69–006

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106–20

HIRAM H. WARD FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES

COURTHOUSE

FEBRUARY 23, 1999.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. SHUSTER, from the Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H.R. 92]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom

was referred the bill (H.R. 92) to designate the Federal building

and United States courthouse located at 251 North Main Street in

Winston-Salem, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Hiram H. Ward Federal

Building and United States Courthouse’’, having considered the

same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

Hiram H. Ward was born in Thomasville, North Carolina on

April 29, 1923. He served as a Lieutenant Colonel Pilot, in the

United States Army Air Force, Civil Air Patrol from 1940 until

1945. For his efforts during World War II, Judge Ward received an

Air Medal and Purple Heart.

Upon his return from the war, Judge Ward attended Wake Forest University, with the initial intent of pursuing a career in journalism. However, he turned his sights to law and graduated with

honors from Wake Forest School of Law in 1950. Later that same

year Judge Ward was admitted to the North Carolina Bar Association.

Judge Ward began his career in the private sector, where he

practiced for twenty years and became a partner in a private law

firm in Lexington, North Carolina. In 1972, President Nixon appointed Judge Ward to the Federal bench for the Middle District

of North Carolina. He served the Middle District from 1972, achieving the status of Chief Judge in 1982, until 1988. In 1988, Judge

Ward elected to take senior status, retaining all of his pending
2

cases, and continued to sit for an additional six years with the

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

HEARINGS AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

H.R. 92 was introduced on January 6, 1999. The Committee did

not hold hearings on the reported legislation.

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On February 11, 1999, the Committee met in open session and

ordered reported H.R. 92, to designate the Federal building located

at 251 North Main Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, as the

‘‘Hiram H. Ward Federal Building and United States Courthouse,’’

discharged the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public

Buildings, Hazardous Materials and Pipeline Transportation, without an amendment, by voice vote with a quorum present. There

were no recorded votes taken during Committee consideration of

H.R. 92.

RECORD VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives requires

each committee report to include the total number of votes cast for

and against on each record vote on a motion to report and on any

amendment offered to the measure or matter, and the names of

those members voting for and against. There were no recorded

votes taken in connection with ordering H.R. 92 reported. A motion

by Mr. Franks to order H.R. 92 favorably reported to the House,

without amendment, was agreed to by voice vote, a quorum being

present.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of

the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in this report.

COST OF THE LEGISLATION

Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and comparison

prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under

section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the report and is included in the

report. Such a cost estimate is included in this report.

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and section 308(a) of

the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee references

the report of the Congressional Budget Office below.

2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has

received no report of oversight findings and recommendations from

the Committee on Government Reform on the subject of H.R. 92.

3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII

of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
3

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the

following cost estimate for H.R. 92 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

U.S. CONGRESS,

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,

Washington, DC, February 18, 1999.

Hon. BUD SHUSTER,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House

of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has reviewed the following bills, which were ordered reported by the

House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on February 11, 1999. CBO estimates that their enactment would have no

significant impact on the federal budget, and would not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures

would not apply. The bills contain no intergovernmental or privatesector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.

The bills reviewed are:

H.R. 92, a bill to designate the federal building and United

States courthouse located at 251 North Main Street in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Hiram H. Ward Federal

Building and United States Courthouse;’’

H.R. 158, a bill to designate the United States courthouse located at 316 North 26th Street in Billings, Montana, as the

‘‘James F. Battin United States Courthouse;’’

H.R. 233, a bill to designate the federal building located at

700 East San Antonio Street in El Paso, Texas, as the ‘‘Richard

C. White Federal Building;’’ and

H.R. 396, a bill to designate the federal building located at

1301 Clay Street in Oakland, California, as the ‘‘Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building.’’

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is John R. Righter.

Sincerely,

DAN L. CRIPPEN, Director.

APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1).

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of the Federal

mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

(Public Law 104–4).

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House

of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint resolution
4

of a public character shall include a statement citing the specific

powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the

measure. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

finds that Congress has the authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No Advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

H.R. 92 makes no changes in existing law.

Æ