AIDS cases and area incidence, no 

longer reflects the nature of an epidemic that has been transformed 

by both advances in HIV health care and surveillance, and by the 

increasingly disproportionate impact of the virus on communities of 

poverty and color. The Committee encourages the Department to 

work with the authorizing committees on any additional statutory 

authority needed to modernize the HOPWA formula. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $3,100,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 2,870,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,060,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥40,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +190,000,000 

The Community Development Fund, authorized by the Housing 

and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), 

provides funding, primarily through Community Development 

Block Grants, to state and local governments and other eligible entities to carry out community and economic development activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $3,060,000,000 for the 

Community Development Fund account, which is the $40,000,000 

below fiscal year 2014 and $190,000,000 above the budget request. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
83 

Of the amounts made available: 

—$3,000,000,000 is for the Community Development Block 

Grants (CDBG) formula program for entitlement communities 

and states. This is $30,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 and 

$200,000,000 above the budget request; —$60,000,000 is for the Native American Housing and Economic 

Development Block Grant (also known as Indian CDBG), 

which is $10,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 and $10,000,000 

below the budget request; and —$7,000,000, of the amount provided for the regular CDBG formula program, is for insular areas, per 42 U.S.C. 5306(a)(2), 

which is the same as fiscal year 2014 and the budget request. 

The recommendation continues language requiring the Department to notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days 

of enactment of this Act. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING RESCISSION)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Section 108 Loan Guarantee program is a source of variable 

and fixed-rate financing for communities undertaking projects eligible under the Community Development and Block Grant (CDBG) 

program. Such activities may include economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities, and large-scale physical development projects. By pledging their current and future CDBG allocations to cover the loan amount as security, communities are able 

to finance large-scale projects with a federally guaranteed loan. 

HUD may require additional security for a loan, as determined on 

a case-by-case basis. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation continues the Section 108 Loan 

Guarantee program as a borrower-paid subsidy program and therefore recommends providing no budget authority, which is 

$3,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 and the same funding level as 

the budget request. The Committee also accepts the request for a 

limit on guaranteed loan volume of $500,000,000 which is 

$350,000,000 above fiscal year 2014 and the same as the budget request. 

With the conversion to a borrower-paid subsidy program structure, the Committee recommends the rescission of all unobligated 

balances of subsidy budget authority remaining at the end of fiscal 

year 2014. 

Hazard mitigation.—The Committee directs HUD to coordinate 

with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to identify eligible activities covered by the section 108 loan guarantee 

program that also qualify as eligible activities under FEMA’s hazard mitigation programs intended to protect communities from the 

impact of future disasters. The Committee also directs HUD, in coVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
84 

ordination with FEMA, to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of enactment, on (1) an assessment of the benefits of making all FEMA hazard mitigation activities eligible under section 108, (2) a timeline for HUD to make 

communities aware of the current eligibility of these activities 

under section 108, and (3) a catalogue of mitigation activities that 

would require legislation in order to become eligible. 

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 950,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥300,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥250,000,000 

The HOME investment partnerships program provides block 

grants to participating jurisdictions (states, units of local government, Indian tribes, and insular areas) to undertake activities that 

expand the supply of affordable housing in the jurisdiction. HOME 

block grants are distributed based on formula allocations. Upon receipt of these federal funds, state and local governments develop a 

housing affordability strategy to acquire, rehabilitate, or construct 

new affordable housing, or to provide rental assistance to eligible 

families. 

Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP) funds 

are distributed through grants to nonprofit organizations and consortia that have experience in providing or facilitating self-help 

homeownership opportunities. Grant funds are used for land acquisition and improvements associated with developing new, decent 

dwellings for low-income persons using the self-help model. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $700,000,000 for activities funded 

under this account, which is $300,000,000 below fiscal year 2014 

and $250,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee continues bill language to prevent newly participating jurisdictions from being permanently added to the HOME 

program. The Committee continues language specifying that reform 

provisions from prior appropriations Acts shall be superseded by 

the final rule published August 23, 2013. The Committee continues 

language requiring the Department to notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act. The Committee does not include the statutory reforms to HOME requested 

in the budget. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for SHOP 

which is the same as fiscal year 2014 enacted and the budget request. 

CAPACITY BUILDING 1

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $40,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 20,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +20,000,000 1Capacity Building was funded under the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program account in fiscal 

year 2014. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
85 

Section 4 Capacity Building funds are for activities described 

under section 4(a) of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 

U.S.C. 9816 note). Section 4 funds are awarded to a limited number of non-profits, which use the funds to develop the capacity of 

community development corporations (CDCs) and community housing development organizations (CHDOs). The CDCs and CHDOs 

then undertake community development and affordable housing activities. Section 4 funds must be matched by recipients with at 

least three times the grant amount in private funding. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee reflects the budget proposal to reorganize the 

self-help opportunity program (SHOP) as a set-aside within the 

Home Investment Partnerships account, eliminate the SHOP account, and create a new account for capacity building programs. 

The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for a Capacity Building 

account which includes $35,000,000 for the Section 4 capacity 

building grant program and $5,000,000 for capacity building grants 

to national rural housing organizations. The recommended funding 

level for these activities is the same as fiscal year 2014 and 

$20,000,000 above the budget request. 

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $2,105,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 2,406,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,105,000,000 

Bill compared with:.

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥301,400,000 

The Homeless Assistance Grants account provides funding for 

programs under title IV of the McKinney Act, as amended by the 

Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing 

(HEARTH) Act of 2009. HEARTH Act programs include the Continuum of Care (CoC) competitive grants, the Emergency Solutions 

Grants (ESG) program, and the Rural Housing Stability Grants 

program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends funding the homeless grant assistance programs at $2,105,000,000, which is the same as fiscal year 

2014 and $301,400,000 below the budget request. The recommendation includes funding to support continuum of care project renewals 

of no less than $1,800,000,000 as well as at least $200,000,000 in 

emergency solutions grants. Up to $5,000,000 is available for the 

national homeless data analysis project. 

The recommendation continues language allowing private nonprofit organizations to administer permanent housing rental assistance funded under the continuum of care. The Department shall 

report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

within 90 days of enactment on the use of this authority in fiscal 

year 2014 including the number and geographic location of individuals and properties assisted, the identity of the non-profit organizaVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
86 

tions administering the assistance, and the identity of the public 

entities that would have otherwise been responsible for administering such assistance. 

BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT

(RESCISSION)

The Committee recommendation permanently rescinds unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from 

funds previously appropriated under this heading. 

HOUSING PROGRAMS

PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $9,916,628,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 9,746,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,746,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥170,628,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

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 contract administration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides a total of $9,746,000,000, including $400,000,000 provided as advance appropriations, for the annual 

renewal of project-based contracts. This funding level is 

$170,628,000 below the enacted level for fiscal year 2014 and the 

same as the budget request. Up to $210,000,000 is available for 

performance-based contract administrators. 

Contract payment rebasing.—The Committee acknowledges that 

the fiscal year 2015 appropriation for the Project-Based Rental Assistance account provides less than twelve months of additional 

funding visibility for some contracts. However, the recommended 

funding level is predicated on HUD’s proposal to shift to a calendar 

year funding cycle for payments on renewal contracts as presented 

in the request. The Committee directs HUD to follow the calendar 

payment proposal as reflected in the request and consistent with 

current practice in the Housing Choice Voucher and Public Housing programs. The recommendation expects HUD to plan for the 

sustainability of the new payment cycle beyond calendar year 2015, 

and expects HUD to accurately reflect the twelve months of funding required to support the new approach in its annual budget request for fiscal year 2016. 

Section 8 contract administration.—The Committee concurs with 

decisions by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that HUD’s contracts for 

performance based contract administrator (PBCA) services are procurement contracts. The recommendation rejects the request to 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
87 

give HUD authority to administer PBCA funds as grants or cooperative agreements and directs HUD to follow the law and GAO by 

soliciting and awarding procurement contracts under full and open 

competition and without geographic limitations. The Committee 

further directs HUD to carry out these procurement processes in a 

manner that is compliant with requirements under the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the Competition in Contracting Act. 

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $383,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 440,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 420,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +36,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥20,000,000 

The Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) program provides eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants to finance 

the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of housing intended 

for low income elderly people. In addition, the program provides 

project-based rental assistance contracts (PRAC) to support operational costs for units constructed under the program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $420,000,000, which is $36,500,000 

above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $20,000,000 below the 

budget request. 

The amount provided will fully meet the need for project rental 

assistance renewals and amendments in fiscal year 2015. In addition to this amount, another $9,200,000 is available for the elderly 

housing rental assistance demonstration program, a five-year effort 

which was fully funded in fiscal year 2014. Therefore, the funds 

available total $429,200,000 for this program. The Committee denies additional funding for the elderly housing rental assistance 

demonstration program beyond the $9,200,000, including any direct 

appropriation, residual receipts, or carryover, in fiscal year 2015. 

The recommendation allocates available funding as follows: • $350,000,000 for the renewal and amendment of project rental assistance contracts (PRAC); • Up to $70,000,000 for service coordinators and the continuation of congregate services grants. • $9,200,000 for the elderly housing demonstration program 

(funding provided in fiscal year 2014). 

The Committee continues to include bill language relating to the 

initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided under 

this heading and language allowing these funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office. 

HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $126,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 160,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 135,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +9,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥25,000,000 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
88 

The Housing for Persons with Disabilities (Section 811) program 

provides eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital 

grants to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 

supportive housing for disabled persons and provides project-based 

rental assistance (PRAC) to support operational costs for such 

units. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $135,000,000 for Section 811 activities, $9,000,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and 

$25,000,000 below the budget request. This level will fully fund the 

project rental assistance and project assistant contract renewals 

and amendments in fiscal year 2015. The Committee continues to 

include bill language allowing these funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD’s REAC program office. 

The Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to 

provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation within 180 days of enactment of this Act detailing Section 

202 and Section 811 HUD grant award totals by state for each fiscal year 2008 through 2013. 

HOUSING COUNSELING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $45,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 60,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 47,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥13,000,000 

Section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 

authorized HUD to provide housing counseling services to homebuyers, homeowners, low and moderate income renters, and the 

homeless. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $47,000,000 for housing counseling, 

which is an increase of $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $13,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee includes bill language that provides two year 

funding availability to allow HUD flexibility to use unobligated balances recaptures for counseling activities, instead of allowing them 

to expire. The bill also lengthens the time frame that HUD is required to make grants from 120 to 180 days of enactment of the 

Act to enhance quality control. 

The Committee encourages HUD to coordinate with FEMA’s 

Flood Insurance Advocate to ensure HUD counselors located in 

flood-prone states receive adequate training and information to 

educate future homeowners on their potential flood risks, associated flood insurance premiums, home mitigation measures available proven to reduce flood risk, and any federal assistance available for mitigation projects and activities. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
89 

RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $21,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 28,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 28,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +7,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Rental Housing Assistance account includes existing longterm project-based rental assistance contracts covering approximately 18,000 affordable housing units under the Rent Supplement 

and Section 236 Rental Assistance Payment (RAP) programs. Enacted in 1965 and 1974 respectively, these programs created affordable units for low-income families. Monthly payments are made to 

project owners from existing contract balances, with new budget 

authority provided for short-term extensions of expiring contracts 

and annual contract amendments. Contract amendments provide 

additional subsidy to below-market contracts where rents have 

been constrained and owners are unable to adequately service 

properties and perform ongoing maintenance. HUD states that 

most of the remaining rent supplement and RAP contracts will expire by fiscal year 2017. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $28,000,000 in funding for the Rental Housing Assistance Program, which is $7,000,000 above the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2014 and the same as the budget request. This appropriation plus projected carryover of $9,750,000 

will fully fund an estimated $37,750,000 in contract amendment 

and extension needs in fiscal year 2015. The Committee continues 

bill language that allows HUD to use unobligated balances and recaptured funds for extensions and amendments. 

PAYMENT TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $7,530,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 10,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +2,470,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 

Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 

Improvement Act of 2000, authorized the Secretary to establish 

Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards for 

the construction, design, and performance of manufactured homes. 

All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs of administering the Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends up to $10,000,000 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 Committee does not provide a direct appropriation for 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
90 

this account. The recommendation is $2,470,000 above the fiscal 

year 2014 enacted level, and equal to the budget request. 

The Committee includes language allowing the Department to 

collect fees from program participants for the dispute resolution 

and installation programs. These fees are to be deposited into the 

trust fund and may be used by the Department subject to the overall cap placed on the account. 

FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION

MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of direct loans Limitation of guaran- teed loans Administrative contract expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .......................................... $20,000,000 $400,000,000,000 $127,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................... 20,000,000 400,000,000,000 170,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................... 20,000,000 400,000,000,000 130,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ................................. – – – – – – +3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .............................. – – – – – – ¥40,000,000 

The Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA) mutual mortgage 

insurance program account includes the mutual mortgage insurance (MMI) and cooperative management housing insurance funds. 

This program account covers unsubsidized programs, primarily the 

single-family home mortgage program, which is the largest of all 

the FHA programs. These include the Condominium, Section 203(k) 

rehabilitation, and Home Equity Conversion Mortgage programs 

(HECM) and the multifamily Cooperative Management Housing Insurance Funds (CMHI). The cooperative housing insurance program provides mortgages for cooperative housing projects of more 

than five units that are occupied by members of a cooperative housing corporation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 

commitments in the MMI program account: $400,000,000,000 for 

loan guarantees and $20,000,000 for direct loans. The recommendation also includes $130,000,000 for administrative contract expenses. The Committee continues language as requested, appropriating additional administrative expenses in certain circumstances. 

The Committee’s recommendation for administrative contract expenses is $40,000,000 below the budget request and $3,000,000 

more than the level enacted in fiscal year 2014. The Committee denies any transfer of administrative contract expenses to the Management and Administration account. 

The Committee includes bill language that lifts the statutory aggregate cap of 275,000 HECM loan guarantees in fiscal year 2015. 

The Committee has carried similar language in prior years. 

Use of eminent domain to seize mortgages.—In its fiscal year 

2014 report, the Committee directed HUD to submit a study by 

April 1, 2014 on the risk of using eminent domain on the housing 

market, including FHA primary and refinance market, the broader 

mortgage market, interest rates, homeownership, and affordability. 

The Committee has not received the report. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
91 

The Committee continues to be concerned about proposals for 

local governments to seize underwater performing mortgages and 

then refinance them into an FHA product. More than 20 municipalities have publically considered or are considering a plan using 

eminent domain and some have entered into an advisory services 

agreement with a firm for this purpose. Both an FHA official and 

the former head of the Federal Housing Financing Agency raised 

significant concerns about the proposal and its negative effect on 

private capital availability, mortgage credit, and its harm to investors and taxpayers. 

The Committee includes a general provision that prohibits FHA 

from financing or refinancing a loan that has been seized using 

eminent domain. 

Homeowners Armed With Knowledge.—The Committee has prohibited implementation of this new pilot program as it is dependent 

on implementation of a new fee on lenders. The Committee strongly encourages the authorizing committee of jurisdiction to consider 

the fee as proposed. 

The Committee encourages HUD to coordinate with FEMA to 

identify eligible rehabilitation activities covered by HUD’s Section 

203(k) program that concurrently fulfill FEMA’s hazard mitigation 

standards as reducing a structure’s long-term flood risk, and mitigating potential damage from future disasters. The Committee directs HUD, with guidance from FEMA’s Flood Insurance Advocate, 

to provide information on its Section 203(k) program website and 

other promotional materials that identify qualifying disaster mitigation rehabilitation options as another program benefit to homeowners. 

GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitations of direct 

loans

Limitations of 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... $20,000,000 $30,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................... 20,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 20,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................................................... – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................. – – – – – – 

The Federal Housing Administration’s (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 multifamily loans, including loans for property improvements, manufactured housing, multifamily rental housing, condominiums, housing 

for the elderly, hospitals, group practice facilities, and nursing 

homes. The SRI fund includes insurance programs for mortgages in 

older, declining urban areas that would not be otherwise eligible 

for insurance, mortgages with interest reduction payments, and 

mortgages for experimental housing and for high-risk mortgagors 

who would not normally be eligible for mortgage insurance without 

housing counseling. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
92 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on loan guarantees of 

$30,000,000,000, equal to the fiscal year 2014 level and the budget 

request. It includes a limitation of $20,000,000 for direct loans, 

which is the same as the fiscal year 2014 level and the budget request. 

Section 232 long term care facility mortgage insurance program.—While the Committee appreciates HUD’s willingness to 

amend some loan documents in FHA’s section 232 program, all 

issues were not fully addressed. The Committee directs the Department to ensure that the policies, regulations, and documents promulgated in support of the long-term care facility mortgage insurance program are risk-focused, based upon evidence, and do not 

prevent financially sound facilities from participating in the program. 

GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans 

Administrative contract 

expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... $500,000,000,000 $19,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................................................... 500,000,000,000 28,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ........................................................................................ 500,000,000,000 22,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................................................... – – – +2,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................................................. – – – ¥6,000,000 

The Guarantee of Mortgage-Backed Securities Program facilitates the financing of residential mortgage loans insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, and the Rural Housing Services program. The 

Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) guarantees 

the timely payment of principal and interest on securities issued by 

private service institutions such as mortgage companies, commercial banks, savings banks, and savings and loan associations that 

assemble pools of mortgages and issue securities backed by the 

pools. In turn, investment proceeds are used to finance additional 

mortgage loans. Investors include non-traditional sources of credit 

in the housing market such as pension and retirement funds, life 

insurance companies, and individuals. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation includes a $500,000,000,000 limitation on 

loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities as requested and 

$22,000,000 for the personnel costs of GNMA, to be funded by Commitment and Multiclass fees. The recommendation for personnel 

costs is $2,500,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and 

$6,000,000 below the budget request. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
93 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $46,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 50,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥6,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 

Title V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, as 

amended, directs the Secretary of the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development to undertake programs of research, evaluation, 

and reports relating to the Department’s mission and programs. 

These functions are carried out internally and through grants and 

contracts with industry, nonprofit research organizations, educational institutions, and through agreements with State and local 

governments and other federal agencies. The research programs 

seek ways to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and equity of 

HUD programs and to identify methods to achieve cost reductions. 

Additionally, this appropriation is used to support HUD evaluation 

and monitoring activities and to conduct housing surveys. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for this account, which 

is $10,000,000 below the budget request and $6,000,000 below last 

year’s level. 

Of the activities proposed in the budget, the Committee rec- ommends $17,000,000 for the American Housing Survey and 

$1,000,000 for the new home sales and completions reports. HUD 

is encouraged to reduce the size and frequency of these reports and 

studies to accommodate the lower funding level. The Committee has provided $5,000,000 for research dissemina- tion and support, plus another $3,000,000 to support research partnerships. Research and demonstration activities formerly funded 

under the Transformation Initiative are to be funded from this appropriation. 

In addition to the basic research program, the Committee has 

provided $14,000,000 under this header to conduct various technical assistance and OneCPD activities. Of the funds provided, 

$6,000,000 is for OneCPD, $7,000,000 is for public housing technical assistance and oversight, and $1,000,000 is for Office of Housing technical assistance activities. The Committee continues to 

limit technical assistance and capacity building activities to only 

HUD grantees regarding the use of their HUD funds. 

The 2014 Transformation Initiative spend plan contained up to 

$4,000,000 for technical assistance activities to Choice Neighborhood and HOPE VI grantees, a rather large sum of money when 

you consider the relatively low number of Choice implementation 

grantees, plus the fact that the last HOPE VI appropriation was 

five years ago in 2009. The Committee directs HUD to reinstate 

the HOPE VI report and provide information on each HOPE VI 

grant with unexpended balances and on each grantee receiving 

technical assistance with fiscal year 2014 funds. The report must 

contain information on why the HOPE VI project is still unfulfilled, 

steps available to the grantee to move the project along, the year 

the grant was signed, a realistic assessment of if or how the project 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
94 

can be completed, and the total number of dollars unexpended. The 

report is due to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 180 days after enactment of this Act. 

The Committee directs HUD to continue providing information 

on all technical assistance, and research projects and demonstrations concurrent with the overall departmental operating plan. This 

report shall include updates on the status of projects and demonstrations on-going and funded with prior year appropriations. 

The Committee directs HUD to provide notice at least three days 

prior to the announcement of any grant or award, including awards 

under this program, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. This notice is in addition to the spend plan requirement for technical assistance and capacity building activities. 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $66,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 71,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 46,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥20,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥25,000,000 

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (OFHEO) is 

responsible for developing policies and guidance, and for providing 

technical support for enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and the 

civil rights statues. OFHEO serves as the central point for the formulation, clearance and dissemination of policies, intra-departmental clearances, and public information related to fair housing 

issues. OFHEO receives, investigates, conciliates and recommends 

the issuance of charges of discrimination and determinations of 

non-compliance for complaints filed under Title VIII and other civil 

rights authorities. Additionally, OFHEO conducts civil rights compliance reviews and compliance reviews under Section 3. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $46,000,000 for this account, which 

is $20,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014 and 

$25,000,000 below the request. Of the funds provided, $300,000 is 

for the Limited English Proficiency Initiative and $23,800,000 is for 

the Fair Housing Assistance Program. The Committee directs the 

Department to focus resources on education, outreach, and training 

initiatives, and supporting local and state organizations that conduct investigations and adjudicate claims. 

The Committee proposes $1,500,000 for the National Fair Housing Training Academy, and encourages the Office to pursue ways 

to make the Academy self-sustaining. 

The Committee directs HUD to provide notice at least three days 

prior to the announcement of any grant or award, including awards 

under this program, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. This notice is in addition to the spend plan requirement. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
95 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $110,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 70,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥40,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥50,000,000 

The Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes is responsible for administering the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction 

program authorized by Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The office also addresses multiple housingrelated health hazards through the Healthy Homes Initiative, pursuant to the Secretary’s authority in sections 501 and 502 of the 

Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1701z–1 

and 1701z–2). 

The office develops lead-based paint regulations, guidelines, and 

policies applicable to HUD programs and enforces the Lead Disclosure Rule issued under Title X. For both lead-related and healthy 

homes issues, the office designs and administers programs for 

grants, training, research, demonstration, and education. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for the lead programs, which is $40,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2014 

and $50,000,000 below the budget request. This reduction is taken 

without prejudice. The Committee recommends no more than $9,000,000 for the 

Healthy Homes Initiative, and directs the Department to fund activities aimed at reducing incidences of asthma, mold, pests and 

radon. Of the total amount provided, $2,000,000 is for technical 

studies. 

The Committee directs HUD to provide notice at least three days 

prior to the announcement of any grant or award, including awards 

under this program, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. This notice is in addition to the spend plan requirement. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $250,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 272,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 97,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥153,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥175,000,000 

While HUD’s Working Capital Fund (WCF) was established pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the development of, modifications to, and infrastructure for Departmentwide information technology systems, and for the continuing operation of both Department-wide and program-specific information 

technology systems, HUD has never created the cost-accounting 

structure to operate a true WCF and the Committee changed the 

name of the account from ‘‘Working Capital Fund’’ to the ‘‘Information Technology Fund’’ in 2014. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
96 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $97,000,000 in direct appropriations 

for the IT Fund to support Department-wide information technology system activities, $153,000,000 less than the fiscal year 

2014 enacted level and $175,000,000 below the the budget request. 

Considering the Department requires $256,100,000 simply to operate basic telecommunication services and existing information technology contracts, the Committee strongly urges the Department to 

establish a true working capital fund in 2014 so that in fiscal year 

2015 the Department is able to appropriately charge the various offices for the services used to make up the funding difference and 

keep the lights on. Considering the Department continues to advocate for an account takedown under the Transformation Initiative 

under the guise of individual office responsibility and participation 

in the management of each project, participation in a traditional 

working capital fund similar to other agencies seems to be a perfect 

opportunity to truly transform the way the Department develops 

and maintains HUD’s core IT systems, and the expenditures of 

such activities. 

The Committee has retained bill language that precludes the use 

of these or any other funds appropriated previously to the Working 

Capital Fund or program offices that previously transferred funds 

to the Working Capital Fund that would be used or transferred to 

any other entity in HUD or elsewhere for the purposes of implementing the Administration’s ‘‘e-Gov’’ initiative without the Committee’s approval in HUD’s operating plan. The Committee directs 

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 

are specifically precluded in legislation, unless the Committee 

agrees to a change. 

Further, the Committee continues language requiring the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to audit and oversee HUD’s 

information technology programs, development and investments. 

Since 2010 the Committee has required HUD to submit an expenditure plan outlining its IT modernization projects prior to spending 

a portion of the funds made available. Over the past few years, 

HUD has provided details regarding the modernization efforts in 

the plans. GAO has reviewed the plans and provided continuous 

briefings to the Committee on the plans’ satisfaction of the statutory requirements. Recognizing progress made in planning IT modernization efforts, the Committee recommends modifying the contents of the plan to provide (1) details regarding HUD’s portfolio 

of IT investments and (2) the status of the Department’s efforts in 

applying IT management controls. It is expected that the Department will submit this plan to the Committee and GAO. This plan 

may also include additional information regarding the extent to 

which IT management controls have been applied to the projects 

associated with each IT investment in the department’s portfolio. 

The Committee emphasizes the importance of pursuing a strategic 

approach as HUD continues to improve its IT management. For fiscal year 2015, the Committee affirms its direction for GAO to also 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
97 

evaluate HUD’s institutionalization of governance and cost estimating practices. In particular, the Committee requests an evaluation of HUD’s ability to create a working capital fund. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $125,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 129,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 124,861,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥139,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥4,139,000 

The Office of Inspector General (IG) provides agency-wide audit 

and investigative functions to identify and correct management and 

administrative deficiencies that create conditions for existing or potential instances of waste, fraud, and mismanagement. The audit 

function provides internal audit, contract audit, and inspection 

services. Contract audits provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, award, administration, re-pricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits evaluate all facets of agency operations. Inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of agency 

operations. The investigative function provides for the detection 

and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $124,861,000 for the Office of Inspector General, which is $139,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $4,139,000 below the budget request. 

TRANSFORMATION INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $40,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1 80,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥40,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥80,000,000 1The budget proposes to transfer up to $80,000,000 from other accounts into the Transformation Initiative. 

The Transformation Initiative is the Department’s effort to improve and streamline the systems and operations at HUD. Managed by the Office of Strategic Planning and Management, this initiative has three elements: (1) research, evaluation, and program 

metrics; (2) program demonstrations; (3) technical assistance and 

capacity building. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee did not fund the Transformation Initiative. The 

Committee continues to find the mass take down and transfer of 

funds as proposed to be an awkward method of funding the activities under this account, and distorts the resources required and 

available under the various donor program accounts. The Committee has determined that funds under this heading are not warranted and has instead recommended funding for research projects 

and technical assistance under the PDR account. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
98 

The Committee questions just how many years it takes to ‘‘transform’’ the Department. Research projects and demonstrations 

should be planned, requested, and accounted for under the Policy, 

Demonstration, and Research (PDR) account. Technical assistance 

activities need to find a home and a structure within the Department to oversee the expenses and operations. 

Finally, the Department has demonstrated that even with direction and directly appropriated dollars, their interpretation of what 

is technical assistance, and what activities should be funded by 

contract or a notice of funding available (NOFA) is suspect. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

Section 201. The Committee continues the provision that relates 

to the division of financing adjustment factors. 

Section 202. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits available funds from being used to investigate or prosecute 

lawful activities under the Fair Housing Act. 

Section 203. The Committee continues by reference the two provisions in prior appropriations Acts that correct the HOPWA formula and make other technical corrections. 

Section 204. The Committee 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 205. The Committee continues language regarding the 

availability of funds subject to the Government Corporation Control 

Act and the Housing Act of 1950. 

Section 206. The Committee continues language regarding allocation of funds in excess of the budget estimates. 

Section 207. The Committee continues language regarding the 

expenditure of funds for corporations and agencies subject to the 

Government Corporation Control Act. 

Section 208. The Committee continues language requiring the 

Secretary to provide quarterly reports on uncommitted, unobligated 

and excess funds in each departmental program and activity. 

Section 209. The Committee continues the provision that requires that the administration’s budget and the Department’s 

budget justifications for fiscal year 2016 shall be submitted in the 

identical account and sub-account structure provided in this Act. 

Section 210. The Committee continues the provision that exempts PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi and the County of Los Angeles from public housing resident representation requirement. 

Section 211. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits the IG from changing the basis on which the audit of GNMA 

is conducted. 

Section 212. The Committee continues the provision that authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use agreements from an obsolete 

project to a viable project, provided that no additional costs are incurred, and other conditions are met. 

Section 213. The Committee continues the provision that sets 

forth requirements for eligibility for Section 8 voucher assistance, 

and includes consideration for persons with disabilities. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
99 

Section 214. The Committee continues the provision that distributes Native American housing block grant funds to the same Native Alaskan recipients as 2005. 

Section 215. The Committee continues the provision that authorizes the Secretary to insure mortgages under Section 255 of the 

National Housing Act. 

Section 216. The Committee continues the provision that instructs HUD on managing and disposing of any multifamily property that is owned by HUD. 

Section 217. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

committment authorityunder the Section 108 loan guarantee program to be used to guarantee notes or other obligations issued by 

any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State. 

Section 218. The Committee continues the provision that instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 400 units or fewer 

of public housing are exempt from asset management requirements. 

Section 219. The Committee continues the provision that restricts the Secretary from imposing any requirement or guideline 

relating to asset management that restricts or limits the use of 

capital funds for central office costs, up to the limit established in 

QHWRA. 

Section 220. The Committee continues the provision that provides that no employee of the Department shall be designated as 

an allotment holder unless the CFO determines that such allotment holder has received training. 

Section 221. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

HUD to provide an annual report on the status of all Section 8 

project-based housing. 

Section 222. The Committee continues language regarding Notice 

of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication. 

Section 223. The Committee continues the provision that provides that funding for indemnities is limited to non-programmatic 

litigation and is restricted to the payment of attorney fees only. 

Section 224. The Committee continues the provision that authorizes the Secretary to transfer up to the lesser of 5 percent or 

$5,000,000 of funds appropriated underthe Management and Administration accounts. 

Section 225. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

the Disaster Housing Assistance Programs to be considered a program of the Department of Housing and Urban Development for 

the purpose of income verifications and matching. 

Section 226. The Committee continues a provision requiring 

HUD to take certain actions against owners receiving rental subsidies that do not maintain safe properties. 

Section 227. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

PHA salary levels. 

Section 228. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds for a doctoral dissertation research program at HUD. 

Section 229. The Committee includes a provision requiring notification to the Committee on grant awards. 

Section 230. The Committee includes a provision extending Section 529 of MAHRAA. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
100 

Section 231. The Committee includes a new provision that prohibits funds to require public housing agencies to conduct a Physical Needs Assessment. 

Section 232. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds for the Homeowners Armed With Knowledge (HAWK) program. 

Section 233. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds for HUD financing of mortgages for properties that have 

been subject to eminent domain. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(101) 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES 

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $7,448,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 7,548,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,548,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The United States Access Board (Access Board) was established 

by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and is the only federal agency whose primary mission is accessibility for people with 

disabilities. The Access Board is responsible for developing guidelines under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Architectural 

Barriers Act, and the Telecommunications Act. The Access Board 

is responsible for developing standards under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act for accessible electronic and information technology 

used by federal agencies. The Access Board also enforces the Architectural Barriers Act and provides training and technical assistance on the guidelines and standards it develops. 

The Access Board has been given responsibilities under the Help 

America Vote Act to serve on the Election Assistance Commission’s 

Board of Advisors and Technical Guidelines Development Committee. Additionally, the Board maintains a small research program that develops technical assistance materials and provides information needed for rulemaking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $7,548,000 for the operations of the 

Access Board, which is $100,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted 

level and the same as the President’s request. 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $48,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 48,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 45,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥3,000,000 

The Federal Housing Finance Agency Office of Inspector General 

(FHFA OIG) was established by the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (P.L. 110–289). It promotes the efficient and effective conduct of the Federal Housing Finance Agency in its capacity 

as the primary regulator of the housing Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
102 

FHFA OIG activities are funded from mandatory assessments on 

the GSE’s. IG is currently funded through FHFA’s direct assessments on the housing GSE’s program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $45,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2015, which is $3,000,000 below the budget request and 

the fiscal year 2014 funding level. 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $24,669,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 25,660,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +830,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥161,000 

Established in 1961, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is 

an independent government agency, responsible for the regulation 

of oceanborne transportation in the foreign commerce of the United 

States. FMC policy focuses on (1) maintaining an efficient and competitive international ocean transportation system; and (2) protecting the public from unlawful, unfair, and deceptive ocean transportation practices. The Federal Maritime Commission monitors 

ocean common carriers, marine terminal operators, conferences, 

ports, and ocean transportation intermediaries to ensure they 

maintain just and reasonable practices. Among other activities, 

FMC also maintains a trade monitoring and enforcement program, 

monitors the laws and practices of foreign governments and their 

impacts on shipping conditions in the U.S., and enforces special 

regulatory requirements as they apply to controlled carriers. 

The principal shipping statutes administered by the FMC are the 

Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101–41309), the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988 (46 U.S.C. 42301–42307), Section 19 of 

the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. 42101–42109), and Public Law 89–777 (46 U.S.C. 44101–44106). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $25,499,000 for the Federal Maritime Commission, which is $830,000 above the fiscal year 2014 appropriation and $161,000 less than the President’s budget request. 

The Committee does not include the proposal to retain user fees. 

NATIONAL PASSENGER RAILROAD CORPORATION (AMTRAK) 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $23,499,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 24,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 24,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
103 

The Amtrak Inspector General is an independent, objective unit 

responsible for detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and 

violations of law and for promoting economy, efficiency and effectiveness at Amtrak. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $24,499,000 for Amtrak’s Office of 

Inspector General (Amtrak OIG), which is $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and the same amount proposed in the 

fiscal year 2015 budget. In fiscal year 2014, the Amtrak OIG was 

forced to reduce staffing by 21 people (from 95 in 2013 to 74) to 

mitigate the impact of sequestration and unanticipated rail employee benefit cost increases. As a result, the organization had to 

curtail or suspend work on important initiatives and investigations. 

For example, it significantly reduced the scope on its real estate 

management audit from a comprehensive review to a narrow review of real estate information reporting systems. It curtailed 

planned data analytics work which delayed the analysis of data 

systems and supporting investigations aimed at detecting fraud in 

health care programs. It also postponed work on information technology program audits, security programs, and crew work scheduling. 

The recommended level will allow Amtrak OIG to replace positions in audit, evaluation, and investigation and will ensure the 

OIG’s effective oversight of Amtrak’s programs and operations. The 

OIG’s efforts have resulted in valuable studies and recommendations for this Committee and for the Corporation that have yielded 

cost savings. These studies have been in a number of areas, including food and beverage service, capital planning, overtime, and 

fraud. In addition, after noting that Amtrak was not reviewing invoices before payment, the OIG developed an audit process and 

identified $91,300,000 in overpayments. Amtrak has recovered 

more than $38,400,000, and has the opportunity to recover more. 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $103,027,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 103,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥27,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Initially established along with the Department of Transportation (DOT), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent federal 

agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation 

accident in the United States, as well as significant accidents in 

other modes of transportation—railroad, highway, marine and 

pipeline—and issuing safety recommendations aimed at preventing 

future accidents. Although it has always operated independently, 

the NTSB relied on the DOT for funding and administrative support until the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
104 

93–633) severed all ties between the two organizations effective 

April of 1975. 

In addition to its investigatory duties, the NTSB is responsible 

for maintaining the government’s database of civil aviation accidents and conducting special studies of transportation safety issues 

of national significance. Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international treaties, the NTSB supplies investigators to 

serve as U.S. Accredited Representatives for aviation accidents 

overseas involving U.S.-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or 

major components of U.S. manufacture. The NTSB also serves as 

the court of appeals for any airman, mechanic or mariner whenever 

certificate action is taken by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant, 

or when civil penalties are assessed by the FAA. In addition, the 

NTSB operates the NTSB Academy in Ashburn, Virginia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for the salaries and 

expenses of the NTSB, which is $27,000 below the fiscal year 2014 

enacted level and equal to the budget request. 

NTSB Academy.—The agency is encouraged to continue to seek 

additional opportunities to lease out, or otherwise generate revenue 

from the NTSB Academy, so that the agency can appropriately 

focus its resources on the important investigative work that is central to the agency’s mission. In addition, the agency is again directed to submit detailed information on the costs associated with 

the NTSB Academy, as well as the revenue the facility is expected 

to generate, as part of the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $204,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 182,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 182,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥22,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by the 

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978). Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation now operates under the trade 

name ‘NeighborWorks America.’ NeighborWorks America helps 

local communities establish working partnerships between residents and representatives of the public and private sectors. These 

partnership-based organizations are independent, tax-exempt, community-based nonprofit entities, often referred to as 

NeighborWorks organizations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $182,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2015, which is equal to the request and $22,100,000 

below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
105 

Of the funds provided, $132,000,000 is for the core program, which is equal to the request and $4,600,000 below the fiscal year 

2014 enacted level. In addition, there is a total of $50,000,000 for 

the National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling (NFMC) Program, 

which is equal to the budget request and $17,500,000 below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. 

Program Fiscal year 2014 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2015 

budget request 

Fiscal year 2015 

committee 

recommendation 

Core ....................................................................................................... $136,600,000 $132,000,000 $132,000.000 

NFMC ..................................................................................................... 67,500,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 

Total ............................................................................................. 204,100,000 182,000,000 182,000,000 

The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2007, Congress initially 

provided ‘‘one-time funding’’ for NFMC in response to the housing 

foreclosure crisis. According to RealtyTrac’s Year-End 2013 U.S. 

Foreclosure Market Report, foreclosure filings—default notices, 

scheduled auctions and bank repossessions—were reported on 1.4 

million properties in 2013, down 26 percent from 2012 and down 

53 percent from the peak of 2.9 million properties with foreclosure 

filings in 2010. Recognizing the improvement in the housing market and the reduction in foreclosures, the Committee reduces funding for NFMC, and allows NFMC to retain up to $4,000,000 to 

begin closing out the program. 

UNITED STATES INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $3,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 3,530,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥30,000 

The mission of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) is ‘‘to coordinate the Federal response to homelessness and to create a national partnership at every level of government and with the private sector to reduce and end homelessness in the nation while maximizing the effectiveness of the Federal Government in contributing to the end of homelessness.’’ 42 

U.S.C. 11311 (2013). 

The USICH was reauthorized in 2009 in the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act, 

P.L. 111–22, with a termination date of October 1, 2010. This date 

has since been extended to October 1, 2016. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,500,000 for the USICH, which is 

equal to the fiscal year 2014 appropriation and $30,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee does not include requests to make 

this program permanent or to increase the salary for the Executive 

Director. 

The Committee encourages the nineteen USICH agencies to use 

the next year to establish permanent working relationships and 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
106 

interagency efficiencies that will endure beyond USICH’s sunset 

date in 2016. The Committee expects USICH to also find efficiencies and to begin to wind down activities as it transitions its 

coordination function to permanently authorized agencies. This 

transition will also begin to leverage the resources of those agencies to carry on interagency coordination beyond 2016 on Opening 

Doors: the Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness. The Committee discourages further efforts by USICH to hire 

for new or vacant positions. The Committee directs USICH to provide a report within 90 days of enactment of this Act on how it 

plans to wind down operations in anticipation of the sunset date. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(107) 

TITLE IV—GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT 

Section 401. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act. 

Section 402. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibiting transfers 

of funds unless expressly provided in this Act. 

Section 403. The Committee continues the provision limiting consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement contracts. 

Section 404. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

employee training not directly related to the performance of official 

duties. 

Section 405. The Committee continues the provision specifying 

reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new 

offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 406. The Committee continues a provision that ensures 

that 50 percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 

certain purposes. 

Section 407. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for any project that seeks to use the power 

of eminent domain unless eminent domain is employed only for a 

public use. 

Section 408. The Committee continues to require reports on sole 

source contracts. 

Section 409. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

the transfer of funds made available in this Act to any instrumentality of the United States Government except as authorized by 

this Act or any other appropriations Act. 

Section 410. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used to permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his past occupation after completion 

of military service. 

Section 411. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used unless the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 412. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being appropriated or made available to any person or 

entity that has been found to violate the Buy American Act. 

Section 413. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits funds for first-class airline accommodations in contravention 

of section 301–10.122 and 301–10.123 of title 41 CFR. 

Section 414. The Committee includes a provision limiting the use 

of funds to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding, 

or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or provide a loan 

or loan guarantee to, corporations convicted of a felony criminal 

violation of Federal law within the preceding 24 months. The DeVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
108 

partment of Transportation and the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development shall each provide an annual report to the 

Committee, due within 30 days of the end of each fiscal year, detailing its implementation of this provision, including a list of affected corporations and a justification for any cases where it was 

determined that the limitation should not apply. 

Section 415. The Committee includes a provision limiting the use 

of funds to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding, 

or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or provide a loan 

or loan guarantee to, corporations with certain unpaid Federal tax 

liabilities. The Department of Transportation and the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development shall each provide an annual 

report to the Committee, due within 30 days of the end of each fiscal year, detailing its implementation of this provision, including a 

list of affected corporations and a justification for any cases where 

it was determined that the limitation should not apply. 

Section 416. The Committee includes a provision establishing a 

‘‘Spending Reduction Account’’ in the bill. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The following materials are submitted in accordance with various 

requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives: 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

RESCISSION OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the rescissions of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 

• $260,000,000 of contract authority from ‘‘Grants-in-Aid for Airports’’; 

• $65,000,000 from ‘‘Capital Investment Grants’’; 

• $29,000,000 from the ‘‘Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) 

Program Account’’; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Housing Certificate Fund’’ 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Community Development 

Loan Guarantees’’; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Brownfields Redevelopment’’ 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the transfers of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
109 

UNDER TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Office of the Secretary ............................ Office of the Secretary .......................... ≤5% of certain funds subject to conditions 

Federal Aviation Administration, Operations.Federal Aviation Administration, Operations.≤2% of certain funds subject to conditions 

FHWA: Limitation on administrative expenses.Appalachian Regional Commission ....... $3,248,000 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to the 

National Railroad Passenger Corporation.

Operating Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.≤$20,000,000 subject to conditions 

Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration.

Pipeline Safety ....................................... $1,500,000 

UNDER TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Administrative Support Offices (Sec. 

224).

Program Office Salaries and Expenses ≤5% or $5,000,000, whichever is less, 

subject to conditions 

Program Office Salaries and Expenses 

(Sec. 224).

Administrative Support Offices ............. ≤5% or $5,000,000, whichever is less, 

subject to conditions 

Shelter Plus Care Renewal ..................... Homeless Assistance Grants ................. Such sums as available 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no changes are proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS 

* * * * * * * 

§ 127. Vehicle weight limitations—Interstate System 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(j) OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN OTHER WISCONSIN

HIGHWAYS.—If any segment of the United States Route 41 corridor, 

as described in section 1105(c)(57) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, is designated as a route on the 

Interstate System, a vehicle that could operate legally on that segment before the date of such designation may continue to operate on 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
110 

that segment, without regard to any requirement under subsection 

(a). 

(k) LONGER COMBINATION VEHICLES IN IDAHO.—No limit or other 

prohibition under this section, except as provided in this subsection, 

applies to a longer combination vehicle operating on a segment of 

the Interstate System in Idaho if such vehicle— 

(1) has a gross vehicle weight of 129,000 pounds or less; 

(2) complies with the single axle, tandem axle, and bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a); and 

(3) is authorized to operate on such segment under Idaho 

State law. 

(l) OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN MISSISSIPPI HIGH- WAYS.—If any segment of United States Route 78 in Mississippi 

from mile marker 0 to mile marker 113 is designated as part of the 

Interstate System, no limit established under this section may apply 

to that segment with respect to the operation of any vehicle that 

could have legally operated on that segment before such designation. 

* * * * * * * 

MULTIFAMILY ASSISTED HOUSING REFORM AND 

AFFORDABILITY ACT 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—HUD MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REFORM 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle C—Enforcement Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

Part 2—FHA Multifamily Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 579. TERMINATION. 

(a) REPEALS.— 

(1) MARK-TO-MARKET PROGRAM.—Subtitle A (except for section 524) is repealed effective øOctober 1, 2015¿ October 1, 

2016. 

* * * * * * * 

(b) EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding the repeal under subsection 

(a), the provisions of subtitle A (as in effect immediately before 

such repeal) shall apply with respect to projects and programs for 

which binding commitments have been entered into under this Act 

before øOctober 1, 2015¿ October 1, 2016. 

* * * * * * * 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
111 

ing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly 

or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘Salaries and 

expenses’ specifying certain amounts for individual offices of the 

Office of the Secretary and official reception and representation expenses; specifying transfer authority among offices; allowing up to 

$2,500,000 in user fees to be credited to the account; and prohibiting the establishment of Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Research 

and technology’ which limits the availability of funds, changes the 

availability of funds, and allows funds received from other entities 

to be credited to the account. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘National 

Infrastructure Investments’ which limits the availability of funds, 

provides for the distribution of funds, specifies that funds are available only for certain activities, allows the use of funds for administrative costs, ensures equitable geographic distribution of funds, 

specifies amounts for grants, limits that amount that may be 

awarded to a single state, specifies an amount for the federal cost 

share, provides priority to projects that require a contribution of 

Federal funds, specifies a percentage, minimum grants size and 

Federal cost share for rural projects, and specifies that projects 

must comply with certain requirements in the United States Code. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Financial management capital’ which provides funds to upgrade DOT’s 

financial systems and processes, and changes the availability of 

funds. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Cyber 

security initiatives’ which provides funds for information technology security upgrades, and changes the availability of funds. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Transportation planning, research, and development’ which provides 

funds for conducting transportation planning, research, systems development, development activities and making grants, and changes 

the availability of funds. 

Language is included that limits operating costs and capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund for the Department of Transportation; provides that services shall be provided on a competitive 

basis, except for non-DOT entities; restricts the transfer for any 

funds to the Working Capital Fund with approval; and limits special assessments or reimbursable agreements levied against any 

program, project or activity funded in this Act to only those assessments or reimbursable agreements that are presented to and approved by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Minority 

business resource center’ which limits the amount of loans that can 

be subsidized, and provides funds for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘Minority 

business outreach’ specifying that funds may be used for business 

opportunities related to any mode of transportation, and limits the 

availability of funds. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
112 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Payments to air carriers’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation 

to consider subsidy requirements when determining service to a 

community, limits funds only to communities served in fiscal year 

2011, eliminates the requirement that carriers use at least 15-passenger aircraft, prohibits funds for communities within a certain 

distance of a small hub airport without a cost-share, and prohibits 

funds to communities that require a rate of subsidy per passenger 

in excess of a certain amount unless the community enters into a 

cost-share. 

Section 101 prohibits the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from approving assessments or reimbursable agreements 

pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal administrations in 

this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed 

the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification. 

Section 102 allows the Secretary or his designee to work with 

States and State legislators to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. 

Section 103 allows the Department to use the Working Capital 

Fund to provide transit benefits to Federal employees. 

Section 104 sets administrative requirements of the Department’s Credit Council. 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Operations’ that specifies funds for certain activities; derives funds 

from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund; specifies amounts for certain activities; specifies transfer authorities among activities; requires various staffing plans by a certain date with financial penalties for late submissions; permits the use of funds to enter into 

a grant agreement with a nonprofit standard setting organization 

to develop aviation safety standards; prohibits the use of funds for 

new applicants of the second career training program; prohibits 

funds to plan, finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new aviation user fees not specifically authorized by law; 

credits funds received from other entities for expenses incurred in 

the provision of agency services; specifies funds for the contract 

tower programs; and prohibits funds from certain activities coordinated through the Working Capital Fund. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Facilities and equipment’ that funds various activities from the 

Airport and Airway Trust Fund, limits the availability of funds, allows certain funds received for expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of air navigation facilities to be credited 

to the account, and that requires the Secretary of Transportation 

to transmit a comprehensive capital investment plan for the Federal Aviation Administration. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Research, engineering, and development’ that provides funds from 

the Airport and Airway Trust Fund; that limits the availability of 

funds; and that allows certain funds received for expenses incurred 

in research, engineering and development to be credited to the account. 

Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Grants-in-aid for airports’ that provides funds from the Airport 

and Airway Trust Fund, changes the availability of funds, prohibits 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
113 

the availability of funds for certain activities, and limits the availability of funds for certain activities. 

Section 110 limits the number of technical workyears at the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to 600 in fiscal 

year 2014. 

Section 111 prohibits FAA from requiring airport sponsors to provide the agency ‘without cost’ building construction, maintenance, 

utilities and expenses, or space in sponsor-owned buildings, except 

in the case of certain specified exceptions. 

Section 112 allows reimbursement for fees collected and credited 

under 49 U.S.C. 45303. 

Section 113 allows reimbursement of funds for providing technical assistance to foreign aviation authorities to be credited to the 

operations account. 

Section 114 prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium pay 

except in those cases where the individual actually worked on a 

Sunday. 

Section 115 prohibits FAA from using funds to purchase store 

gift cards or gift certificates through a government-issued credit 

card. 

Section 116 requires approval from the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration of the Department of Transportation for retention 

bonuses for any FAA employee. 

Section 117 requires the Secretary to block the display of an 

owner or operator’s aircraft registration number in the Aircraft Situational Display to Industry program, upon the request of an 

owner or operator. 

Section 118 prohibits funds for more than 9 political appointees 

at the Federal Aviation Administration. 

Section 119 prohibits funds to increase fees pursuant to Section 

44721 of title 49, U.S.C. until the FAA submits a report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 119A prohibits funds to change weight restrictions or 

prior permission rules at Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New Jersey. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Limitation on administrative expenses’ that limits the 

amount to be paid, together with advances and reimbursements received, for the administrative expenses of the agency. In addition 

to this limitation, an amount is specified that is to be made available to the Appalachian Regional Commission for administrative 

expenses. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Federal-aid highways’ that limits the obligations for Federalaid highways and highway safety construction programs; allows the 

Secretary to charge, collect and spend fees for the costs of underwriting and servicing Federal credit instruments; and provides that 

such amounts are in addition to administrative expenses, and not 

subject to any obligation limitation or limitation on administrative 

expenses under section 608 of title 23, U.S.C., and available until 

expended. 

Language is included under the Federal Highway Administration, ‘Federal-aid highways’ that liquidates contract authority from 

the Highway Trust Fund. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
114 

Section 120 distributes obligation authority among Federal-aid 

highways programs. 

Section 121 credits funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the Federal-aid highways account. 

Section 122 provides requirements for any waiver of the Buy 

America Act. 

Section 123 prohibits tolling in Texas, with exceptions. 

Section 124 requires Congressional notification before the Department provides credit assistance under section 603 and 604 of 

title 23, U.S.C. 

Section 125 provides exemptions from certain Federal truck 

weight requirements. 

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; changes the availability of funds; and specifies 

amounts available for specific activities. 

Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, ‘Motor carrier safety grants’ that provides a limitation on obligations and liquidation of contract authorization and 

specifies amounts available for various programs. 

Section 130 continues a provision subjecting funds appropriated 

in this Act to the terms and conditions included in prior appropriations Acts regarding Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. 

Section 131 requires the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to send notices of certain violations such that the receipt of 

such notice is confirmed. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘Operations and research’ that limits the availability 

of funds. 

Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ‘Operations and research’ that provides a limitation 

on obligations and a liquidation of contract authorization from the 

Highway Trust Fund; specifies amounts for various programs; and 

makes available unobligated balances of prior year contract authority. 

Language is included under the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration ‘Highway traffic safety grants’ that provides a limitation on obligations; changes the availability of funds; provides a 

liquidation of contract authorization from the Highway Trust Fund; 

specifies the amounts for various programs; prohibits and limits 

funds for specific purposes; and requires certain Congressional notifications. 

Section 140 provides funding for travel and related expenses for 

state management reviews and highway safety core competency development training. 

Section 141 exempts obligation authority that was made available in previous public laws from limitations on obligations for the 

current year. 

Section 142 prohibits funding for the National Highway Safety 

Advisory Committee. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Safety and operations’ that changes the availability of funds. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
115 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Railroad research and development’ that changes the availability 

of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program’ authorizing the Secretary to issue direct loans and loan guarantees 

under sections 501 through 504 of the Railroad Revitalization and 

Regulatory Reform Act, prohibits new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments in 2015 that use Federal funds for the credit 

risk premium, and limits total principal amount of direct loans and 

loan guarantees for a project in a single state. 

Language is included under the Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Operating subsidy grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation’ that provides funds to the Secretary of Transportation to 

make quarterly grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and changes the availability of funds; allows the Secretary to 

approve funding only after receiving and reviewing a grant request 

for each train route; ensures that each grant request is accompanied by a detailed financial analysis, revenue projection, and 

capital expenditure projection; requires the Corporation to submit 

a number of reports, including a business plan, a five year financial 

plan, an annual budget; requires that the budget, business plan, 

requires that the 5 Year Financial Plan include annual information 

on maintenance, refurbishment, replacement, and expansion for 

Amtrak rolling stock consistent with the comprehensive fleet plan; 

requires monthly performance reports in electronic format, and 

that it describe work completed, changes to the business plan and 

progress against the 2012 performance improvement plan milestones; requires that reports comply with requirements in Public 

Law 112–55; prohibits funds to support any route with a discounted fare of more than 50 percent off the normal peak fare, unless the operating loss is the result of a discount covered by a 

State. 

Language is included under the Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Capital and debt service grants to the national railroad passenger 

corporation’ that allows the Secretary of Transportation to make 

grants on a reimbursable basis to the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation for the maintenance and repair of capital infrastructure and debt service and to meet the Americans with Disability 

Act; designates funds up to a certain amount as a working capital 

fund account; allows funds to be used for operational costs subject 

to conditions; allows the Secretary to retain funds to be used for 

oversight; requires approval of funds only after receipt of a request 

justifying Federal support; limits the use of funds to subsidize operating losses; restricts the use of funds unless they have been approved by the Secretary or are contained in the Corporation’s business plan; and allows the Secretary to retain an amount to be used 

by the Northeast Corridor Commission. 

Section 150 allows FRA to receive and use cash or spare parts 

to repair and replace damaged automated track inspection cars and 

equipment in connection with the automated track inspection program. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
116 

Section 151 authorizes the Secretary to allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase such stock sold to the Department. 

Section 152 limits overtime to $35,000 per employee; allows Amtrak’s president to waive this restriction for specific employees for 

safety or operational efficiency reasons; requires quarterly notification to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on 

waivers granted for overtime and specified information related to 

overtime; requires the president of Amtrak certify the overtime 

documentation; and requires a report that includes specified information on overtime payments incurred for 2014 and two prior 

years. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘Administrative expenses’ specifying amounts for certain activities, 

prohibiting a permanent office of transit security, and directing the 

submission of the annual report on new starts. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Transit formula grants’ that provides a limitation on obligations 

from the Highway Trust Fund, provides for the liquidation of contract authority, and changes the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Transit Research’ that changes the availability of funds and specifies amounts made available for certain activities. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration 

‘Technical assistance and training that changes the availability of 

funds and specifies amounts for certain activities. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Capital investment grants’ that changes the availability of funds 

and rescinds unobligated balances. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Washington metropolitan area transit authority’ that changes the 

availability of funds, requires the Secretary to review projects before a grant is made, requires the Secretary to determine that 

WMATA has placed the highest priority on safety investments, and 

allows the Secretary to waive the requirement for cellular phone 

service. 

Section 160 exempts previously made transit obligations from 

limitations on obligations. 

Section 161 allows funds appropriated for capital investment 

grants and bus and bus facilities not obligated by a certain date, 

plus other recoveries to be available for other projects under 49 

U.S.C. 5309. 

Section 162 allows for the transfer of prior year appropriations 

from older accounts to be merged into new accounts with similar, 

current activities. 

Section 163 permits the Secretary to consider significant private 

contributions when calculating the non-Federal share of new starts 

projects. 

Section 164 prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project 

with a new starts share greater than 50 percent. 

Section 165 prohibits funds for a certain fixed guideway project 

in Houston, Texas. 

Section 166 allows for certain unobligated funds to be available 

for activities under 49 U.S.C. 5309. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
117 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation that authorizes expenditures, contracts, and commitments as may be necessary. 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation ‘Operations and maintenance’ that provides 

funds derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Maritime 

security program’ that provides funds to preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Operations and training’ that provides dedicated funds for salaries and 

benefits of employees of the United States Merchant Marine Academy, Student Incentive Program payments, capital improvements 

at the United States Merchant Marine Academy, and the State 

Maritime Schools Schoolship Maintenance and Repair; directs allotment holders; and limits funds until the Secretary completes a plan 

detailing how funding will be expended at the Academy. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Maritime 

guaranteed loan (title XI) program account’ that provides for the 

transfer to ‘‘Operations and training.’’ 

Section 170 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD. 

Section 171 continues a provision regarding MARAD ship disposal. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Operational expenses’ which requires that 

a specific amount be transferred to the ‘‘Pipeline safety’’ account to 

fund pipeline safety information grants to communities. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Hazardous materials safety’ which limits 

the availability of a certain amount and allows up to $800,000 in 

fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts, and which credits 

to the appropriation for the account funds received from states, 

counties, other public authorities, and private sources for certain 

expenses. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Pipeline safety’ which specifies the amounts 

derived from the Pipeline Safety Fund, the Oil Spill Liability Trust 

Fund, and the Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund, and limits 

their period of availability. 

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 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Emergency preparedness grants’ which 

specifies the amount derived from the Emergency Preparedness 

Fund, limits the availability of some funds, and prohibits funds 

from being obligated by anyone other than the Secretary or a designee of the Secretary. 

Language is included under Office of Inspector General, ‘Salaries 

and expenses’ that provides the Inspector General with all necessary authority to investigate allegations of fraud by any person 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
118 

or entity that is subject to regulation by the Department of Transportation and the authority to investigate unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition by domestic and foreign air 

carriers and ticket agents. 

Language is included under the Office of the Inspector General, 

‘Salaries and expenses’ providing the IG with authority to conduct 

audits and investigations of the Metropolitan Washington Airports 

Authority (MWAA) and to require MWAA to reimburse the IG to 

these audits and investigations. 

Language is included under Surface Transportation Board, ‘Sala- ries and expenses’ allowing the collection of $1,250,000 in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board, 

and providing that the sum appropriated from the general fund 

shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as such fees are received. 

Section 180 allows the Department of Transportation to use 

funds for aircraft, motor vehicles, liability insurance, uniforms, or 

allowances as authorized by law. 

Section 181 limits appropriations for services authorized by 5 

U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for an Executive Level IV. 

Section 182 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and expenses 

of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation, and prohibits political and Presidential personnel assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation. 

Section 183 prohibits recipients of funds made available in this 

Act from releasing personal information, including social security 

number, medical or disability information, and photographs from a 

driver’s license or motor vehicle record, without express consent of 

the person to whom such information pertains; and prohibits the 

withholding of funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state 

is in noncompliance with this provision. 

Section 184 allows funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration from states, counties, municipalities, other 

public authorities, and private sources to be used for expenses incurred for training may be credited to each agency’s respective accounts. 

Section 185 prohibits funds in Title I of this Act from being 

issued for any loan, loan guarantee, line of credit or grant unless 

the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business 

days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full 

funding grant is announced by the department or its modal administrations. 

Section 186 allows funds received from rebates, refunds, and 

similar sources to be credited to Department of Transportation appropriations. 

Section 187 allows amounts from improper payments to a third 

party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the Department of 

Transportation to be available to cover expenses incurred in recovery of such payments. 

Section 188 stipulates that the Committees on Appropriations 

solely approve or deny any funds provided or limited in this Act 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
119 

that are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to 

be provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 189 prohibits the Surface Transportation Board from 

charging or collecting filing fees for late complaints in an amount 

in excess of the authorized amount under section 1914 of title 28, 

United States Code. 

Section 190 allows funds to modal administrations to be obligated to the Office of the Secretary for the costs related to assessments or reimbursable agreements only when the services provide 

a direct benefit to the applicable modal administration. 

Section 191 allows the use of the Working Capital Fund to carry 

out the Federal Transit Pass program. 

Section 192 prohibits funds for the Surface Transportation Board 

to take action on a high-speed rail project in California unless the 

STB considerers the project as a whole. 

Section 193 limits any one state from receiving more than 33 

percent of the total credit subsidy made available by the Act under 

the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act. 

Section 194 prohibits funds from being used to deny an application to renew a hazardous materials safety program permit for a 

motor carrier based on their out-of-service rate unless the carrier 

has had an opportunity to submit a corrective action plan and the 

Secretary determines the plan and other corrective actions are insufficient to address safety concerns. 

Section 195 allows prior year unobligated funds from ‘Federal 

Railroad Administration—Safety and Operations’’ to be used for 

rail safety oversight activities for the transport of energy products 

and prior year unobligated funds from ‘Federal Railroad Administration—Capital Assistance to States—Intercity Passenger Rail 

Service’ is available for grade crossing safety improvements on rail 

routes that transport energy products. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Management and administration’ which designates 

funds for ‘Executive offices’; designates funds for ‘Administrative 

support offices;’ specifies funding for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of the General Counsel, Office of Administration, 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Office, Office of Field Policy and 

Management, Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Office of the 

Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, Office of Strategic 

Planning and Management, and Office of the Chief Information Officer; limits official reception and representation expenses to 

$25,000; allows funds to be used for certain administrative and 

non-administrative expenses; and allows funds to be used for advertising and promotional activities that support the housing mission area. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Program office salaries and expenses’ which specifies 

funds for the Office of Public and Indian Housing, the Office of 

Community Planning and Development, the Office of Housing, the 

Office of Risk and Regulatory Affairs, the Office of Policy DevelopVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
120 

ment and Research, the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, and the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Health Homes. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which specifies 

funds for certain programs, activities and purposes and limits the 

use and availability of certain funds; specifies the methodology for 

allocation of renewal funding; directs the Secretary to provide renewal funding based on validated voucher system leasing and cost 

data for the prior year; prohibits funds to exceed a public housing 

agency’s authorized level of units under contract, except for those 

participating in the Moving to Work demonstration; directs the 

Secretary to the extent possible to prorate each public housing 

agency’s (PHA) allocation; directs the Secretary to notify PHAs of 

their annual budget the later of 60 days after enactment of the Act 

or March 1, 2015; allows the Secretary to extend the notification 

period with the prior approval of the House and Senate appropriations committees; specifies the amounts available to the Secretary 

to allocate to PHAs that need additional funds and for fees; specifies the amount for additional rental subsidy due to unforeseen 

emergencies and portability; provides funding for public housing 

agencies with vouchers that were not in use during the previous 12 

month period in order to be available to meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13); provides funding for incremental vouchers 

for homeless veterans; and provides for adjustments in allocations 

for PHAs that participate in the Small Area Fair Market Rent 

demonstration. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which provides 

funds for tenant protection vouchers; sets certain conditions for the 

Secretary to provide such vouchers; provides funds for residents of 

multi-family properties that would not otherwise have been eligible 

for tenant-protection vouchers; sets eligibility requirements for 

multi-family properties to participate in the program; and allows 

the Secretary to use unobligated and recaptured funds from prior 

years. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which provides 

funds for administrative and other expenses of public housing 

agencies to administer the section 8 tenant-based rental assistance 

program; sets an amount to be available to PHAs that need additional funds to administer tenant protection assistance, disaster related vouchers, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers and 

other special purpose vouchers; establishes that ‘Moving to Work’ 

(MTW) agencies be funded pursuant to their MTW agreements; 

provides funds for family self-sufficiency coordinators; and provides 

funds for section 811 mainstream vouchers. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Tenant-based rental assistance’ which provides 

funds for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers, 

sets requirements for the administration of VASH vouchers, specifies that funds shall remain available for homeless veterans upon 

turn-over of such vouchers, and requires the Secretary separately 

track such vouchers. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
121 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing certificate fund’ which rescinds prior year 

funds and allows the Secretary to use recaptures to fund projectbased contracts and contract administrators. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Public housing capital fund’ which limits the availability of funds; limits the delegation of certain waiver authorities 

and prohibits funds from being used for certain activities; specifies 

the total amount available for certain activities; specifies an 

amount for ongoing Public Housing Financial and Physical Assessment activities of the Real Estate Assessment Center; specifies an 

amount for receivership costs; specifies an amount for supportive 

services; specifies an amount for emergency capital needs; makes 

funds available for bonuses for high performing PHAs; specifies the 

amount for a Jobs-plus Pilot initiative and specifies that the initiative shall provide competitive grants; specifies that the Secretary 

may waive or specify alternative requirements; and specifies that 

the Secretary shall public notice of any waiver or alternative requirement. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Choice Neighborhoods Initiative’ which allows the 

Secretary to make competitive grants for neighborhood rehabilitation; changes the availability of funds; allows funds to be used for 

services, development, and housing; declares funds not for ‘‘public 

housing’’; requires local planning and cost share; allows local governments, tribal entities, public housing authorities and non-profits 

to be grantees; allows for-profits to partner and apply with a public 

entity; requires grantees to partner with local organizations; requires the Secretary to consult with other federal agencies; allows 

prior year program funds and HOPE VI funds to be used for this 

program; and prohibits prior year grantees from receiving an 

award. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Family self-sufficiency’ which allows the Secretary to 

waive or specify certain requirements. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Native American housing block grants’ which limits 

the availability of funds; specifies the formula for allocation; specifies the amounts for technical assistance and capacity building to 

support the inspection of Indian housing units, administrative expenses, to subsidize the total principal amount of any notes, and 

the cost of guaranteed notes, which are defined in section 502 of 

the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and makes adjustments to 

certain recipient allocations under certain conditions without a regulation. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account’ which limits the availability of funds, specifies how to define 

the costs of modifying loans, specifies the amount and availability 

of funds to subsidize total loan principal, and provides a dedicated 

amount for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS’ which 

limits availability of funds and sets forth certain requirements for 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
122 

the allocation of funds, renewal of contracts, and grantee notification. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Community development fund’ which limits the use 

and availability of certain funds; specifies the allocation of certain 

funds; prohibits grant recipients from selling, trading or transfering funds; specifies the amount made available for grants to federally-recognized Indian tribes; prohibits funding for grants under 

the Economic Development Initiative, Neighborhood Initiatives, 

Rural Innovation Fund, and Section 107 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and requires grantee notification 

of formula allocations within 60 days of enactment. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Community development loan guarantees program 

account’ which limits the principal amount of loan guarantees, directs the Secretary to collect fees from borrowers adequate to result 

in credit subsidy cost of zero, and rescinds all unobligated balances 

of budget authority previously appropriated or recaptured under 

the account. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Home investment partnerships program’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds 

for certain purposes; specifies multiple oversight requirements from 

prior acts that are not effective for projects committed on or after 

August 23, 2013 and shall instead be governed by the Final Rule 

entitled ‘Home Investment Partnerships Program; Improving Performance and Accountability; Updating Property Standards’; specifies certain conditions on prior year technical assistance funding; 

directs HUD to notify formula grantees no later than 60 days after 

enactment of the Act; and provides a certain amount for the selfhelp and assisted homeownership opportunity program. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Capacity building’ which limits the availability of 

funds and specifies certain amounts for rural activities and organizations. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Homeless assistance grants’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds for certain 

purposes; specifies matching requirements; allows the Secretary to 

renew continuum of care contracts if certain requirements are met; 

requires grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social 

service providers; allows transferred and recaptured balances from 

shelter plus care renewals to be used for continuum of care project 

renewals; allows certain funds to be administered by private nonprofit organizations; and requires notification of formula allocations 

within 60 days of enactment. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Project-based rental assistance’ which limits the 

availability of funds and specifies the allocation of certain funds for 

certain purposes; specifies a certain amount for contract administrators to administer certain programs; allows certain recaptured 

funds to be used for contracts or contract administrators; and allows the Secretary to recapture residual receipts from certain properties. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
123 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for the elderly’ which limits the availability 

of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; designates certain 

funds to be used only for certain grants; allows funds to be used 

for specified inspections or inspection-related activities; allows 

funds to be used to renew certain contracts; allows the Secretary 

to waive certain provisions governing contract terms. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for persons with disabilities’ which limits 

the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; 

allows funds to be used for inspections or inspection-related activities; allows funds to be used to renew certain contracts. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing counseling assistance’ that provides funds 

for described purposes, limits the availability of funds, specifies 

amounts to be used for specified purposes, and requires the Secretary to make grants within a specified time frame. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Rental housing assistance’ that limits the availability of funds and allows the Secretary to use specified unobligated balances, including recaptures, carryover and other specified 

remaining funds for specified purposes. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Payment to manufactured housing fees trust fund’ 

that limits the availability of funds from specified sources; permits 

fees to be assessed, modified, and collected; permits temporary borrowing authority from the General Fund of the Treasury; provides 

that general fund amounts from collections offset the appropriation 

so that the resulting appropriation is a specified amount; requires 

fees collected to be deposited into the Manufactured Housing Fees 

Trust Fund; allows fees to be used for necessary expenses; allows 

the Secretary to use approved service providers. 

Language is included under the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, ‘Mutual mortgage insurance program account’ 

which limits new commitments to issue guarantees, limits the obligations to make direct loans, specifies funds for specific purposes, 

allows for additional contract expenses as guaranteed loan commitments exceed certain levels, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘General and special risk program account’ which 

sets a loan principal limitation on new commitments to guarantee 

loans, limits the obligations to make direct loans, specifies funds 

for specific purposes, and limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Government national mortgage association’ which 

limits new commitments to issue guarantees, provides funds for 

salaries and expenses, allows for additional salaries and expenses 

as guaranteed loan commitments exceed certain levels, allows specified receipts to be credited as offsetting collections, and limits the 

availability of funds 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Policy development and research’ which limits the 

availability of funds and specifies authorized uses. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
124 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Fair housing and equal opportunity’ which limits the 

availability of funds; authorizes the Secretary to assess and collect 

fees, places restrictions on the use of funds for lobbying activities, 

and provides funds for programs that support the assistance of persons with limited English proficiency. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Office of lead hazard control and healthy homes’ 

which limits the availability of funds, specifies the amount of funds 

for specific purposes, specifies the treatment of certain grants, and 

specifies a matching requirement for grants. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Information technology fund’ which limits the availability and purpose of funds, including funds transferred, provides 

funds for the development of information technology systems, and 

restricts the amount provided until the Secretary submits an expenditure plan for such systems. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Office of Inspector General’ which specifies the use 

of funds and directs that the IG shall have independent authority 

over all personnel issues within the office. 

Section 201 relates to the division of financing adjustment factors. 

Section 202 prohibits available funds from being used to investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair Housing Act. 

Section 203 corrects an anomaly in the HOPWA formula that results in the loss of funds for certain states. 

Section 204 requires funds appropriated to be distributed on a 

competitive basis in accordance with the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989. 

Section 205 establishes the availability of funds subject to the 

Government Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950. 

Section 206 set requirements on the allocation of funds in excess 

of the budget estimates. 

Section 207 sets requirements regarding the expenditure of funds 

for corporations and agencies subject to the Government Corporation Control Act. 

Section 208 requires the Secretary to provide quarterly reports 

on uncommitted, unobligated and excess funds in each departmental program and activity. 

Section 209 requires that the Administration’s budget and the 

Department’s budget justifications for fiscal year 2015 shall be submitted in the identical account and sub-account structure provided 

in this Act. 

Section 210 exempts PHA Boards in Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi and the County of Los Angeles from public housing resident representation requirement. 

Section 211 prohibits the IG from changing the basis on which 

the audit of GNMA is conducted. 

Section 212 authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use agreements 

from an obsolete project to a viable project, provided that no additional costs are incurred, and other conditions are met. 

Section 213 sets requirements for eligibility for Section 8 voucher 

assistance, and includes consideration for persons with disabilities. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
125 

Section 214 requires the distribution of Native American housing 

block grant funds to the same Native Alaskan recipients as 2005. 

Section 215 authorizes the Secretary to insure mortgages under 

Section 255 of the National Housing Act. 

Section 216 instructs HUD on managing and disposing of any 

multifamily property that is owned by HUD. 

Section 217 allows commitment authority under the Section 108 

loan guarantee program to be used to guarantee notes or other obligations issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State. 

Section 218 instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 400 

units or fewer of public housing are exempt from asset management requirements. 

Section 219 restricts the Secretary from imposing any requirement or guideline relating to asset management that restricts or 

limits the use of capital funds for central office costs, up to the 

limit established in QHWRA. 

Section 220 requires that no employee of the Department shall 

be designated as an allotment holder unless the CFO determines 

that such allotment holder has received training. 

Section 221 requires HUD to provide an annual report on the 

status of all Section 8 project-based housing. 

Section 222 sets requirements regarding Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication. 

Section 223 provides that funding for indemnities is limited to 

non-programmatic litigation and is restricted to the payment of attorney fees only. 

Section 224 authorizes the Secretary to transfer up to 5 percent 

of appropriated funds, or $5,000,000, whichever is less, under the 

headings ‘‘Management and administration’’ and ‘‘Program office 

salaries and expenses.’’ 

Section 225 allows the Disaster Housing Assistance Programs to 

be considered a program of the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development for the purpose of income verifications and matching. 

Section 226 requires HUD to take certain actions against owners 

receiving rental subsidies that do not maintain safe properties. 

Section 227 sets limitations on funds used for PHA salary levels. 

Section 228 prohibits funds for a doctoral dissertation research 

program at HUD. 

Section 229 requires notification to the Committee on grant 

awards. 

Section 230 extends Section 579 of MAHRAA. 

Section 231 prohibits funds to require public housing agencies to 

conduct a Physical Needs Assessment. 

Section 232 prohibits funds for the Homeowners Armed With 

Knowledge (HAWK) program. 

Section 233 prohibits funds for HUD financing of mortgages for 

properties that have been subject to eminent domain. 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES

Language is included for the Access Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that limits funds for necessary expenses and allows for the 

credit to the appropriation of funds received for publications and 

training expenses. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
126 

Language is included for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, 

‘Office of Inspector General’ that limits funds for necessary expenses and derives funds from various banks and corporations. 

Language is included for the Federal Maritime Commission, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that provides funds for services authorized by 

5 U.S.C. 3109, the hire of passenger motor vehicles, uniforms and 

allowances; and limits funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language is included for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Office of Inspector General, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that 

provides funds for an independent, objective unit responsible for 

detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and violations of law; 

promotes economy, efficiency and effectiveness at Amtrak; allows 

the IG to enter into contracts; select, appoint or employ officers and 

employees to carry out its functions; and requires the IG to submit 

its budget request concurrently with the President’s budget and in 

a similar format. 

Language is included under National Transportation Safety 

Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that provides funds for hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 

3109, uniforms or allowances therefore, and limits funds for official 

reception and representation expenses. 

Language is included under National Transportation Safety 

Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that allows funds provided in this 

Act to be used to pay for costs associated with a 2001 capital lease. 

Language is included in the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC), ‘Payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation’ which limits the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of funds to certain activities; and specifies the terms and conditions surrounding NRC activities. 

Language is included for the United States Interagency Council 

on Homelessness, ‘Operating expenses’ that provides funds for salaries, travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, rental of conference 

rooms, and the employment of experts and consultants. 

TITLE IV—GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT

Section 401 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-Federal 

parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this 

Act. 

Section 402 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal year 

and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so provided herein. 

Section 403 limits consulting service expenditures of public 

record in procurement contracts. 

Section 404 prohibits Federal training not directly related to the 

performance of official duties. 

Section 405 specifies reprogramming procedures by subjecting 

the establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 406 provides that fifty percent of unobligated balances 

may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 407 prohibits funds from being used for any project that 

seeks to use the power of eminent domain unless eminent domain 

is employed only for a public use. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
127 

Section 408 requires a report on sole source contracts. 

Section 409 prohibits the transfer of funds made available in this 

Act to any instrumentality of the United States Government except 

as authorized by this Act or any other appropriations Act. 

Section 410 prohibits funds in this Act from being used to permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his or her past 

occupation after the completion of military service. 

Section 411 prohibits funds in this Act from being used unless 

the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 412 prohibits funds from being appropriated or made 

available to any person or entity that has been found to violate the 

Buy American Act. 

Section 413 prohibits funds for first-class airline accommodations 

in contravention of section 301 10.122 and 301 10.123 of title 41 

CFR. 

Section 414 prohibits convicted felons from receiving certain Federal funds. 

Section 415 prohibits funding to corporations with any unpaid 

Federal tax liability. 

Section 416 establishes a spending reduction account. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law for 

the period concerned (dollars in thousands): 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

Insert offset folio 035 here HR464.001tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

Appropriations Not Authorized by Law and Expiring Authorizations 

[Dollars in Thousands 1 

Program 

Federal Highway Administration 

Federal-aid Highways 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 2/ 

Motor Carrier Safety Operations & Programs 

Motor Carrier Safety Grants 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

Operations and Research -- Highway Trust Fund 

Highway Traffic Safety Grants 

Federal Transit Administration 

Transit Formula Grants 

Capital Investment Grants 

Transit Research Transit Cooperative Research Technical Assistance and Training 

Human Resources and Training 

Administrative Expenses 

Emergency Relief 

Federal Railroad Administration 31 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to Amtrak Operating Subsidy Grants to Amtrak 

Safety and Operations 

Maritime Administration 

Operations and Training 4/ 

Ship Disposal 41 

TitleXI41 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Emergency Preparedness Grants 

Surface Transportation Board 

Surface Transportation Board 

Last year of 

authorization Authorization Level 

Title I - Department of Transportation 

2014 $40,995,000 2014 $259,000 2014 $313,000 

2014 $118,500 2014 $561,500 2014 $8,595,000 2014 $1,907,000 2014 $70,000 2014 $7,000 2014 $7,000 

2014 $5,000 

2014 $104,000 2014 such sums 

2013 $1,625,000 

20t3 $631,000 20t3 $293,000 

2014 $98,368 

2014 $2,000 

2014 $72,655 

2014 $42,762 

2014 $28,318 

1998 $12,000 

Appropriations in last year 

of authorization 

$40,995,000 

$259,000 

$313,000 

$123,500 $561,500 

$8,595,000 $1,942,938 

$43,000 

$0 

$5,000 

$0 

$105,933 

$0 

$950,096 

$465,068 $178,239 $148,003 

$4,800 

$38,500 $45,000 $28,318 

$13,853 

Appropriations 

$

Insert offset folio 36 here HR464.002tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

II Excludes accounts that have never had authorized appropriation amounts, such as Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants. 

21 Excludes $13 million of prior year funding repurposed in the National Motor Carrier Safety account pursuant to the FY 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act. 31 Includes 0.2% Across the Board Reduction calculated by OMB from the Consolidated and Further Appropriations Act, 2013, P.L. 113-6, Section 3004(c Xl). 

41 Authorized amounts represent amounts associated with maintaining national security aspects of the merchant marine per P.L. 133-66, which are only a portion of the repo

Title II - Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Rental Assistance: 

Section 8 Contract Renewals and Administrative Expenses 

Public Housing Capital Fund 

Public Housing Operating Fund 

Native American Housing Block Grants 

Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund 

Housing Opportunity for Persons with Aids 

Community Development Fund 

Community Development Loan Guarantee 11 

Home Investment Partnership 

Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program 

Homeless Assistance Housing for the Elderly 

FHA General and Special Risk Program Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans 

Limitation on Direct Loans 

Administrative Expenses 

GNMA Mortgage Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program 

Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans 

1994 8,446,173 

2003 3,000,000 2003 2,900,000 

2013 Such sums as necessary 

2012 Such sums as necessary 

1994 156,300 1994 4,168,000 

1994 Not Applicable 1994 2,173,612 

2001 Such sums as necessary 

2011 Such sums as necessary 

2003 Such sums as necessary 

1995 

1995 

1995 1996 [1 10,000,000] 

Administrative Expenses 1996 

Policy Development and Research 1994 36,470 Fair Housing Activities, Fair Housing Program 1994 26,000 

Lead Hazard Reduction Program 1994 250,000 

Salaries and Expenses 1994 1,029,496 

11 The Community Development Loan Guarantee program authorization only limits commitment authority. 

Access Board 

National Transportation Safety Board 

Title III - Related Agencies 

2003 

2008 

5,401 

96,625 

5,458,106 

2,712,555 

3,576,600 

616,001 

6,000 

156,000 

4,877,389 

Not Applicable 

1,275,000 

48,000 

1,901,190 

783,286 

[20,885,072] [

[220,000] 

197,470 

[110,000,000] [5

9,101 

35,000 

20,481 

150,000 

916,963 

5,401 

91,000 
130 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

Pursuant to section 3(j)(2) of H. Res. 5 (113th Congress), no provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of 

Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified 

in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not direct any rule making. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocations under section 302(b) of the Budget Act: 

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF FY 2015 TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Transportation, 

Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies: .................... .................... .................... ....................

Mandatory ............................................................................. n.a. n.a. 0 1 0 

Discretionary ......................................................................... 52,029 118,974 52,029 118,682 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections prepared 

by the Congressional Budget Office of outlays associated with the 

budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2015 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 38,542 

2016 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 33,340 

2017 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 13,601 

2018 .............................................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5,725 

2019 and future years .................................................................................. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7,044 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the amounts of financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
131 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2015 .......................... n.a. n.a. 30,988 2 29,847 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
132 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 038 HR464.003

FULL COMMITIEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIll of the House of Representatives. the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report. together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against. are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. I 

Date: May 21. 2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation. and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Mr. Moran 

Description of Motion: Increase Amtrak capital and debt service grants by $200,000,000 with no offset. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 28 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
133 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 039 HR464.004

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule Xlii of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 2 

Date: May21,20l4 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Mr. Price 

Description of Motion: Increase Department of Transportation national infrastructure investments grants by 

$500,000,000 with no offset. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 28 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. ViscJosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
134 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 040 HR464.005

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule Xlll of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names ofthose voting for and 

those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 3 

Date: May 21, 2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Ms. Kaptur 

Description of Motion: Increase the Department of Housing and Urban Development community development 

fund by $300,000,000 with no offset. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 28 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
135 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 041 HR464.006

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 4 

Date; May 21, 2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Ms. McCollum 

Description of Motion: Amend the eligibility of national infrastructure investment grants to include projects 

under title 23 and title 49 United States Code. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 28 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
136 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 042 HR464.007

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report. together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against. are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 5 

Date: May21,2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Mr. Honda 

Description of Motion: Increase Federal Transit Administration capital investment grants by $809,000,000 

with no offset. 

Results: Defeated 21 yeas to 28 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
137 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 043 HR464.008

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XllI of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 6 

Date: May21,2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill. FY 2015 

Motion by: Ms. DeLauro 

Description or Motion: Amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1937. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 27 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fattah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Mr. Pastor 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
138 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 044 HR464.009

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the results of 

each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for and 

those voting against. are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 7 

Date: May 21,2014 

Measure: Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill, FY 2015 

Motion by: Mr. Wolf 

Description: To report the bill to the House, as amended. 

Results: Adopted 28 yeas to 21 nays 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Crenshaw 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mr. Pastor 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Mr. Farr 

Mr. Fanah 

Mr. Honda 

Ms. Kaptur 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Owens 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Schiff 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Insert graphic folio 045 HR464.010tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

TITLE I - DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Sal ari es and expenses ................................ . 

Immediate Office of the Secretary ................ . Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary ......... . 

Office of the General Counsel .................... . 

Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation 

for Policy ..................................... . 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget 

and Programs ................................... . 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental 

Affai rs ........................................ . 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration ................................. . 

Office of Public Affairs ......................... . Office of the Executive Secretariat .............. . Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 

Utilization .................................... . 

Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency 

Response ....................................... . 

Office of the Chief Information Officer .......... . 

Research and Technology .............................. . 

National Infrastructure Investments .................. . 

Infrastructure Permitting Center ..................... . 

Financial Management Capital ......................... . 

Cyber Security Initiatives ........................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

107,000 

(2,652) (1,000) 

(19,900) (10,271 ) (12,676) 

(2,530) 

(26,378) 

(2,020) (1,714) (1,386) 

(10,778) (15,695) 

14,765 

600,000 

7,000 

4,455 

FY 2015 

Request 

109,916 

(2,696) (1,011 ) 

(20,312) (10,417) (13,111 ) 

(2,567) 

(27,420) 

(2,061) (1,746) 

(1,414 ) 

(11,055) (16,106) 

14,625 

1 ,250,000 

8,000 

5,000 5,000 

Bill 

103,000 

(2,600) 

(980) 

(19,000) 

(9,500) 

(12,500) 

(2,500) 

(24,720) 

(2,000) (1,700) (1,400) 

(10,600) (15,500) 

12,625 

100,000 

5,000 

5,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-4,000 

(-52) 

(-20) 

(-900) (

(-771) 

( -176) 

(-30) 

(-1,658) (

(-20) 

( -14) 

(+14) 

( -178) 

( -195) 

- 2,140 

-500,000 -1,1

-2,000 

+545 

Insert graphic folio 046 HR464.011tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Office of Civil Rights ............................... . 

Transportation Planning, Research, and Development ... . 

Rescission of unobligated balances ............... . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Worki ng Capital Fund ................................. . 

Minority Business Resource Center Program ............ . 

{Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

Minority Business Outreach ........................... . 

Safe Transport of 0; 1 ................................ . 

Payments to Air Carriers (Airport & Airway Trust 

Fund) .............................................. . 

Total, Office of the Secretary ................. . 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Operat ions ........................................... . 

Air traffic organization ........................ .. 

Aviation safety .................................. . 

Commercial space transportation .................. . 

Fi nance and management ........................... . 

Staff offi ces .................................... . 

NextGen .......................................... . 

Facilities and Equipment (Airport & Airway Trust 

Fund) .............................................. . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

9,551 7,000 

-2,750 

4,250 

(178,OOO) 

925 

(18,367) 

3,088 

149,000 

900,034 

9,651,422 

(7,311,790) 

(1 ,204,777) 

(16, 011) 

(762,462) (296,600) 

(59,782) 

2,600,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

9,600 

8,000 

8,000 

1,013 

(18,367) 

3,099 

40,000 

155,000 

1,609,253 

9,750,000 

(7,396,654) (1,215,458) 

(16,605) 

(765,047) (296,147) 

(60,089) 

2,603,700 

Bi 11 

9,600 

6,000 6,000 

(181,OOO) 

1,013 

(18,367) 

3,099 

149,000 

394,337 

9,750,000 

(7,396,654) (1,218,458) 

(16,OOO) 

(762,652) (296,147) 

(60,089) 

2,600,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+49 

-1,000 

+2,750 

+1,750 

(+3,000) 

+88 

+11 

-505,697 

+98,578 

(+84,864) (+13,681) 

(-11) 

(+190) ( -453) (+307) 

B

(+1

-

-1,2

(

(

Insert graphic folio 047 HR464.012tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Research, Engineering, and Development (Airport & 

Airway Trust Fund .................................. . 

Rescission of unobligated balances .............. . 

Grants-in-Aid for Airports (Airport and Airway Trust 

Fund) (Liquidation of contract authorization) ....... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

Administration ................................... . 

Airport cooperative research program ............. . Airport technology research ...................... . 

Small community air service development program .. . 

Rescission of contract authority ................. . 

Pop-up contract authority ........................ . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

158,792 

-26,184 

(3,200,000) (3,350,000) 

(106,600) 

(15,000) (29,500) 

(5,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

156,750 

(3,200,000) (2,900,000) 

(107,100) 

(15,000) (29,750) 

-256,000 

126,000 

Bill 

156,750 

(3,200,000) (3,350,000) 

(107,100) 

(15,000) (29,750) 

(3,000) 

-260,000 

130,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-2,042 

+26,184 

(+4

(+500) (+250) 

(-2,000) (

-260,000 

+130,000 

_____________ 

-------------- -------------- -. __ .o ...

Total, Federal Aviation Administration ....... . 12,384,030 12,380,450 12,376,750 -7,280 

Limitations on obligations ................... . (3,350,000) (2,900,000) (3,350,000) (+4

Total budgetary resources .............. . (15,734,030) (15,280,450) (15,726,750) (-7,280) (+4

Administrative Provision 

War Risk Insurance Program Extension ................. . -100,000 +100,000 

Insert graphic folio 048 HR464.013tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Federal Highway Administration 

Limitation on Administrative Expenses"""""", 

Federal-Aid Highways (Highway Trust Fund): 

(Liquidation of contract authorization)""""", (Limitation on obligations)"." ...... " ... ,',.," 

Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation 

(Liquidation of contract authorization)., .. , .. " 

(Limitation on obligations)""" .. ", ... "", 

(Exempt contract authority) .. , ... "" .. ""., .. , .. 

Total, Federal Highway Administration ..... " ... . 

Limitations on obligations ... , ............ , .... , 

Exempt contract authority.,., ....... , .... ,', ... , 

Tota 1 budgetary resou rces, ....... , .. , ...... , . , , , 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

(416,100) 

(40,995,000) (40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,995,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

(439,000) 

(48,062,248) (47,323,248) 

(500,000) (500,000) (739,000) 

(47,823,248) 

(739,000) 

(48,562,248) 

Bill 

(426,100) 

(40,995,000) (40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,995,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

(+10,000) 

B

(-

(-7,0(-7,0

(-5(-5

(-7,5

(-7,5

Insert graphic folio 049 HR464.014tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

Motor Carrier Safety Operations and Programs (Highway 

Trust Fund) (Liquidation of contract authorization) .. 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

National Motor Carrier Safety Program (Highway Trust 

Fund) (Liquidation of contract authorization) ... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

Motor Carrier Safety Grants (Highway Trust Fund) 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ....... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

(259,000) 

(259,000) 

(13,000) (13,000) 

(313,000) (313,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

(315,770) (315,770) (352,753) (352,753) 

Bi 11 

(259,000) (259,000) 

(313,000) (313,000) 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

(-(-

( 13,000) 

(-13,OOO) 

(-

(-

------------- -------------- ---

... 

-

..................... _----

Total, Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration ....................... . 

Limitations on obligations .................... .. (585,000) (668,523) (572,000) (-13,000) (-

Total budgetary resources ...................... . (585,000) (668,523) (572,000) (-13,000) (-

Insert graphic folio 050 HR464.015tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COHPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AHOUNTS RECOHHENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

Operations and Research (general fund) ............... . Operations and Research (Highway Trust Fund) 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ............ . 

(Limitation on obligations) ..................... . 

Subtotal, Operations and Research .......... . 

Highway Traffic Safety Grants (Highway Trust Fund) 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ............ . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

Highway safety programs (23 USC 402) ........... . 

National priority safety programs (23 USC 405) .. 

High visibility enforcement ................... . 

Administrative expenses ........................ . 

Total, National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration ............................. . 

Limitations on obligations ................... . 

Total budgetary resources .................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

134,000 

(123,500 ) (123,500) 

257,500 

(561,500) (561,500) (235,000) (272,000) 

(29,OOO) 

(25,500) 

134,000 

(685,000) (819,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

152,000 

(122,000) 

(122,000) 

274,000 

(577,000) (577 ,000) (241,146) 

(278,705) 

(29,000) (28,149) 

152,000 

(699,000) (851,000) 

Bill 

134,000 

(128,500) (128,500) 

262,500 

(561,500) (561,500) (235,000) (272,000) 

(29,000) 

(25,500) 

134,000 

(690,OOO) 

(824,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

(+5,000) (+5,000) 

+5,000 

(+5,000) (+5,000) 

B

-

(

(

-

(-(-

(

((

-

(

(-

Insert graphic folio 051 HR464.016tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Safety and Operat ions ................................ . 

Rail road Research and Development .................... . Rail Servi ce Improvement Program ..................... . 

Northeast Corridor Improvement Program (rescission) .. . 

Next Generation High-Speed Rail (rescission) ......... . 

National Railroad Passenger Corporation: 

Operating Grants to the National Railroad 

Passenger Corporati on .......................... . 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to the National 

Railroad Passenger Corporation ................. . 

Current Rail Passenger Service ................... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

Total, Federal Railroad Administration ......... . 

Federal Transit Administration 

Administrative Expenses .............................. . 

Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program ....... . 

Transit Formula Grants (Hwy Trust Fund, Mass Transit 

Account (Liquidation of contract authorization) .... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

184,500 

35,250 

-4,419 -1,973 

340,000 

1,050,000 1,390,000 1,603,358 

105,933 

(9,500,000) 

(8,595,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

185,250 

35,100 

2,325,000 

2,450,000 2,450,000 

4,995,350 

114,400 

25,000 

(13,800,000) 

(13,800,000) 

Bi 11 

185,250 

35,250 

340,000 

850,000 

1,190,000 1,410,500 

103,000 

(9,500,000) (8,595,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+750 

+4,419 +1,973 

-200,000 

-200,000 -192,858 

-2,933 

B

-2,3

+3+8

-2,4

-1,2-3,5

--

(-4,3(-5,2

Insert graphic folio 052 HR464.017tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Fixing and Acceleration Surface Transportation 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ............ . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

Transit Research ..................................... . 

Technical Assistance and Training .................... . Trans it Research and Tra i ni ng ........................ . 

Rapid-Growth Area Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Program 

(liquidation of contract authorization) ............ . 

(limitation on obligations) .................... . 

Capital Investment Grants ............................ . 

Resci ssi on ....................................... . 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

Capital and Preventive Maintenance ................. . 

Administrative Provisions 

Rescission (Sec. 168) ................................ . 

Total, Federal Transit Administration .......... . 

Limitations on obligations .... _. _ .. _ ........... . 

Total budgetary resources ........... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

43,000 

5,000 

1,942,938 

150,000 

-96,228 

2,150,643 

(8,595,000) 

(10,745,643) 

FY 2015 

Request 

(500,000) 

(500,000) 

60,000 

(500,000) (500,000) 

2,500,000 

150,000 

2,849,400 

(14,800,000) (17,649,400) 

Bill 

15,000 

3,000 

1,691,000 

-65,000 

150,000 

1,897,000 

(8,595,000) 

(10,492,000) 

Bi 11 vs. 

Enacted 

-28,000 

-2,000 

-251,938 

-65,000 

+96,228 

-253,643 

(-253,643) 

B

(-5(-5

+

-

(-5(-5

-8

-

-9

(-6,2

(-7,1

Insert graphic folio 053 HR464.018tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Saint lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 

Operations and Maintenance (Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund) .............................................. . 

Maritime Administration 

Maritime Security Program ............................ . 

Operati ons and Trai ni ng .............................. . 

Ready Reserve Force (by transfer) .................... . 

Shi P Di sposa 1 ........................................ . 

Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account: 

Administrative expenses .......................... . 

Guaranteed loans subsidy ......................... . 

Resci ssi on ..................................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

31,000 

186,000 

148,003 

4,800 

3,500 

35,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

31,500 

211,000 

148,400 

(291,000) 

4,800 

3,100 

Bi 11 

32,500 

166,000 132,000 

4,000 

3,100 

-29,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+1,500 

-20,000 -

-16,003 -

(-2

-800 -400 

-35,000 -29,000 -

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Total, Maritime Administration ............... . 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

Operational Expenses: 

Genera 1 Fund ..................................... . 

Pipeline Safety Fund ............................. . Pipeline Safety information grants ............... . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

38,500 3,100 ·25,900 -64,400 ·

___ 8_ .... _______________________________________________________

377,303 367,300 276,100 -101,203 -

21,015 22,225 21,654 +639 

639 ·639 

(1,500) (1,500) (1,500) 

------------- ---.--------- -------------- -------------- -------

21,654 22,225 21,654 

Insert graphic folio 054 HR464.019tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Hazardous Materials Safety: 

Genera 1 Fund ..................................... . 

Special Permit and Approval Fees ................. . 

Pipeline Safety: 

Pipeline Safety Fund ............................. . 

Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund ................... . 

Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund ............... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

45,000 

98.514 

18,573 

2,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

52,000 

-6,000 

136.500 

19,500 

2,000 

Bi 11 

52,000 

110,000 

19,500 

2,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+7 ,000 

+11,486 -

+927 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Subtotal, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration ...................... . 

Pipeline safety user fees ........................... .. Pipeline Safety Design Review fee .................... . 

Emergency Preparedness Grants: 

Limitation on emergency preparedness fund ........ . 

(Emergency preparedness fund) ................ . 

Total, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration ............................... . 

119,087 158,000 131,500 +12,413 -

-------------

... 

----

.. 

-

...... 

_ ... 

-------------- ---------

...................... _-

185,741 

-99,153 

-2,000 

(28,318) 

(188) 

84,588 

226,225 

-136,500 

-2,000 

(28,318) 

( 188) 

87,725 

205,154 

-110,000 

-2,000 

(28,318) 

(188) 

93,154 

+19,413 -

-10,847 +

+8,566 

Insert graphic folio 055 HR464.020tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Office of Inspector General 

Sal ari es and Expenses ...................... . 

Surface Transportation Board 

Sal ari es and Expenses ................................ . 

Offsetting collections ........................... . 

Total, Surface Transportation Board .......... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

85,605 

31,000 

-1,250 

FY 2015 

Request 

86,223 

31,500 

-1,250 

Bi 11 

86,223 

31,250 

-1,250 

...... 

29,750 30,250 30,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+618 

+250 

+250 

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

Total, title I, Department of Transportation .. 17,680,311 22,589,451 16,730,564 -949,747 -5,8

Appropri at ions ............................ (17,813,115) (22,852,701) (17 ,085,814) (-727,301) (-5,7

Rescissions .............. . . , . . . . . . . . . . . (-131,554) (-94,000) (+37,554) (-Rescissions of contract authority ......... (-256,000) (-260,000) (-260,000) (

Offsetting collections .................... (-1,250) (-7,250) (-1,250) (

Limitations on obligations .................... (53,471,000) (66,890,771) (53,463,000) ( -8,000) (-13,4

(By transfer) ................................. (291,000) (-2

Total budgetary resources ..................... (71,151,311 ) (89,480,222) (70 , 193 , 564) (-957,747) (-19,2

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

Insert graphic folio 056 HR464.021tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

TITLE II - DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Management and Administration 

Executive Offices .................................... . 

Administration Support Offices ....................... . 

Program Office Salaries and Expenses: 

Public and Indian Housing ........................ . 

Community Planning and Development ............... . 

Housi ng .......................................... . 

Policy Development and Research .................. . Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity ............... . 

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes .. . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

14,500 

506,000 

205,000 

102,000 

381,500 

22,000 

69,000 

7,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

15,234 

530,783 

213,664 

110,535 

386,677 

23,248 

77,629 

7,879 

Bi 11 

14,000 

500,000 

200,000 

100,000 

370,000 

20,000 

68,000 

7,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-500 

-6,000 -

-5,000 --2,000 -

-11,500 -

-2,000 

-1,000 

.. 

------------

.... 

--

...... _------ -------

Subtotal ..................................... . 786,500 819,632 765,000 -21,500 -

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Total, Management and Administration ......... . 1,307,000 1,365,649 1,279,000 -28,000 -

Public and Indian Housing 

Tenant-based Rental Assistance: 

Renewal s ......................................... . 17,365,527 18,006,550 17,693,079 +327,552 -3

Tenant protection vouchers ....................... . 130,000 150,000 130,000 -

Administrative fees .............................. . 1,500,000 1,705,000 1,350,000 -150,000 -3

Veterans affairs supportive housing .............. . 75,000 75,000 75,000 

Sec. 811 mai nstream voucher renewal s ............. . 106,691 108,450 108,450 +1,759 

Insert graphic folio 057 HR464.022tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Subtotal (available this fiscal year) ........ . 

Advance appropriations ........................... . 

Less appropriations from prior year advances ..... . 

Total, Tenant-based Rental Assistance 

appropriated in this bill .................. . 

Rental Assistance Demonstration ...................... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Public Housing Capital Fund ........................ . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Public Housing Operating Fund ........................ . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Choi ce nei ghborhoods ................................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Family Self-Sufficiency .............................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Native American Housing Block Grants ................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant .................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account ... . 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

19,177,218 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

19,177,218 

1,875,000 

4,400,000 

90,000 75,000 

650,000 

10,000 

6,000 

(1,818,000) 

FY 2015 

Request 

( -15,000) 

20,045,000 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

20,045,000 

10,000 

( -50) 

1,925,000 

( -9,625) 

4,600,000 

(-10,070) 

120,000 

(-600) 

75,000 

(-375) 

650,000 

(-3,250) 

13,000 

( -65) 

6,000 

(1,200,000) 

Bi 11 

19,356,529 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

19,356,529 

1,775,000 

4,400,000 

25,000 

75,000 

650,000 

6,000 

(1,200,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+179,311 

+179,311 

-100,000 

-65,000 

10,000 

+2,000 

(-618,000) 

B

(+

-6

-6

-

-1

(

-2

(+

-

(

-

Insert graphic folio 058 HR464.023tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Native Hawaiian Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account .. . 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

Total, Public and Indian Housing ............. . 

Community Planning and Development 

Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS .......... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Community Development Fund: 

CDBG formul a ..................................... . 

Indian CDBG ...................................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

100 

(18,868) 

26,283,318 

330,000 

3,030,000 

70,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

27,446,000 

332,000 

(-1,660) 

2,800,000 

70,000 

Bi 11 

26,289,529 

305,900 

3,000,000 

60,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-100 

(-18,868) 

+6,211 

-24,100 -30,000 -10,000 

B

-1 ,1

-

(

+2

-

- ---- ---- --- -- .................. ----- ---- ----------- .. - .. ----- --

Subtotal ..................................... . 3,100,000 2,870,000 3,060,000 -40,000 +1

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . (-14,350) (+

Community Development Loan Guarantees (Section 108): 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . (150,000) (500,000) (500,000) (+350,000) 

Credi t subsi dy ................................... . 3,000 -3,000 

Resci ss ion ....................................... . -3,000 -3,000 

HOME Investment Partnerships Program ................. . 1, 000, 000 950,000 700,000 ·300,000 -2

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . (-4,750) (

Self-help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity 

Program ............................................ . 50,000 -50,000 

Capacity Building .................................... . 20,000 40,000 +40,000 +

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . ( -100) 

Insert graphic folio 059 HR464.024tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Homeless Assistance Grants ........................... . 

Brownfields (rescission) ............................. . 

Total, Community Planning and Development ...... . 

Housing Programs 

Project-based Rental Assistance: 

Renewal s ......................................... . 

Contract admi ni st rators .......................... . 

Subtotal (available this fiscal year) ........ . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Advance appropri at i cns ........................... . 

Less appropriations from prior year advances ..... . 

Total, Project-based Rental Assistance 

appropriated in this bill ................... 

Housing for the Elderly ............................... 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) .......... 

Housing for Persons with Disabilities ................. 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) .......... 

Housing Counseling Assistance ......................... 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) .......... 

Rental Housi n9 Assi stance ............................. Rent Supplement (rescission) .......................... 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

2,105,000 

6,588,000 

9,651,628 

265.000 

9,916,628 

400,000 

-400.000 

9,916.628 

383,500 

126,000 

45,000 

21,000 

-3,500 

FY 2015 

Request 

2,406,400 

6,578,400 9,536,000 

210,000 

9,746,000 

(-15,000) 

400,000 

-400,000 

9,746,000 

440,000 

(-2,200) 

160,000 

(-800) 

60,000 

(-300) 

28,000 

Bi 11 

2,105,000 

-2,900 

6,205.000 

9,536,000 

210,000 

9,746.000 

400,000 

-400,000 

9,746,000 

420,000 

135,000 

47,000 

28,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-3

-2,900 

-383,000 -3

-115,628 

-55,000 

-170,628 

(+

-170,628 

+36,500 -

(

+9,000 -+2,000 -

+7,000 +3,500 

Insert graphic folio 060 HR464.025tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund ................. . 

Offsett i ng co 11 ecti ons ........................... . 

Total, Housi ng Programs ............ . 

Federal Housing Administration 

Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . (Limitation on direct loans) ..................... . 

Offsetting receipts .............................. . 

Proposed offsetting receipts (HECM) .............. . 

Additional offsetting receipts (Sec. 244) ........ . 

Administrative contract expenses ................. . 

Homeowners Armed with Knowledge Pilot ............ . 

HAWK prohibition (Sec. 232) ...................... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

General and Special Risk Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans} ................. . (Limitation on direct loans) ..................... . 

Offsetting receipts .............................. . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

7,530 

-6,530 

10,489,628 

(400,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-10,841,000 

-57,000 

127,000 

(30,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-926,000 

Total, Federal Housing Administration ......... -11,697,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

10,000 

-10,000 

10,434,000 

(400,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-7,951,000 

-36,000 

-32,000 

170 ,000 

10,000 

( -850) 

(30,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-876,000 

-8,715,000 

Bi 11 

10,000 

-10,000 

10,376,000 

(400,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-7,951,000 

-36,000 

130,000 

10,000 

-10,000 

(30,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-876,000 

-8,733,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+2,470 

-3,470 

-113,628 

+2,890,000 

+21,000 

+3,000 

+10,000 

-10,000 

+50,000 

+2,964,000 

B

-

+

-

-

-

Insert graphic folio 061 HR464.026tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Government National Mortgage Association 

Guarantees of Mortgage-backed Securities Loan 

Guarantee Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

Admi ni strat i ve expenses .......................... . 

Offsetting receipts .............................. . Offsetti ng recei pts .............................. . 

Proposed offsetting receipts (HECM) (Sec. 210) ... . 

Additional contract expenses ..................... . 

Total, Gov't National Mortgage Association .... 

Policy Development and Research 

Research and Technology .............................. . 

Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity 

Fair Housing Activities .............................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes 

Lead Hazard Reduction ................................ . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

lnformat i on Technology Fund .......................... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

(500.000.000) 

19,500 

-100,000 -707,000 

-12,000 

1,000 

-798,500 

46,000 

66.000 

110,000 

250.000 

FY 2015 

Request 

(500,000.000) 

28,000 

-94,000 

-742,000 

-28,000 

1,000 

-835,000 

50,000 

71,000 

( -355) 

120,000 

( -600) 

272,000 

Bill 

(500.000,000) 

22,000 

-94,000 

-742,000 

-28,000 

-842,000 

40,000 

46,000 

70,000 97,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+2,500 +6,000 

-35,000 -16,000 

-1,000 

-43,500 

-6,000 

-20,000 

-40,000 

-153,000 

B

-

-

-

-1

Insert graphic folio 062 HR464.027tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Offi ce of Inspector General .......................... . 

Transformation Initiative ............ ".,', ........ ". 

(by transfer)."" ... "." .. , ... """"."""", 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

125,000 

40,000 

FY 2015 

Request 

129,000 

(80,000) 

Bill 

124,861 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-139 

-40,000 

(-

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

Total, title II, Department of Housing and 

Urban Deve 1 opment , , , , , . , , , , , , . , , , ... , , , , , , , , , . 

Appropri ati ons. , , .. , . , , , ........ , , , , .. , , .. 

Rescissions.".",."." .. "".,.",."" . 

Advance appropr i at ions, , . , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , . 

Offsetting receipts"",."",.""""", Offsetting collections"."", .. """",. 

(by transfer)"".""".,.""""".""""" 

(trans fer out)"", , , , , " .,',.,"', .. ,""" ,. 

(Limitation on direct loans)" .. "",."" ... ", 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans)", .... , ... "", 

TITLE III - OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Acces s Board" , , , , , , , , . , . , , , , , , . , , , , , , , , . , . , , , , , .. , , . , 

Federal Housing Finance Agency, Office of Inspector 

General (legislative proposal)"",.""".", .. , ... 

Offsetting collections (legislative proposal)"", 

Federal Maritime Commission",., .. ".,.",."",."". 

National Railroad Passenger Corporation Inspector 

General, , , , .. , , . , , , . , ... , , , . , ... , , . , , , , ... , , , ... , , , , 

National Transportation Safety Board.,."".", .. ,.", 

32,809,446 36,916,049 34,952,390 +2,142,944 -1,9

(41,062,476) (42,285,049) (40,295,290) (-767,186) (-1 ,9

(-3,500) (-5,900) (-2,400) (

(4,400,000) (4,400,000) (4,400,000) 

(-12,643,000) (-9,759,000) (-9,727,000) (+2,916,000) (+

(-6,530) (-10,000) (-10,000) (-3,470) 

80,000 -

-80,000 +

(40,000) (40,000) (40,000) 

(931 ,986,868) (931 ,700,000) (931,700,000) (-286,868) 

============= ============= ===:==:::===== ============== =======

7,448 7,548 7,548 +100 

48,000 45,000 +45,000 

-48,000 -45,000 -45,000 

24,669 25,660 25,499 +830 

23,499 24,499 24,499 +1,000 

103,027 103,000 103,000 -27 

Insert graphic folio 063 HR464.028tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2014 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2015 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation ................ . 

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness .... . 

FY 2014 

Enacted 

204,100 

3,500 

FY 2015 

Request 

182,000 

3,530 

Bi 11 

182,000 

3,500 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-22,100 

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

Total, title III, Other Independent Agencies .... Grand tot a 1 .................................... . 

Appropri ati ons ............................. . 

Resci ssi ons ................................ . 

Rescissions of contract authority .......... . 

Advance appropriations ..................... . 

Offsetting receipts ........................ . Offsetting collections ..................... . 

(by transfer) .................................. . 

(transfer out) ................................. . 

(Limitation on obligations) ................... .. 

366,243 

50,856,000 

(59,241,834) 

(-135,054) 

(4,400,000) 

(-12,643,000) 

(-7,780) 

(53,471,000) 

346,237 

59,851,737 

(65,531,987) 

(-256,000) 

(4,400,000) 

(-9,759,000) 

(-65,250) 

371,000 

-80,000 

(66,890,771) 

346,046 

52,029,000 

(57,772,150) 

(-99,900) 

(-260,000) 

(4,400,000) 

(-9,727,000) 

(-56,250) 

(53,463,000) 

Total budgetary resources ....................... (104,327,000) (126,742,508) (105,492,000) 

-20,197 

+1,173,000 

( -1 ,469,684) 

(+35,154) 

(-260,000) 

(+2,916,000) 

(-48,470) 

( -8,000) 

-7,8

(-7,7

(-

(

(+

(

-3

+

(-13,4

(+1,165,000) (-21,2
(158) 

MINORITY VIEWS OF NITA M. LOWEY AND ED PASTOR 

The Fiscal Year 2015 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies (T–HUD) bill funds our nation’s 

transportation and housing infrastructure and provides housing for 

some of our most vulnerable populations. Chairman Latham has 

been open, engaged and accommodating throughout the process, 

and we thank him for his willingness to accommodate requests 

from the Minority. 

Investments in transportation and housing are critical to creating a strong economy and demonstrating we are a nation that 

cares for its most vulnerable citizens. In both areas, challenges lie 

ahead if we are to support robust programs. 

Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) ‘‘Ginnie Mae’’ receipts have a 

dramatic impact on the bill this year. Each year, FHA collects premiums from borrowers and GNMA generates revenue from the sale 

of securities. These receipts generate negative budget authority 

that offset spending elsewhere in the bill. In Fiscal Year 2014, the 

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that these receipts 

were worth $12.6 billion. For Fiscal Year 2015, CBO estimated that 

the receipts would be worth $9.7 billion, a $2.9 billion decrease 

from last year. The T–HUD subcommittee’s 302(b) allocation is 

$52.029 billion, $1.1 billion higher than last year. However, because of the $2.9 billion decrease in receipts, this bill actually 

spends $1.8 billion less than Fiscal Year 2014. 

This bill has become increasingly reliant on receipts from FHA 

and GNMA. In 2008, these receipts generated $413 million in 

budgetary savings; in Fiscal Year 2014 they generated $12.6 billion 

dollars. For Fiscal Year 2015, CBO estimates that these receipts 

will decline to $9.7 billion, and CBO’s estimates show a steady decline over the next five years due to a reduced FHA presence and 

an improving economy. In Fiscal Year 2020, CBO estimates that 

FHA and GNMA receipts will produce $6.7 billion in budgetary 

savings. This represents a $3.2 billion decrease from the Fiscal 

Year 2015 level. To put this decrease into perspective, it is slightly 

larger than the size of the Community Development Block Grant 

program. 

Over the same period, we can expect increases in the cost of the 

rental assistance programs like Section 8. Between Fiscal Years 

2011–2015, Tenant-Based Rental Assistance renewals increased by 

nearly $1 billion; Project-Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) increased by $1.2 billion. Assuming that the past program growth 

will continue, and assuming the PBRA contract synchronization becomes law, we can expect at least $4 billion in growth for renewal 

needs in these two accounts. Together with the expected decrease 

in receipts, the Fiscal Year 2020 T–HUD bill will need at least $8 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
159 

billion more in budget authority to retain level services for HUD 

alone. 

Similarly, in transportation, the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is 

in dire straits. With more fuel efficient vehicles and fewer vehicle 

miles traveled, receipts into the HTF are not sufficient to cover the 

investments necessary to maintain and expand our highway and 

transit infrastructure. The last time revenues into the HTF were 

increased was more than two decades ago. Since then, there have 

been five general fund transfers totaling $53.3 billion in order to 

keep the HTF from insolvency. The HTF is expected to go negative 

as soon as August or September of this year. With the expiration 

of the surface transportation authorization on September 30, 2014, 

it is time for a serious discussion about how our nation will pay 

for its infrastructure investments. The President sent a comprehensive legislative proposal to boost transportation funding through 

corporate tax reform. The authorizing committees must carefully 

evaluate his proposal and suggest a realistic alternative if our nation is going to address the state of good repair and capacity backlog that faces our transportation system. 

The decrease in housing receipts and the pending surface transportation authorization made Chairman Latham’s job much harder 

than the allocation indicates. Funding levels for the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration were largely contingent on the reauthorization of the surface transportation programs. 

With regard to Amtrak, the bill cuts Amtrak’s capital funding by $200 million below the Fiscal Year 2014 enacted level. Amtrak will 

have to reduce track, signal and bridge work which could denigrate 

the quality of service and on-time performance. Nearly 32 million 

passengers rely on Amtrak for business and recreational travel annually. We ought to be investing more in our nation’s passenger 

rail system, not less. 

The Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) capital investment 

grant program was cut by $809 million below the President’s request. The capital investment grant program is dedicated to expanding or building new commuter rail, light rail, subway and bus 

rapid transit lines. The bill provides sufficient funding for projects 

that are or will be in construction during the current fiscal year. 

Those projects that are scheduled to begin construction in Fiscal 

Year 2015 will be put off for another year. These projects have 

gone through years of FTA’s rigorous review process. To delay them 

for another year will only prolong the traffic congestion that these 

projects are intended to alleviate and delay the creation of construction and operational jobs that these projects produce. 

The HOME program receives $700 million, the lowest level in its 

history. Underfunding this program ensures that the demand for 

affordable housing will continue to greatly exceed the supply. 

Grants to abate lead and other household toxins are reduced by 

$40 million in this bill despite a clear need for the program. The 

Public Housing Capital Fund is funded below the sequester level. 

Our nation’s public housing stock has a capital backlog of more 

than $20 billion. This bill would add at least $1 billion to that 

backlog. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
160 

An emerging safety challenge for the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is the important and careful oversight required for the transport of energy products. The increase in the 

transport of crude oil, ethanol and other hazardous materials warrants additional resources to ensure that these products are transported safely and efficiently. 

Unfortunately, the bill does not include any funding for the President’s request of $40 million for a new ‘‘Safe Transportation 

of Energy Products Fund.’’ On a positive note, the bill fully funds 

the President’s request for FRA’s safety and operations account and 

PHMSA’s hazardous materials account. In addition, the Committee 

adopted an amendment to allocate nearly $12 million in unexpended FRA funds for the purpose of hiring safety staff to monitor 

the routing of energy products and to make safety improvements 

on grade crossings that carry energy products. This represents a 

critical first step in an area that will require constant monitoring 

and resources in the years to come. 

It is also disappointing that the bill did not include the Presi- dent’s request of $825 million for the implementation of positive 

train control (PTC) systems on passenger and commuter rail lines. 

The National Transportation Safety Board has included the implementation of PTC on its ‘‘Most Wanted List’’ for years. Additionally, the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 required freight and 

passenger rail lines to implement PTC by December 31, 2015. Most 

railroads are not prepared to meet this deadline. There are too 

many tragic examples of crashes that could have been prevented if 

PTC technology had been in place. We appreciate Chairman 

Latham’s willingness to work with us on this important safety 

issue as the bill moves forward. 

The bill eliminates the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity 

Program (SHOP) program as a standalone program. The Fiscal 

Year 2013 House Committee Report correctly noted: ‘‘HOME funding has decreased significantly in recent years; the self-help and 

sweat-equity model enjoys broad Congressional support; and SHOP 

funding is much-needed in rural areas, where state-wide HOME 

funds are scarce and often set-aside for large tax-credit developments, rather than for self-help homeownership.’’ But for an even 

lower HOME program, this statement is equally true today, yet 

this bill ends dedicated funding for SHOP and moves it into the 

HOME program. 

A similar shift has occurred within the PBRA account. At this 

year’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 

Budget hearing, the Chairman expressed skepticism at the Administration’s proposal to synchronize the expiration of project-based 

Section 8 contracts. The Chairman correctly observed that this 

change increases this program’s cost in Fiscal Year 2016 and beyond. However, this bill adopts the Administration’s proposal and 

the higher baseline in future years. Next year, we can expect at 

least a $1 billion increase in the cost of program. 

While the bill funds Community Development Block Grants at a 

robust level, it short-funds salaries and expenses for the Office of 

Community Planning and Development (CPD). In fact, if this bill 

were to become law, HUD estimates that CPD would need to furVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
161 

lough their employees for 8 days while other offices at HUD would 

need to implement a reduction in force. The bill provides adequate 

funding for tenant-based rental assistance, but fails to provide adequate funding to administer those vouchers. HUD’s Information 

Technology Fund is more than $100 million short of the level required for the Department to have working computers. Too often, 

this bill funds a program, but doesn’t provide adequate funding for 

the program to be administered or monitored. 

This bill contains sufficient funding for renewals in the TenantBased Rental Assistance account. At the same time, we are disappointed that this funding level won’t allow HUD to restore any 

of the estimated 40,000 vouchers that were lost during sequestration. We are also concerned that the funding level for administrative fees is inadequate. In Fiscal Year 2013, the administrative fee 

proration was 69 percent- this bill provides 65 percent. In Fiscal 

Year 2013, 18 public housing authorities refused new Veterans’ Affairs-Supportive Housing vouchers and 25 stopped administering 

their Tenant-Based programs altogether. We fear that if the levels 

for administrative fees in the bill were to become law, we would see 

similar consequences in Fiscal Year 2015. 

Despite significant cuts to critical rail and transit capital programs, the bill adequately funds the core safety missions of the Department of Transportation. In particular, the bill includes strong 

funding for the programs and activities of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA continues to recover from the devastating impact of sequestration last year when the agency had to 

impose a hiring freeze through the end of Fiscal Year 2013. 

The hiring freeze resulted in the loss of hundreds of air traffic 

controllers and the FAA has been playing catch up during Fiscal 

Year 2014 in order to hire and train the controllers lost during Fiscal Year 2013 as well as the controller positions lost through retirements and normal attrition. The Fiscal Year 2015 bill fully funds 

the President’s request for FAA operations and includes strong report language directing the FAA continue to keep staffing and 

training to the highest standard. 

Additionally, the FAA’s capital and research programs were 

nearly fully funded in order to ensure that the development and deployment of key NextGen technologies, such as en route and terminal modernization programs, data communications and ADS–B, 

stay on track. 

In a departure from recent House bills, the bill included $100 

million for the National Infrastructure Investment program, commonly known as the TIGER program. Created in 2009, TIGER has 

been enormously popular helping to advance highway, transit, port, 

freight and passenger rail projects. Since the program’s inception, 

the demand has far exceeded the funding provided. For Fiscal Year 

2014, the Department of Transportation received 790 applications 

totaling nearly $9.5 billion for the $600 million in TIGER funding. 

The majority rejected amendments to increase funding for TIGER 

to the FY 2014 level and to delete bill language that narrows the 

scope of eligible projects. Restricting the TIGER program to only 

highway, bridge, port and freight projects limits the flexibility for 

States and localities to invest in transportation projects that best 

meet their needs. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
162 

The bill also includes controversial riders regarding California 

High Speed Rail and truck weights. High speed rail has been a priority of President Obama’s Administration, and a rider to prohibit 

the advancement of projects in California will only diminish the 

bill’s chances for enactment. Since 2009, fatalities and injuries involving large trucks have increased by 16 percent and 40 percent 

respectively. Our collective goal should be to enhance the safety of 

our nation’s transportation system and not take dramatic measures 

to weaken it. Any changes to current safety standards for trucks 

should be thoroughly examined by the authorizing committees of 

jurisdiction. 

We are pleased that the Committee adopted two amendments. 

One amendment restored a funding cut to the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness. The second amendment provided 

report language to address administrative fees for ported tenantbased housing choice vouchers. We are disappointed that Democratic amendments to restore funding to the HOME program and 

increase funding for the Community Development Block Grant 

(CDBG) program were rejected. 

We renew our call for the Financial Services Committee to address the Administration’s proposals to reform HUD’s programs. 

The authorizing committee has considered reform proposals to the 

Section 8 program since the 108th Congress. Every year that the 

authorizing committee fails to act, Congress leaves millions of dollars in savings on the table. 2014 marks the 40th anniversary of 

the Community Development Block Grant program and the 20th 

anniversary of the expiration of its last authorization. Finally, the Senate’s allocation for the T–HUD bill is $54.4 bil- lion, which is $2.37 billion higher than the House allocation. It is 

our hope that the shortcomings in the bill will be addressed as the 

legislative process moves forward. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

ED PASTOR. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(163) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE ROSA L. DELAURO 

I am saddened that my amendment to increase the minimum 

wage to $10.10 an hour, as called for in the Fair Minimum Wage 

Act (H.R. 1010), was rejected by a party line vote in the Appropriations Committee. In 2006, the House Appropriations Committee 

acted in a bipartisan way to raise the minimum wage with President Bush ultimately signing legislation to increase the wage in 

2007. 

The members of the Appropriations Committee from the majority 

party, without any argument on the merits, voted against a wage 

hike that would improve the standard of living for 25 million Americans, lift millions out of poverty, create jobs and strengthen our 

economy. They claimed that my amendment to do just that does 

not belong on an appropriations bill. The fact is both Democrats 

and Republicans voted to increase the minimum wage on an appropriations bill in 2006. 

At a time of great need all across America, we know that the 

minimum wage has fallen far below the rise in the cost of living, 

and that minimum wage workers have not received a pay raise in 

four years. It is long past time to get this done. 

The minimum wage in America used to be equal to about half 

of average wages. Today, at $7.25 an hour, it is barely a third. Put 

another way, in terms of purchasing power, the minimum wage has 

been dropping steadily for 45 years now—ever since 1968. If it had 

kept up with inflation over the last 40 years, it would be $10.55 

an hour. 

It is time to go to $10.10 for women, who make up nearly two 

out of three workers making the minimum wage. At that rate, a 

year of full-time work comes out to $14,500 a year. For a mom with 

two children, that is over $3,000 below the poverty line. It is past 

time to raise the minimum wage for those children. 

Raising the minimum wage, as this amendment does, would 

mean a raise for 30 million workers. And many economists argue 

that it could create 300,000 new jobs and boost GDP by $33 billion. 

It is time to go to $10.10 for our economy. 

What is more, support for this proposed raise is broad-based and 

bipartisan. A poll conducted by Hart Research showed that the 

American people support raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an 

hour, as this amendment does, by a 4–to–1 margin. This includes 

three out of five Republicans, and four out of five Independents. 

And 74% of Americans believe that raising the minimum wage 

should be an important legislative priority for Congress this year. 

They want to see us act. 

I am saddened that the majority party opposed raising the minimum wage. I am also saddened that the Chairman failed to give 

me the full opportunity to argue for my minimum wage amendment, by refusing to give me the standard one-minute closing afVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:42 May 28, 2014 Jkt 087987 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR464.XXX HR464

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
164 

forded to all other members with amendments. This deviation from 

the regular process is very troubling. In our democracy, those with 

opposing views are allowed a full opportunity to speak. This was 

not the case last week for me and I feel compelled to include my 

objections to this in these views. 

ROSA L. DELAURO. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS