81–684 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 113–136 

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2014 

JULY 2, 2013.—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 VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 2610] 

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, 

2014. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

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

Title II—Department of Housing and Urban Development ................... 68 70 

Title III—Related Agencies ....................................................................... 133 102 

Title IV—General Provisions .................................................................... 141 107 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2014, 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 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

propriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

This definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 

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

OPERATING PLANS AND REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

The Committee includes a provision (Sec. 404) 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 thorough 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 budgVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

etary 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 2014, and non-appropriated resources such 

as fee collections that are used to meet program requirements in 

fiscal year 2014. 

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, 2014. 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 6 specifically instructs agencies to ‘‘consult with your congressional committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your 

plans to modify the format of agency budget documents.’’ 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 noted a vast improvement in the quality, information and presentation of the budget justifications. The Committee has made some specific suggestions for the 2015 submission, 

but overall a better product is produced. The Committee continues 

the direction that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2015 

budget request by agencies funded under this act contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests at the level of detail contained in 

the funding table included at the end of this report. Among other 

items, agencies shall provide a detailed discussion of proposed new 

initiatives, proposed changes in the agency’s financial plan from 

prior year enactment, detailed data on all programs, and comprehensive information on any office or agency restructurings. At 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

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 2015 to the fiscal year 2014 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 2015 budget request. 

SURFACE AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION 

The Highway Trust Fund, and the Mass Transit Account are 

both projected to reach low levels at the end of fiscal year 2014. 

The Department may be forced to limit payments to states and localities at the end of fiscal year 2014, if not before, and the programs and spending in Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP–21) cannot simply be extended. The Administration and 

the Congress must come up with a new authorization and a funding stream to meet the demands of repairing, maintaining and operating our Nation’s transportation infrastructure. Further, the 

Committee will not be amenable to a General Fund transfer to the 

Highway Trust Fund. 

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. 

DEPARTMENT REPORTS 

The Congress and the administration, in an effort to reduce the 

overall bureaucratic burden and financial demands on agencies and 

departments, are working together to reduce the number of reports 

sent to the Congress. While a few reports may be outdated and 

have outlived their usefulness, the Congress, and specifically this 

Committee, depend on the reports directed in this bill and report 

to gauge the effectiveness of the various programs and funding in 

the THUD bill, and provide information necessary to conduct proper oversight of the taxpayer dollars provided. Of the reports requested by this Committee in prior years, the following modifications are allowed: 

Report Requirement Modification 

Public Housing Receiverships ................................................ Conf. Rpt 112–284 ................ Submit annually. 

Status of all Section 8 Housing ............................................ P.L. 112–55 ........................... Eliminate. 

13th Buckle Up America ........................................................ House Report 105–188 .......... Eliminate. 

14th Buckle Up America ........................................................ House Report 105–188 .......... Eliminate. 

Hazardous Materials Safety ................................................... Senate Report 111–230 ........ Eliminate. 

High Speed Corridors & Intercity Psgr Rail ........................... House Report 111–564 .......... Eliminate. 

Neighborhood Electric Vehicles .............................................. – – – Eliminate. 

Technical Staffing Requirements ........................................... P.L. 111–8 Stat. of Managers Eliminate. 

All other reports should continue to be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate as directed. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(5) 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $102,481,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 113,108,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 102,481,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,627,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The bill provides $102,481,000 for the salaries and expenses of 

the offices comprising the Office of the Secretary of Transportation 

(OST). The Committee’s recommendation is equal to the appropriation provided in fiscal year 2013, and $10,627,000 below the budget 

request. The Committee’s recommendation includes individual 

funding for each of these offices as has been done in prior years. 

Funding levels cannot be reduced signficantly more primarily due 

to increases in rent and working capital fund expenses and in most 

cases, each office will need to find reductions in other contracts to 

meet these fixed requirements. The following table (dollars in thousands) compares the fiscal year 2013 enacted level to the fiscal year 

2014 budget request and the Committee’s recommendation by office. The Committee assumes no increases in the number of fulltime equivalents (FTE) in fiscal year 2014 unless otherwise noted. 

Fiscal year— 

2013 Enacted 2014 request 2014 recommendation 

Office of the Secretary .......................................................................... $2,618 $2,652 $2,618 

Deputy Secretary ................................................................................... 984 1,000 984 

Executive Secretariat ............................................................................ 1,595 1,714 1,595 

Policy ..................................................................................................... 10,107 12,804 10,107

Small Business ..................................................................................... 1,369 1,386 1,369 

Intelligence and Security ...................................................................... 10,778 10,849 10,778 

Chief Information Officer ...................................................................... 14,988 16,576 15,695 

General Counsel .................................................................................... 19,515 20,504 19,867 

Government Affairs ............................................................................... 2,500 2,627 2,500 

Budget ................................................................................................... 10,538 13,326 11,572 

Administration ....................................................................................... 25,469 27,468 23,376 

Public Affairs ........................................................................................ 2,020 2,203 2,020 

Total Salaries and Expenses ................................................... 102,481 113,109 102,481 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

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

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. 

No funds are provided for upgrades to the correspondence system. 

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. No funds are provided for new FTE or the ‘‘Enforcement Learning Network.’’ 

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. 

The Committee assumes at least $518,000 for changes to the enterprise architecture and records management requirements. 

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, or full funding grant agreement in excess 

of $1,000,000 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) any grant from the Federal Railroad Administration; and 

(4) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other than 

the formula grants. 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. The Committee provides $17,400,000 for 

the operations of the general counsel, plus $2,500,000 for work related to aviation enforcement. No new funds are provided for the 

workload related to the FAA Modernization Act (3 FTE and 

$502,000 proposed). The office will either need to meet the new requirements within existing resources or simply delay implementation of the activities of the FAA Modernization Act. 

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

Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is responsible for deVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

veloping, reviewing, and presenting budget resource requirements 

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

Management and Budget. The Committee’s recommendation slows 

the FTE creep occurring over the past few years, and assumes no 

new contractor support for budget systems ($350,000 requested). 

Further, the Committee limits the credit office to 3 half year FTE 

at no more than $1,000,000 (5 half year FTE requested at 

$2,300,000). 

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. The Committee’s recommendation includes $45,000 as requested for background investigations, administrative law judges and postings on USA jobs. However, no funds 

are provided for acquisition studies ($901,000) or green surveys of 

DOT operations ($579,000). 

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. The Committee’s 

recommendation does not include additional funds for a new 

speechwriter. 

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. 

Further, for fiscal year 2015, the Committee directs the Department to include with the budget materials, a comprehensive legislative proposal for reauthorization of the surface transportation 

and safety programs. Such proposal must include a credible funding source proposal (not a General Fund transfer), proposals on 

programs, and a resources crosswalk of how the legislative proposal 

compares with MAP–21 funding. Every administration since President Eisenhower has submitted such proposals, and why this administration deems to be different is baffling. 

Operating Plan.—The Committee directs the Department to submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2014 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 levVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

els 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 appropriations reports, and the statement of the 

managers. Further, 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. Further, the Department is directed 

in the introduction of this report regarding reporting requirements 

after enactment of surface authorizations. 

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. 

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $15,981,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 14,765,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 14,220,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,761,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥545,000 1 In fiscal year 2013 funds were provided through the Research and Innovative Technology Administration. 

The Committee adopts the request to move these programs under the Office of the Secretary. Enacted level 

does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary or Research and Technology 

will take over the responsibilities previously held by the Research 

and Innovative Technology Administration. The responsibilities include coordinating, facilitating, and reviewing 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 $14,220,000 for research and technology activities, $545,000 below the budget request 

and $1,761,000 below fiscal year 2013. The Committee endorses the 

Administration’s proposal to bring the functions of the Research 

and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) under the Office 

of the Secretary with an assistant secretary instead of a separate 

administrator. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT

(RESCISSION)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $500,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 500,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥237,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥737,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥737,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 does not recommend additional funds for the national infrastructure investment program (also known as ‘‘TIGER 

grants’’) proposed by the budget request. The continuing resolution 

put the funding for this program on auto pilot in fiscal year 2013 

without the benefit of a conference agreement, and the Committee 

recommends rescinding $237,000,000, the amount of fiscal year 

2013 funds available for rescission in 2014. While the Committee 

agrees that the Nation is in desperate need for infrastructure investment and improvements, the Administration has yet to demonstrate or define the process, priority or criteria for how these 

grants are awarded. Further, states can more adequately address 

transportation infrastructure improvements through a comprehensive multi-year, multi-billion dollar per year authorization package. 

AVIATION CONSUMER CALL CENTER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $7,500,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥7,500,000 

The Aviation Consumer Call Center was authorized in the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act (P.L. 112–95) to respond to consumer complaints about airline service, inform travelers of their 

rights, and obtain information from callers about airline service 

problems that may warrant an investigation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not recommend funding for this new account. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CAPITAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $4,990,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 10,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,990,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥5,010,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 2014. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends continuing the fiscal year 2013 

funding level of $4,990,000 into fiscal year 2014, a reduction of 

$5,010,000 from the budget request for the financial management 

capital program. The Committee was not able to provide the additional $4,954,000 requested for system upgrades. 

CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 6,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥8,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥4,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $2,000,000 to support the Secretary’s Cyber Security Initiative, which is $4,000,000 below 

the budget request and $8,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level. Because of the fiscal year 2013 continuing resolution, 

this account received $10,000,000, a $4,000,000 increase over that 

year’s budget request. With the funding provided in fiscal year 

2014, the Department will receive a total of $12,000,000 over two 

years, equal to the requests of the two fiscal years. 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $9,384,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 9,551,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,384,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥167,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

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

the full implementation of the civil rights laws and departmental 

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

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $9,384,000 for the Office of Civil 

Rights, a continuation of the level provided in fiscal year 2013 and 

a decrease of $167,000 from the budget request. 

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $9,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 9,750,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,750,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 

$3,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $3,750,000 

below the level proposed in the fiscal year 2014 budget. The Committee’s recommendation may eliminate up to 5 FTE, and rejects 

the request for 7 new FTE. The Committee strongly urges DOT to 

pursue projects related to aviation data modernization, international regulation cooperation and research, airline merger reviews, air carrier fitness audits, and freight planning for exports as 

proposed in the budget justification. Further, the Committee proposes rescinding $2,750,000 from two old projects related to a Mississippi River study and Mobility First as requested in the budget. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $172,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 182,930,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 172,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,930,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $172,000,000 on the 

Working Capital Fund (WCF), the same level as fiscal year 2013. 

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 $10,930,000 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 2015 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. Further, the Department should 

provide more detailed information on e-Gov activities. 

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

Appropriation Limitation on 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ........................................................................................ $922,000 ($18,367,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... 925,000 (18,367,000) 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... 922,000 (18,367,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................................................. – – – – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .............................................................................. ¥3,000 – – – 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $922,000 for the resource 

center, the same as the fiscal year 2013 funding level and $3,000 

less than the budget request. Of the funds provided, $333,000 is to 

cover the subsidy costs of guaranteed loans and $589,000 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 2013. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $3,068,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 3,088,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,068,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥20,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The minority business outreach program provides contractual 

support to small and disadvantaged businesses by providing information dissemination and technical and financial assistance to empower those businesses to compete for contracting opportunities 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the fiscal year 2013 funding level of 

$3,068,000 for the minority business outreach program, which is 

$20,000 less than the budget request. 

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $143,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 146,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥43,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥46,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 2014, but the Department estimates that it will collect $116,000,000 in overflight 

fees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

For fiscal year 2014, the Committee includes $100,000,000 in discretionary funding for the EAS program, a reduction of $43,000,000 

from the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and a reduction of 

$46,000,000 below the budget request. 

The following table shows the discretionary, mandatory, and 

total program levels for the EAS program: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

Appropriation Mandatory Total Program 

FY 2013 Appropriation 1 ............................................................................. $143,000,000 $100,000,000 $243,000,000 

FY 2014 Request ....................................................................................... 146,000,000 100,000,000 246,000,000 

Committee Recommendation ..................................................................... 100,000,000 116,000,000 216,000,000 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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

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

competition among carriers and control overall costs. The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a letter report to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 15, 2014 that 

describes measures that could increase competition for EAS providers and help contain additional cost growth. For example, the 

Department should explore whether the EAS requirement that carriers utilize twin engine aircraft should be modified to allow single 

engine aircraft as long as safety is not compromised, and whether 

a community cost share could alleviate the cost to the taxpayer, 

particularly for those communities with a heavy per passenger, per 

flight subsidy. 

The Committee notes that the budget request includes a total 

program cost which takes in $100 million in overflight fees. However, the Department estimates that the overflight fee collection 

level will be $116 million. 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 prohibiting funding for 

any EAS community which has a per passenger, per flight subsidy 

that exceeds $500. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

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. 

OPERATIONS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $9,653,395,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 9,707,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,521,784,000 

Bill compared with:.

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥131,611,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥185,216,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 proVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

gram; (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 $9,521,784,000 for FAA operations, 

which is $131,611,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and 

$185,216,000 below the budget request. 

A comparison of the fiscal year 2013 enacted level, the budget request, and the Committee recommendation by budget activity is as 

follows: 

FY 2013 1

enacted 

FY 2014 

request 

FY 2014 

recommendation 

Air Traffic Organization ........................................................... 7,442,738,000 7,311,790,000 7,182,664,000 

Aviation Safety ......................................................................... 1,252,991,000 1,204,777,000 1,199,777,000 

Commercial Space Transportation ........................................... 16,271,000 16,011,000 14,160,000 

Finance and Management ....................................................... 582,117,000 807,646,000 777,198,000 

NextGen and Operations Planning ........................................... 60,134,000 59,782,000 56,637,000 

Staff Offices ............................................................................. 299,144,000 306,994,000 291,348,000 

Total ................................................................................ 9,653,395,000 9,707,000,000 9,521,784,000 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 2015 

budget to include adequate information on each proposed general 

provision. 

TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET

The bill derives $6,484,000,000 of the total operations appropriation from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The balance of the 

appropriation, $3,037,784,000, will be drawn from the general fund 

of the Treasury. 

AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

The bill provides $7,182,664,000 for air traffic services, which is 

the $260,074,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and 

$129,126,000 below the budget request. 

Organizational Structure.—There have been several reorganizations of the Air Traffic Organization in recent years to streamline 

operations, improve performance, and produce cost savings and efficiencies. Past efforts have met with limited success in controlling 

operating costs, improving operations, or achieving the expected 

benefits of major modernization projects. The FAA’s most recent reorganization, the Foundation for Success initiative, is intended to 

improve the management of major acquisitions and achieve cost 

savings. The Committee directs the FAA to provide the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations with a report on progress to 

date on operational efficiencies and cost reductions associated with 

the Foundation for Success initiative. 

Air Traffic Controller Staffing.—FAA currently employs approximately 15,200 controllers, 22 percent of whom are in training, and 

is planning to hire approximately 552 new controllers in fiscal year 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

2013 and up to another 1,300 in fiscal year 2014 to offset future 

retirements. However, according to FAA’s own figures, since 2000, 

air traffic operations have declined by 23 percent while the controller workforce has remained essentially the same. In some cases, 

air traffic facilities have significantly more controllers on board 

than the Agency’s own estimates indicate are needed to operate 

these sites. 

By law, FAA is required to publish an annual Controller Workforce Plan that details the number of controllers currently on-board 

at all air traffic facilities as well as the minimum and maximum 

staffing ranges for each facility. However, for 2013 FAA has only 

published an interim Plan that does not include this important information. The Committee requests that FAA provide this information expeditiously in order for the Committee to better assess 

FAA’s controller staffing needs. Also, while the National Academy 

of Science is currently conducting a study of FAA’s controller staffing methodologies and standards to determine whether they accurately reflect the needs of air traffic facilities, we believe that an 

assessment of controller staffing at the Nation’s most critical facilities is also needed. The Committee directs that the Office of Inspector General conduct a follow-up review of its 2012 study of controller staffing at FAA’s most critical facilities. The review should 

include an analysis of current and projected controller staffing levels at these facilities, how they compare to FAA’s staffing ranges, 

and future staffing plans. 

In addition, FAA must ensure that new and existing controllers 

are appropriately trained. However, it is becoming increasingly 

clear that FAA needs to reassess its overall approach to controller 

training. The 2012 report by the Office of Inspector General on 

staffing and training issues at FAA’s most critical facilities found 

an alarmingly high attrition rate for new controllers at these sites. 

One reason for this high attrition is inadequate training resources 

available to these facilities. FAA’s Air Traffic Control Optimum 

Training Solution Program is a key vehicle for delivering controller 

training. However, the Program has not met expectations for training new and existing controllers or for transforming the paradigm 

for training, and FAA has made downward adjustments in contract 

funding over the last several years and instructed its contractor to 

reduce support for various training efforts. These problems come at 

a time when the number of fully certified controllers who are eligible to retire is increasing, and the Committee is concerned that 

FAA does not have an effective or executable plan for training the 

next generation of air traffic controllers. The Committee will continue to closely watch this issue, and requests that FAA forward 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations the studies 

called for in Section 609 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012 regarding the adequacy of FAA’s air traffic controller training programs. 

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

$10,350,000 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

Aeronautical Navigation Products.—The Committee continues to 

be concerned that Aeronautical Navigation Products (AeroNav) continues to move forward on imposing a per person ‘‘user fee’’ and 

erecting a digital copyright on digital products produced by the 

FAA for public benefit that were previously free for download from 

its website. The Committee is also concerned that the proposed 

scheme will be used to support the declining paper chart services 

by charging those that are moving to a digital format. In contrast 

to AeroNav’s efforts, Executive Order 13642 was issued on May 14, 

2013, to make government data available to foster entrepreneurship and innovation and expands on an order issued in 2012 to 

open up government systems with public interfaces for commercial 

app providers. With these concerns in mind, the Committee restricts AeroNav from implementing new fees on AeroNav products 

or copyright digital products until the Committees on Appropriations is provided a report that provides: (1) the estimated costs for 

producing only digital products, on a product by product basis, (e.g. 

‘‘electronic navigation charts’’ or ‘‘vector charts’’) for use in computers, tablets, and other displays; (2) the costs of producing both 

digital products and products, on a product by product basis, formatted for paper; (3) a study of the safety and operational benefits 

provided by digital products; and (4) how AeroNav’s actions differ 

from Executive Order 13642 that provides for the use of open data 

for entrepreneurship, innovation, and scientific discovery. 

AVIATION SAFETY

The Committee provides $1,199,777,000 for aviation safety, 

which is $53,214,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level, 

mostly due to a realignment of resources into the finance and management activity, and $5,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee continues its direction requiring the Secretary to 

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

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

Aircraft Certification Service.—The Committee provides the full 

request of $212,981,000 for FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service. 

The Committee remains concerned that delays in FAA certification 

of new aircraft and related technologies could negatively affect 

aviation safety, as well as the economic health and competitiveness 

of U.S. manufacturers. Accordingly, the Committee reiterates its 

interest in FAA’s progress on certification reforms, as these critical 

activities are of utmost importance to aviation safety. 

The Committee strongly supports the Organization Designation 

Authorization (ODA) program—the use of ‘‘delegated authority’’ in 

the certification of aircraft is a longstanding and essential practice 

in aviation. A June 2011 DOT Office of Inspector General (OIG) report provided important insights into the program. However, the 

ODA program, with over 90 participants, continues to evolve, and 

FAA has made some changes since the 2011 OIG report. Therefore, 

the Committee directs the OIG to assess the status of the ODA program (including the roles of government and industry), and the effectiveness of program controls and FAA oversight. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

Inspector Staffing.—The Committee continues to place a high priority on FAA’s critical safety workforces and funds its inspector 

workforce at the requested level. FAA is making progress in advancing risk-based oversight systems used by its 4,300 safety inspectors. FAA’s inspector workload is driven by a number of factors, including complexity of air carrier operations and industry use 

of foreign and domestic aircraft repair stations. However, we are 

concerned about FAA’s lack of progress in developing and using a 

reliable inspector staffing model. After years of development and 

investing over $10,000,000, it is troubling that FAA is still not 

using a model to determine the appropriate number of safety inspectors needed or where they should be located to address the 

most pressing safety risks. The Committee directs FAA to provide 

a clear understanding of what needs to be done to correct problems 

and a plan for when a reliable inspector staffing model will be in 

place. 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).—The FAA Modernization 

and Reform Act of 2012 seeks to advance the integration of UAS 

into the National Airspace System and mandates comprehensive 

plans as well as the establishment of UAS test sites. The Committee recognizes that UAS integration into the National Airspace 

System is a complex issue and many research and development 

issues need to be addressed. There are also complex policy questions about privacy that extend well beyond FAA. Nevertheless, 

FAA needs to make measurable progress in developing a regulatory 

framework for the new systems. 

UAS integration is much more than a research and development 

issue because DOD is operating UAS in civil airspace shared by 

commercial aircraft today, although on a limited basis. UAS have 

different operating characteristics and implications for controller 

workload as well as existing FAA communications and flight planning systems. For example, the length of a UAS flight can be seven 

times longer than a commercial aircraft, which is difficult for FAA 

systems to accommodate. These issues are getting insufficient attention. Therefore, the Committee directs FAA to provide a report 

on ‘‘lessons learned’’ thus far and the technical and operational requirements for managing UAS operations in the very near-term. 

A key step towards developing safety standards required by the 

Act is to establish six test ranges, mandated by August 2012. These 

test ranges are expected to provide invaluable information for developing a regulatory framework for UAS integration and sharpen 

ongoing research and development projects. However, this effort 

has been delayed and FAA does not expect to establish these test 

ranges until the end of 2013. Moreover, unresolved issues with defining the safety data FAA needs from the Department of Defense 

is also a stumbling block in FAA’s efforts to develop safety standards. The Committee directs FAA to develop a plan to resolve these 

data-sharing issues with DOD and to identify what data it will 

gather from test sites. 

Human Intervention Motivation Study and the Flight Attendant 

Drug and Alcohol Program.—The Committee recognizes the effectiveness of the Human Intervention Motivation Study (HIMS) and 

the Flight Attendant Drug and Alcohol Program (FADAP) in mitigating drug and alcohol abuse through a peer identification and 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

intervention program. The Committee recommends that the FAA 

continue to prioritize this program and urges that the FAA continue this program from within available resources. 

COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

The Committee recommends $14,160,000 for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, which is $2,111,000 below the fiscal 

year 2013 enacted level and $1,851,000 below the budget request. 

The Office of Commercial Space Transportation protects public 

safety through regulatory oversight of the rapidly growing U.S. 

commercial space transportation industry. The FAA also has a 

statutory mandate to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial 

space transportation. The commercial space transportation industry is nearly certain to increase its activities providing orbital and 

suborbital services to serve commercial, scientific, and government 

purposes. Of particular importance are orbital flights to support 

the operation of the International Space Station. The Committee 

wishes to ensure that the FAA has the ability to provide these permits and licenses effectively and efficiently so that the U.S. can 

emerge as the world leader in space transport. The Committee directs that the FAA meet the funding reduction below the budget 

request in non-safety related activities. 

FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $777,198,000 for finance and management activities, which is $195,081,000 above the enacted level 

and $30,448,000 below the budget request. The increase in this activity is due to transfers of finance, management, and information 

technology activities from operational offices. 

Workforce Diversity Report.—In 2011, the Administration issued 

Executive Order 13583 requiring all Federal agencies to develop a 

plan for recruiting, hiring, promoting, and retaining a diverse 

workforce. The Committee directs the Secretary to provide of a 

copy of the agency’s plan, as required under Executive Order 

13583, to the Committees on Appropriations as well as a progress 

report on the FAA’s implementation of that plan by March 1, 2014. 

In addition, while the agency continues to have a hiring freeze in 

place, the Committee expects FAA to redouble its efforts to attract 

qualified and diverse employees once the freeze is lifted. The Committee urges FAA to report any barriers to achieving a more diverse workforce and recommendations for how to overcome such obstacles. 

NEXTGEN AND OPERATIONS PLANNING

The Committee recommends $56,637,000 for NextGen and Operations Planning, which is $3,497,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $3,145,000 below 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

Aviation User Fees.—The bill includes a limitation carried for 

several years prohibiting funds from being used to finalize or implement any new unauthorized user fees. 

Aeronautical Charting and Cartography.—The bill maintains the 

provision prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to conduct 

aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities through 

the working capital fund (WCF). 

Credits.—This bill includes language allowing funds received 

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

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $2,730,731,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2,777,798,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,155,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥575,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2013 ................................................ ¥622,798,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $2,155,000,000, 

for the FAA’s facilities and equipment program, an decrease of 

$575,000,000 below the level provided in fiscal year 2013 and 

$622,798,000 below the budget request. The bill provides that, of 

the total amount recommended, $1,687,000,000 is available for obligation until September 30, 2015, $458,000,000 (the amount for personnel and related expenses) is available until September 30, 2014 

and $10,000,000 is available until September 30, 2016. These obligation availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts. 

The following table provides funding levels for facilities and 

equipment activities and budget line items. 

Program FY 2014 Budget 

Request 

FY 2014 House 

Bill 

Activity 1, Engineering, Development, Test and Evaluation: 

Advanced Technology Development and Prototype .................................................... $33,500,000 $33,500,000 

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

Technical Center Facilities ......................................................................................... 12,000,000 11,000,000 

Technical Center Building and Plant Support ........................................................... 6,000,000 5,000,000 

Data Communications for Trajectory Based Operations ............................................ 115,450,000 115,450,000 

Next Gen Technology Demonstration .......................................................................... 24,674,500 20,000,000 

Next Gen Systems Development ................................................................................. 61,500,000 48,000,000 

Next Gen Trajectory Based Operations ....................................................................... 18,000,000 15,000,000 

Next Gen Reduce Weather Impact .............................................................................. 6,000,000 6,000,000

Next Gen High Density/Arrivals/Departures ................................................................ 7,000,000 7,000,000 

Next Gen Collaborative ATM ....................................................................................... 41,000,000 38,000,000 

Next Gen Flexible Terminals and Airports .................................................................. 15,000,000 15,000,000

Next Gen System Network Facilities ........................................................................... 9,000,000 9,000,000 

Next Gen Future Facilities .......................................................................................... 10,000,000 10,000,000 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

Program FY 2014 Budget 

Request 

FY 2014 House 

Bill 

Performance Based Navigation/RNAV/RNP ................................................................. 32,200,000 32,200,000 

Activity 1 Subtotal ............................................................................................. 392,324,500 366,150,000 

Activity 2, Procurement and Modernization of Air Traffic Control Facilities: 

a. En Route Programs: 

En Route Automation Program (ERAM) ...................................................................... 26,100,000 26,100,000 

En Route Modernization (ERAM)—PER 3 .................................................................. 64,974,000 60,000,000 

En Route Communications Gateway (ECG) ................................................................ 2,200,000 2,200,000 

Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) ................................................................ 4,100,000 4,100,000 

ARTCC Building Improvement/Plant Improvement ..................................................... 53,000,000 41,000,000 

Air Traffic Management (ATM) ................................................................................... 13,800,000 13,800,000 

Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure ................................................................ 5,500,000 5,500,000 

Air Traffic Control En Route Radar Facilities—Improve ........................................... 5,900,000 5,900,000 

Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS) ............................................................. 20,000,000 15,000,000 

Oceanic Automation System ....................................................................................... 4,800,000 4,800,000 

Next Gen Very High Frequency A/G Comm (NEXCOM) ............................................... 20,250,000 20,250,000 

System-Wide Information Management ...................................................................... 70,500,000 70,500,000 

ADS–B NAS Wide Implementation .............................................................................. 282,100,400 282,100,400 

Wind Hazard Detection Equipment ............................................................................. 2,000,000 2,000,000

Weather and Radar Processor (WARP) ....................................................................... 700,000 700,000 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management Tech ............................................................... 29,390,800 27,000,000 

Colorado ADS-B/WAM Cost Sharing ........................................................................... 3,400,000 3,400,000 

Tactical Flow Based Flow Management ..................................................................... 10,500,000 10,500,000 

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

NextGen Weather Processors ...................................................................................... 23,510,000 20,000,000 

b. Terminal Programs: 

Airport Surface Detection Equip (ASDE–X) ................................................................ 12,100,000 12,100,000 

Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR)—Provide .................................................. 3,600,000 3,600,000 

Terminal Automation Modern (STARS) ....................................................................... 45,500,000 40,000,000 

Terminal Automation Modern (TAMR) ......................................................................... 136,550,000 136,550,000 

Terminal Automation Program .................................................................................... 2,600,000 2,600,000 

Terminal Air Traffic Control Facil—Replace .............................................................. 71,998,300 55,000,000 

ATCT/TRACON Facilities—Improve ............................................................................. 53,200,000 45,000,000 

Terminal Voice Switch Replace/Enhance ................................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

NAS Facilities OSHA and Environ Comp .................................................................... 26,000,000 26,000,000 

Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR–9) ........................................................................... 10,900,000 10,900,000 

Terminal Digital Radar (ASR–11) .............................................................................. 19,400,000 19,400,000 

Runway Status Lights ................................................................................................ 35,250,000 34,000,000 

National Airspace System Voice Switch (NVS) ........................................................... 16,000,000 16,000,000 

Integrated Display System (IDS) ................................................................................ 4,100,000 4,100,000 

Remote Monitoring and Logging System (RMLS) ....................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Mode S Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) ......................................................... 7,300,000 7,300,000 

Surveillance Interface Modernization (SIM) ................................................................ 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Tower Flight Data Manager (TFDM) ........................................................................... 23,500,000 15,000,000 

Voice Recorder Replacement Program (VRRP) ........................................................... 6,200,000 6,200,000 

Precision Runway Monitor Replacement (PRMR) ....................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) .............................................................. 1,300,000 1,300,000 

c. Flight Service Programs: 

Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) ........................................................... 10,000,000 10,000,000 

Future Flight Service Program .................................................................................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Alaska Flight Service Facilities Modernization (AFSFM) ............................................ 2,900,000 – – – 

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

d. Landing and Navigational Aids Program: 

VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) DME .......................................................... 8,300,000 8,300,000 

Instrument Landing System (ILS) Establish/Upgrade ................................................ 7,000,000 7,000,000 

Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) ................................................................... 109,000,000 80,000,000 

Runway Visual Range ................................................................................................. 6,000,000 6,000,000 

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

Distance Measuring Equipment—Sustain ................................................................. 4,000,000 4,000,000 

Visual Navaids—Establish/Expand ............................................................................ 2,500,000 2,500,000 

Instrument Approach Procedures Automation (IAPA) ................................................. 4,500,000 4,500,000 

Navigation and Landing Aids—SLEP ........................................................................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 

VASI Replacement—Replace with PAPI ..................................................................... 2,500,000 2,500,000 

GPS Civil Requirements .............................................................................................. 20,000,000 – – – 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

Program FY 2014 Budget 

Request 

FY 2014 House 

Bill 

Runway Safety Areas—Navigational Mitigation ........................................................ 38,000,000 38,000,000 

e. Other ATC Facilities Programs: 

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Monitoring ....................................................... 8,700,000 5,400,000 

Unstaffed Infrastructure Sustainment ....................................................................... 33,000,000 20,000,000 

Aircraft and Related Equipment Program .................................................................. 10,400,000 8,000,000 

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

Alaska NAS Interfacility Comm (ANICS) ..................................................................... 11,000,000 6,000,000 

Facilities Decommissioning ........................................................................................ 6,500,000 6,500,000 

Electrical Power Systems—Sustain/Support .............................................................. 85,000,000 65,000,000 

FAA Employee Housing and Life Shelter .................................................................... 2,500,000 2,500,000 

Activity 2 Subtotal ............................................................................................. 1,523,223,500 1,359,300,400 

Activity 3, Procurement and Modernization of Non-Air Traffic Control Facilities and 

Equipment 

a. Support Programs: 

Hazardous Materials Management ............................................................................. 20,000,000 17,000,000 

Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS) .................................................................... 12,700,000 12,700,000

Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF) ....................................................... 10,000,000 10,000,000 

NAS Recovery Communications (RCOM) ..................................................................... 12,000,000 12,000,000 

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

Information Security ................................................................................................... 13,000,000 13,000,000 

System Approach for Safety Oversight (SASO) .......................................................... 9,500,000 9,500,000 

Aviation Safety Knowledge Mgt Environ (ASKME) ...................................................... 12,200,000 12,200,000 

Data Center Optimization ........................................................................................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Aerospace Medical Equipment Needs (AMEN) ........................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Aviation Safety Information Anl & Share ................................................................... 15,000,000 15,000,000

National Test Equipment program ............................................................................. 3,000,000 3,000,000

Mobile Assets Management Program ......................................................................... 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Aerospace Medicine Safety Inf Sys (AMSIS) ............................................................... 3,900,000 3,900,000 

b. Training, Equipment and Facilities: 

Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Mod ..................................................................... 12,300,000 – – – 

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

Activity 3 Subtotal ............................................................................................. 148,600,000 133,300,000 

Activity 4, Facilities and Equipment Mission Support: 

System Engineering and Development Support ......................................................... 35,600,000 30,000,000 

Program Support Leases ............................................................................................ 42,100,000 42,100,000 

Logistics Support Services (LSS) ................................................................................ 11,500,000 10,000,000 

Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center—Leases ............................................................ 17,900,000 17,900,000 

Transition Engineering Support .................................................................................. 16,500,000 14,500,000 

Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC) ............................................................. 25,000,000 20,000,000 

Resource Tracking Program ........................................................................................ 4,000,000 4,000,000 

Center for Advanced Aviation System Development .................................................. 70,000,000 55,000,000 

Aeronautical Information Management Program ....................................................... 9,050,000 9,050,000 

Activity 4 subtotal ...................................................................................................... 231,650,000 202,550,000 

Activities 1–4 Subtotal ...................................................................................... 2,295,798,000 2,061,300,400 

Activities 1–4 Undistributed Reduction ............................................................ – – – ¥364,300,400 

Activity 5, Personnel Compensation, Benefits and Travel ................................ – – – – – – 

Personnel and Related Expenses ...................................................................... 482,000,000 458,000,000 

Total .......................................................................................................... 2,777,798,000 2,155,000,000 

Equipage.—The Committee affirms and reinforces the intent of 

section 222 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(Public Law 112–95), giving priority to aircraft equipped with 

ADS–B technology. For several years, the FAA has been developing 

operational incentives with the intent of implementing a best 

equipped-best served (BEBS) policy. These policies are in line with 

recent recommendations made by the Future of Aviation Advisory 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

Committee and the NextGen Advisory Committee. Despite these efforts, the report required by Public Law 112–95 is now several 

months overdue, and FAA’s future plans are unclear. The Committee directs the FAA to provide detailed plans and schedules, by 

March 31, 2014, which define how Best Equipped, Best Served will 

be implemented, and clearly explain how users will receive 

measureable benefit from early equipage. 

ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

Performance-Based Navigation.—The Committee provides 

$32,200,000 for Performance Based Navigation/RNAV/RNP. The 

Committee has strongly supported the accelerated development of 

Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures and processes, 

and continues to have a strong interest in using PBN to provide 

substantial, near-term NextGen benefits to users of the NAS. As 

indicated by industry, DOT IG, and GAO reports, the implementation of new routes, and the realization of benefits, is proving far 

more difficult than expected and several barriers must be addressed. These barriers include, but are not limited to, adjustments 

to the controller handbook, new automated controller tools, and 

controller training. 

The Committee directs FAA to fully utilize the tools provided in 

Section 213, including the use of third parties and categorical exclusions, so that efficient RNP and RNAV procedures can be produced in sufficient quantities in order to meet the demand that exists within the NAS for these types of procedures. Upon completion 

of the FAA’s third party RNP demonstration program, if the FAA 

determines that further third party designs would achieve additional benefits, the Committee would encourage an expansion of 

the program. However, the Committee expects the FAA to 

prioritize airports that currently serve aircraft that are equipped to 

utilize newly developed procedures. The Committee also directs 

FAA to provide a letter report on its progress in meeting Congressional mandates under Section 213, including the estimated fuel 

and carbon dioxide emissions savings from any new RNP or RNAV 

procedure designed or implemented in 2012 and 2013, to the Committees on Appropriations, by March 31, 2014. 

Cyber Security and Protecting the National Airspace System.— 

The Committee is aware that FAA has efforts underway to assess 

the security of the existing airspace system as well as NextGen 

programs, including the satellite-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast System. As FAA continues to make billion dollar investments in NextGen, the Agency must ensure that new systems are more secure than the legacy systems they replace or supplement, and new threats are not inadvertently introduced. A clear 

understanding of threats, vulnerabilities, and countermeasures is 

absolutely essential. FAA needs to take full advantage of ongoing 

DOD cyber work, which could provide invaluable insights on how 

to protect air traffic control systems. Therefore, the Committee directs FAA to keep the Committee informed of the results of security assessments of NextGen systems and how well the Agency is 

leveraging cyber security work being conducted by the Department 

of Defense and other Federal agencies. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

NextGen Future Facilities.—The Committee recommends 

$10,000,000 for the NextGen Future Facilities initiative. These 

funds will be used to fund pre-construction activities related to the 

Liberty Integrated Control Facility. This Committee is aware that 

this is the first step in FAA’s plan for an integrated facility in the 

New York metropolitan area and a significant step toward fundamentally changing the way FAA operates and manages the National Airspace System. However, FAA has provided limited details 

regarding how this new facility or any future realignments and 

consolidations will improve productivity, reduce Agency costs, and 

improve the flow of air traffic. The Committee expects to receive a 

more comprehensive and well justified plan in the coming months 

regarding the long-term cost savings associated with the potential 

elimination of outdated, inefficient, and obsolete facilities. 

NextGen Transformational Programs.—The Committee recognizes FAA’s NextGen transformational programs are critical to its 

overall plans to change the way air traffic is managed. In 2012, the 

Office of Inspector General reported on the status of these programs and highlighted that FAA’s approach to approving small segments of complex NextGen programs has some drawbacks. There 

is no question that segmenting programs can reduce risk to the 

Government, but such segmentation does not provide a crosswalk 

for how key programs align with FAA’s plans for delivering benefits. The Inspector General’s report shows the extraordinarily complex interdependencies between programs and the essential roles 

FAA automation programs, like ERAM, play in executing NextGen. 

The Committee urges FAA to follow through on its commitment to 

address the IG report’s recommendations. The Committee is particularly interested in ensuring that FAA follows through on the 

IG’s recommendation to establish and use an integrated master 

schedule for managing NextGen investments planned for completion in December 2013. 

The Committee commends FAA’s ongoing review for a backup of 

Position, Navigation and Timing (PNT) capability to mitigate risks 

to aviation users if GPS becomes unavailable. Reliable, cost-effective PNT services will maintain safety and security while minimizing economic impacts from GPS outages within the NAS. The 

Committee supports cost-effective options that leverage existing 

wide deployment of systems. 

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

EN ROUTE PROGRAMS

En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM).—ERAM is a 

foundational component of NextGen, and it is critical to meeting 

FAA’s goals for increasing airspace capacity and reducing flight 

delays. FAA originally planned to deploy ERAM at 20 of its enroute facilities by the end of 2010. However, significant software 

problems identified early on at the first two key sites, Salt Lake 

City and Seattle, forced FAA to delay original deployment estimates by nearly four years. The program has also seen cost overruns of $330 million in prior years. 

FAA has made some progress delivering ERAM on time and 

within budget, and is using the system at 16 of 20 sites either on 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

a full or part time basis. Despite this progress, the cost and timeframes for completing ERAM remain uncertain. As noted by the 

Office of Inspector General, there is little room to maneuver in the 

revised cost baseline. If the contract burn rate does not decline significantly, additional funds will be needed to complete the program 

in 2014 timeframe. Going forward, there are important lessons 

learned from ERAM that FAA needs to address to better manage 

its NextGen portfolio and reduce risks when deploying software intensive systems. These include better expectation setting for the 

controller workforce, addressing shortcomings in testing at the 

FAA Technical Center, bolstering Government acceptance, and 

more effectively using contract incentives for both development and 

implementation. The Committee will continue to monitor the program closely and expects that the FAA will regularly communicate 

resource requirements and timeframes for the full deployment of 

ERAM. 

TERMINAL PROGRAMS

Terminal Automation Modernization/Replacement Program 

(TAMR Phase 3).—The Committee recommendation includes 

$135,550,000 for the TAMR program. Phase 3 of the TAMR program is modernize or replace terminal automation systems at 

TRACON facilities around the country. In December 2011, FAA’s 

Joint Resource Council made a final investment decision to implement the STARS system at 11 facilities by 2017. Replacing the automation systems at these terminal facilities is a major undertaking. FAA cannot advance NextGen initiatives, such as new performance based routes, without modernizing controller automation 

systems at the 11 sites. The Committee directs FAA to provide a 

plan by March 31, 2014 to the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations which will include: (1) how new automated controller tools will be introduced; and (2) how long the older systems 

will need to be sustained. 

Runway Status Lights.—The Committee provides $34,000,000 for 

the Runway Status Lights program, the same as the budget request. This funding will continue to support the design, production, 

and installation of runway status lights (RWSL) at busy airports. 

Runway status lights are a fully automated system that gives pilots and vehicle operators a direct visual alert when it is unsafe to 

enter or cross a runway. The RWSL program responds to a safety 

recommendation from the National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB) to implement a safety system that provides direct warning 

capability to flight crews. The Committee strongly supports RWSLs 

as a way to reduce runway incursions. However, the current cost 

and schedule for the effort is not reliable and the Agency plans to 

re-baseline this important effort. While the Committee encourages 

FAA to review the suitability of deploying this critical safety enhancing technology at airports being equipped with the Airport 

Surface Surveillance Capability (ASSC) system, questions must be 

addressed as to why the RWSL program requires re-baselining. 

The Committee directs FAA to provide a report to the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations by April 15, 2014 on the 

causes for the RWSL cost growth, schedule delays, and corrective 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

actions, and the merits and costs associated with installing RWSLs 

at ASSC-equipped airports. 

ATCT/TRACON facilities—improve.—The Committee recommendation includes $45,000,000 for the terminal air traffic control facilities replacement program which is $8,200,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee recognizes that many of the air 

traffic control towers and TRACONS within the national airspace 

system are decades old and in need of rehabilitation and improvement. In a constrained budget environment, the Committee urges 

FAA to explore the inclusion of proven control and monitoring systems that will improve the efficiency of operations and help maximize the use of space within the tower. Systems that increase the 

situational awareness of all visual and navigational aids will assist 

the controller workforce as traffic is managed during peak travel 

times. 

LANDING AND NAVIGATIONAL AIDS PROGRAM

Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR).—The Committee recommendation 

includes a total of $3,704,471 to procure 27 MALSR systems as requested in the budget. Approximately 17 MALSRs are planned for 

procurement through the approach lighting system improvement 

program and another ten MALSRs are planned for procurement 

through the navigation and landing aids—service life extension 

program. The replacement of lighting systems is critical to reducing 

runway downtime and technician maintenance time. The Committee expects FAA to prioritize the replacement of lighting systems in areas where there is a high risk of failure and where a failure would prevent an aircraft from using a primary precision approach. 

PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $458,000,000 for personnel and related expenses, which is a decrease of $17,000,000 below the enacted level and $24,000,000 below the budget request. This appropriation finances the personnel, travel and related expenses of the 

FAA’s facilities and equipment workforce. 

BILL LANGUAGE

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

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $167,556,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 166,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 145,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥22,556,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥21,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

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 $145,000,000, a decrease of 

$22,556,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and 

$21,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes the following funding 

levels for Research, Engineering, and Development programs 

FY 2014 Budget 

Request 

FY 2014 House 

Bill 

Improve Aviation Safety ...................................................................................................... $90,921,000 $90,921,000 

Fire Research and Safety .......................................................................................... 8,313,000 8,313,000 

Propulsion and Fuel Systems .................................................................................... 1,974,000 1,974,000 

Advanced Materials/Structural Safety ....................................................................... 2,607,000 2,607,000 

Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety .......................................................................... 7,582,000 7,582,000 

Continued Airworthiness ............................................................................................ 8,167,000 8,167,000 

Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research ................................................... 1,652,000 1,652,000 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors .................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

System Safety Management ...................................................................................... 11,583,000 11,583,000 

Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors .......................................... 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Aeromedical Research ................................................................................................ 8,672,000 8,672,000 

Weather Program ....................................................................................................... 15,279,000 15,279,000 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research ...................................................................... 7,500,000 7,500,000 

NextGen—Alternative Fuels for General Aviation ..................................................... 5,571,000 5,571,000 

NextGen—Advanced Systems and Software Validation ............................................ 1,021,000 1,021,000 

Economic Competitiveness ................................................................................................. 35,822,000 12,558,000 

Joint Planning and Development Office .................................................................... 12,057,000 – – – 

NextGen—Wake Turbulence ....................................................................................... 9,267,000 5,000,000 

NextGen—Air Ground Integration Human Factors .................................................... 10,329,000 4,558,000 

NextGen—Weather Technology in the Cockpit .......................................................... 4,169,000 3,000,000 

Environmental Sustainability .............................................................................................. 33,521,000 36,521,000 

Environment and Energy ............................................................................................ 14,542,000 14,542,000 

NextGen—Environmental Research—Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics ..... 18,979,000 21,979,000 

Mission Support .................................................................................................................. 5,736,000 5,000,000 

System Planning and Resource Management ........................................................... 2,289,000 2,000,000 

William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility ........................................... 3,447,000 3,000,000 

Total ........................................................................................................................... 166,000,000 145,000,000 

Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO).—The Committee 

recommends no funding for the Joint Planning and Development 

Office, a decrease of $12,057,000 below the budget request. The 

JPDO was established to develop a plan for NextGen in the 2025 

timeframe and to coordinate Federal research to modernize the Nation’s air transport system. Regardless of various FAA reorganizations, FAA has failed to establish a clearly defined role for the 

JPDO and set expectations for how it will leverage research conducted at other Federal agencies, including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of Defense, the 

Department of Commerce and the Department of Homeland Security. The Committee believes that the Chief NextGen Officer, established in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, should 

have responsibility for these interagency coordination activities. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

The Committee believes that the elimination of this office will have 

no programmatic impact. The Committee directs FAA to work with 

JPDO to integrate productive personnel into other offices focused 

on Next Gen advancement. 

NextGen environmental research—aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics.—The Committee provides $21,979,000 for the FAA’s 

NextGen environmental research aircraft technologies, fuels and 

metrics program, which is $1,665,000 below the enacted level and 

$3,000,000 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 resources 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 (CLEEN). 

NextGen—Alternative Fuels for General Aviation.—The Committee provides $5,571,000 for alternative fuels research for general aviation, which is $3,487,000 above the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and the same as 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. 

Centers of Excellence.—FAA’s Center of Excellence (COE) program was established in 1990 and has served as an important collaborative effort between industry, academia and government. The 

COE program has helped advance research on emerging aviation 

challenges and, at the same time, has helped to cultivate the next 

generation of aviation professionals. All federal resources dedicated 

to the program are matched dollar-for-dollar by industry and academic resources. Current Centers of Excellence are conducting research on advanced materials, commercial space transportation, 

and general aviation. The Committee understands there are higher 

education institutions that are interested in conducting research on 

aerospace design and advanced manufacturing practices. As the 

aviation industry develops new technologies to create more energy 

efficient aircraft, the Committee encourages FAA to explore this 

area to determine whether additional research is warranted. 

Rescission.—The Committee recommendation includes a rescission of $26,183,998. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
30 

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

Liquidation of 

contract authorization 

Limitation 

on obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................................................. $3,400,000,000 $3,350,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... 3,200,000,000 2,900,000,000 

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

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ............................................................................. ¥200,000,000 0 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .......................................................................... 0 +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 2014, which is the same as the fiscal year 2013 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 $106,600,000 for the administration of 

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

budget request and $5,600,000 above the fiscal year 2013 enacted 

level. The increase is provided to enhance investigations of airport 

revenue diversion. 

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

budget request and the fiscal year 2013 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 $29,500,000 for the FAA’s airport technology research 

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

the fiscal year 2013 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. 

Airport Revenue Diversion.—The Committee reiterates its concern over the diversion of airport revenues for non-airport purposes. The Inspector General has noted instances of multiple years 

of revenue diversions at certain airports. The Committee urges the 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
31 

FAA to prioritize revenue diversion enforcement, particularly at 

airports that have exhibited a historical pattern of diverting revenues to municipal or county budgets. 

BILL LANGUAGE

Runway Incursion Prevention Systems and Devices.—Consistent 

with prior year appropriations Acts, the bill allows funds under 

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

incursion prevention systems and devices. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Section 110. The Committee retains a provision limiting the 

number of technical workyears at the Center for Advanced Aviation 

Systems Development to 600 in fiscal year 2014. 

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 7. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
32 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... $412,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 429,855,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 417,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥12,855,000 

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. 

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 $417,000,000, which 

is $5,000,000 above fiscal year 2013, and $12,855,000 below the 

budget request. The amount reflects a modest increase adequate to 

continue work already underway to modernize financial management systems and to implement data integration plans. Also, as requested, an additional $1.5 million is provided for increased training and development activities. 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 2013 enacted 

Fiscal year 2014 

request 

Recommended 

in the bill 

Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation) .......................... $39,699,000 $40,256,000 $40,256,000 

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

Liquidation of contract authorization ...................................... 40,438,000 40,995,000 40,995,000 

Total program level ................................................ 40,438,000 40,995,000 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
33 

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. Funding provided supports Federal-aid 

highway programs as authorized under MAP–21. 

National Highway Performance Program.—The National Highway Performance Program provides support for the condition and 

performance of the National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new facilities on the NHS, and to ensure that investments of Federal-aid funds in highway construction are directed to 

support progress toward the achievement of performance targets 

established in a State’s asset management plan for the NHS. 

Surface Transportation Program.—The Surface Transportation 

Program provides flexible funding that may be used by States and 

localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and 

performance on Federal-aid highways, bridge and tunnel projects 

on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle path projects, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. 

Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act.—The 

Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act Program 

provides Federal credit assistance to eligible surface transportation 

projects, including highway, transit, intercity passenger rail, some 

types of freight rail, and intermodal freight transfer facilities. The 

program is designed to fill market gaps and to leverage substantial 

private co-investment by providing projects with supplemental or 

subordinate debt. 

Technology and Innovation Deployment Program.—The Technology and Innovation Deployment Program funds efforts to accelerate the implementation and delivery of new innovations and 

technologies that result from highway research and development to 

benefit all aspects of highway transportation. 

Training and Education Program.—The Training and Education 

Program provides funding to support training and education programs that promote and support national transportation programs 

and activities. 

Metropolitan Planning Program.—The metropolitan planning 

process establishes a cooperative, continuous, and comprehensive 

framework for making transportation investment decisions in metropolitan areas. Program oversight is a joint Federal Highway Administration/Federal Transit Administration responsibility. 

Highway Safety Improvement Program.—The Highway Safety 

Improvement Program provides funding designed to achieve a sigVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
34 

nificant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all 

public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on 

tribal lands. The program requires a data-driven, strategic approach to improving safety that focuses on performance. 

Railway-Highway Crossings Program.—This program funds safety improvements to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, and 

crashes at public grade crossings. 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program.— 

The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program 

provides a flexible funding source to State and local governments 

for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality for areas that do not meet national air 

standards set under the Clean Air Act for ozone, carbon monoxide, 

or particulate matter (nonattainment areas), and for former nonattainment areas that are now in compliance (maintenance areas). 

Transportation Alternatives Program.—MAP–21 established a 

new program to provide for a variety of alternative transportation 

projects, including many that were previously eligible activities 

under separately funded programs. The Transportation Alternatives Program replaces funding from pre-MAP–21 programs including Transportation Enhancements, Recreational Trails, Safe 

Routes to School, and other discretionary programs, and wraps 

these activities into a single funding source. 

Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities.—The 

Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities program 

provides funding for the construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities. 

Emergency Relief Program.—The Emergency Relief program provides funds for emergency repairs and permanent repairs on Federal-aid highways and roads on Federal lands that the Secretary 

finds have suffered serious damage as a result of natural disasters 

or catastrophic failure from an external cause. 

Tribal Transportation Program.—The purpose of the Tribal 

Transportation Program is to enhance transportation and improve 

access to basic community services in Indian country. 

Federal Lands Transportation Program.—The Federal Lands 

Transportation Program funds projects that improve access within 

the Federal estate (national forests, national parks, national wildlife refuges, national recreation areas, and other Federal public 

lands) on transportation facilities in the national Federal Lands 

transportation inventory and owned and maintained by the Federal 

government. 

Federal Lands Access Program.—The Federal Lands Access Program provides funds for projects on Federal Lands access transportation facilities that are located on or adjacent to, or that provide 

access to Federal lands. 

Territorial and Puerto Rico Highway Program.—The Territorial 

and Puerto Rico Highway Program allocates funds for a highway 

program in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and assists the governments of the U.S. territories in constructing and improving a 

system of arterial and collector highways and necessary inter-island connectors. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
35 

Highway Research and Development Program.—The Highway 

Research and Development Program funds strategic investment in 

research activities that address current and emerging highway 

transportation needs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total program level of $40,995,000,000 for the activities of the FHWA in fiscal year 2014, 

as authorized under P.L. 112–141, the Moving Ahead for Progress 

in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21). This amount is $557,000,000 

above fiscal year 2013 and the same as 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. The federal-aid highways 

program obligation level for fiscal year 2014 supports the full funding level as authorized under MAP–21 and appropriations language 

has been updated to reflect current law. 

The Highway Trust Fund.—The Committee does not include a 

provision requested in the budget to allow transfers between the 

Highway Account and the Transit Account of the Highway Trust 

Fund. The Committee directs the FHWA to report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment on DOT’s plan of action in the 

event either account is ever projected to reach a balance in 2014 

that would disrupt current payment practices. The insolvency plan 

should detail balance thresholds for agency action including stakeholder notification, changes to cash management and payment policies, and specific plans for the communication of these changes to 

states, transit agencies, and other affected stakeholders. 

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. 

Project selection and prioritization.—In instances where the Secretary exercises discretion in project selection or federal credit approval, the Committee directs the Secretary to give stronger consideration to projects that are funded through a public-private partnership. The Committee also directs the Secretary to prioritize 

projects that deliver a significant improvement to a national or regional transportation network. 

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. 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program 

(CMAQ).—The Committee encourages collaboration with States 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
36 

and MPOs to invest CMAQ funds in Alternative Fueled Vehicle 

(AFV) Infrastructure as these investments have the potential to reduce emissions and increase fuel efficiency. The Committee urges 

the Department of Transportation to expedite the issuance of guidance on the Alternative Fuel Vehicle provisions of MAP–21, and to 

provide an expedited approval process for technologies that meet 

the definition of an AFV including biodiesel, electricity, ethanol, hydrogen, natural gas, stored hydraulic energy and propane. The 

Committee also urges FHWA to provide an expedited process for 

States and MPOs to take advantage of the new AFV provisions in 

MAP 21 by amending their previously approved State Transportation Improvement Program. 

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... $39,699,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 40,995,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +1,296,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation of $40,995,000,000, which is $1,296,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 

and the same as the budget request. This is the amount required 

to pay the outstanding obligations of the highway program at levels 

provided in this Act and prior appropriations Acts. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

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

The provision has been updated to be consistent with changes to 

the underlying authorizing statute made by MAP–21. 

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 adds a provision making 

$13,248,000 in unobligated balances of contract authority apportioned to States prior to MAP–21 available for obligation to support 

FHWA administrative expenses. 

Section 124. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

tolling in Texas, with exceptions. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
37 

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 carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations for all commercial 

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

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of Contract Authorization Limitation on Obliga- tions 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................................................. $251,000,000 ($251,000,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................................................................... 259,000,000 (259,000,000) 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................................... +8,000,000 (+8,000,000)

Budget request, 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 States and local partners, safety education and 

outreach, and the safety and consumer telephone hotline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

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

motor carrier safety operations and programs. The Committee also 

recommends limiting obligations from the highway trust fund to 

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

fiscal year 2014. Consistent with MAP–21, these levels are 

$8,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 and the same as 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 is the same as fiscal 

year 2013 and the budget request. 

The Committee continues bill language making funds for the research and technology program available until September 30, 2016. 

The Committee also continues bill language prohibiting any funds 

relating to outreach and education from being transferred to another agency. 

Chameleon carriers.—FMCSA’s ability to detect and shut down 

chameleon carriers is critical. A chameleon carrier is an unscrupuVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
38 

lous motor carrier that was once put out-of-service due to safety 

violations, but that reincarnates itself under a new corporate identity to resume business. The vast majority of motor carriers are 

freight carriers, and GAO and the DOT Inspector General found 

that FMCSA can expand its new-entrant audits to the freight sector, but only by using risk-based data to target resources to the 

riskiest new entrants. The Committee directs FMCSA to continue 

working to identify the most cost-effective method for discovering 

such carriers and putting them out-of-service. To this end, the 

Committee further directs FMCSA to evaluate and report back to 

the Committee within 60 days of enactment on the extent to which 

independent commercially available data sources would enhance 

the Agency’s ability to uniquely identify freight carriers with possible corporate and family linkages to previously shuttered carriers. 

The report should include a cost-benefit analysis of the use of these 

data sources as an effective, risk-based method to identify these 

dangerous carriers. 

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 due process. 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. In addition to 

meeting the requirements set out under Section 33014 of MAP–21, 

FMCSA shall report to the Committee within 60 days of enactment 

on what improvements to the HMSP program can be made within 

the Agency’s existing authorities to provide relief to these operators 

prior to instituting a rulemaking, and when FMCSA anticipates 

implementing each of these interim improvements. 

Hours of Service Study.—In carrying out the requirements of 

Section 32301 of PL 112–141 (MAP–21), the Committee urges the 

Secretary to evaluate impacts on small business operators, and to 

consider a low-cost option to address any adverse impacts and report back to the Committee no later than December 31, 2013. 

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Liquidation of contract 

authorization 

Limitation on 

obligations 

Rescission of contract 

authority 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................... $310,000,000 ($310,000,000) – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ...................................... 313,000,000 (313,000,000) – – – 

Recommended in the bill .................................................. 313,000,000 (313,000,000) ¥$95,956,883 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ................................ 3,000,000 (3,000,000) ¥95,956,883 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................. – – – (0) ¥95,956,883 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
39 

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 2014. Consistent with MAP–21, these levels are 

$3,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 and the same as the budget request. The Committee recommendation also rescinds $95,956,883 of 

unobligated contract authority authorized prior to MAP–21. There 

was no rescission of contract authority in either fiscal year 2013 or 

the budget request. 

The Committee recommends the following obligation limitations 

for grants funded under this account: 

Motor carrier safety assistance program (MCSAP) .............................................................. ($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 .................................. (25,000,000) 

Safety data improvement grants ......................................................................................... (3,000,000) 

New entrant audits.—Of the funds made available for the Motor 

Carrier Safety Assistance Grants, the Committee recommends 

$32,000,000 for audits of new entrant motor carriers, which is the 

same as both fiscal year 2013 and the budget request, and is consistent with MAP–21. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION—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. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
40 

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. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $817,675,088 (excluding rescissions), which is $7,529,088 above fiscal year 2013 and $10,667,912 

below the budget request. The Committee’s recommendation funds 

grant programs as authorized under MAP–21. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations: 

2013 enacted 2014 request Committee 

recommendation 

Operations and research (general fund and highway trust fund) ..... $255,646,000 $266,843,000 $256,175,088 

Highway traffic safety grants (highway trust fund) ........................... 554,500,000 561,500,000 561,500,000 

Rescission of Contract Authority (highway trust fund) ...................... – – – – – – ¥152,281,282 

Total ............................................................................................ 810,146,000 828,343,000 665,393,806 

The Committee recommends funding levels that provide NHTSA 

with sufficient resources to meet its responsibilities under MAP–21 

and to continue its critical work improving the safety of passenger 

travel on the nation’s highway system. The Committee encourages 

NHTSA and the network of researchers and public safety personnel 

to continue their work to enhance safety and reduce fatalities. 

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(General fund) (Highway trust 

fund) Total 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ........................................................... $140,146,000 $115,500,000 $255,646,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ........................................................ 148,343,000 118,500,000 266,843,000 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................... 117,000,000 139,175,088 256,175,088 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥23,146,000 +23,675,088 +529,088 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................................... ¥31,343,000 +20,675,088 ¥10,667,912 

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 counterVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
41 

measures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law enforcement, 

emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic records and licensing, traffic safety evaluations, motorcycle safety, pedestrian 

and bicycle safety, pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy 

driving, young and older driver safety programs, and development 

of improved accident investigation procedures. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $256,175,088, which is $529,088 

above fiscal year 2013 and $10,667,912 below the budget request. 

Of this total, $117,000,000 is from the general fund for operations 

and vehicle safety research, and $139,175,088 is from the highway 

trust fund for operations and highway safety research. The Committee recommendation assumes no change in Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) in 2014. 

Data modernization project.—In January of 2012, NHTSA 

launched its Data Modernization Project to update the various elements of the data collection systems, including: sample design, IT 

infrastructure, data collection sites and data elements. On June 21, 

2012, NHTSA published a notice requesting comments on the modernization project and recently announced that the agency intends 

to hold a public listening session with its stakeholders in July of 

2013. The Committee believes that input from external stakeholders and experts is a critical component of the Data Modernization Project, particularly as industry, advocacy organizations and 

medical institutions use the NHTSA data as the foundation for 

their own studies and analyses. The Committee expects NHTSA to 

keep an ongoing dialogue with its stakeholders on this important 

project. The Committee directs NHTSA to provide semiannual updates to the Committee on the Agency’s progress with the modernization project including a review of stakeholder comments and 

concerns and the Agency’s response. 

High-visibility enforcement programs.—NHTSA’s national highvisibility enforcement campaigns for increasing seat belt use (Click 

It or Ticket) and reducing drunk driving (Drive Sober or Get Pulled 

Over) have been successful. MAP–21 included $29,000,000 in Fiscal 

Year 2014 to continue the high-visibility enforcement programs and 

the paid advertising which supports them. The Committee supports 

NHTSA’s Fiscal Year 2014 plans to conduct at least three of these 

safety campaigns: a campaign on seat belt use during the Memorial 

Day weekend; and impaired driving campaigns for Labor Day and 

the December holiday period. In addition, MAP–21 included 

$5,000,000 in new funding for media support of enforcement of distracted driving prevention laws. The Committee strongly believes 

that these important safety campaigns should be discrete initiatives in order to ensure that the Agency’s message is clear and focused. The Committee directs NHTSA to provide an update to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the Agency’s 

plans for these campaigns by March 31, 2014. 

Active Safety Technologies.—The Committee is interested in the 

links between increased utilization of active safety technologies 

(such as collision warning systems) and the potential to improve 

safety on the nation’s roads. The Committee urges the Secretary to 

continue research efforts on these promising technologies. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
42 

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Liquidation of contract 

authorization 

Limitation on obligation Rescission of contract 

authority 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................... $554,500,000 ($554,500,000) – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ...................................... 561,500,000 (561,500,000) – – – 

Recommended in the bill .................................................. 561,500,000 (561,500,000) ¥$152,281,282 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ................................ +7,000,000 (+7,000,000) ¥152,281,282 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................. – – – – – – ¥152,281,282 

The highway traffic safety state grant programs authorized 

under MAP–21 include: Highway Safety Programs, National Priority Safety Programs, and the High Visibility Enforcement Program. 

These grant programs provide resources to states for highway 

safety programs that are data-driven and that meet states’ most 

pressing highway safety problems. They are a critical asset in reducing highway traffic fatalities and injuries. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $561,500,000 in liquidating cash 

from the highway trust fund to pay outstanding obligations of the 

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 

2014 for the highway traffic safety grants programs to 

$561,500,000. These levels are $7,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 

and the same as the budget request. The Committee’s recommendation funds grant programs as authorized under MAP–21. 

The Committee recommendation also rescinds $152,281,282 of unobligated contract authority authorized prior to MAP–21. There 

was no rescission of contract authority in either fiscal year 2013 or 

the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY

ADMINISTRATION

Section 140. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

limited funding for travel and related expenses associated with 

state management reviews and highway safety core competency development training. 

Section 141. The Committee continues a provision that exempts 

from the current fiscal year’s obligation limitation any obligation 

authority that was made available in previous public laws. 

Section 142. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funding for the National Highway Safety Advisory Committee. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
43 

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 2013 1 ....................................................... $178,596,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 184,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 184,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +5,904,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $184,500,000 for safety and operations, which is $5,904,000 above the fiscal year 2013 enacted level 

and the same as the budget request. Of the amount provided under 

this heading, $12,400,000 is available until expended. 

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $35,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 35,250,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,250,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +250,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $250,000 above the 

fiscal year 2013 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes the following allocation 

for FRA’s Railroad Research and Development account: 

Railroad System Issues ................................................................................................................ $3,871,000 

Human Factors .............................................................................................................................. 3,542,000 

Rolling Stock and Components .................................................................................................... 2,796,000 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
44 

Track and Structures .................................................................................................................... 5,010,000 

Track and Train Interaction .......................................................................................................... 3,418,000 

Train Control ................................................................................................................................. 6,473,000 

Grade Crossings ............................................................................................................................ 1,613,000 

Hazardous Materials Transportation ............................................................................................. 1,496,000 

Train Occupant Protection ............................................................................................................ 4,030,000 

R&D Facilities and Test Equipment ............................................................................................. 3,001,000 

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 2014. 

RAILROAD RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2 $54,750,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥54,750,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

2The administration budget requested $54,750,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust Fund 

for another railroad research program, the Railroad Research, Development and Technology Program. 

For fiscal year 2014, the administration’s budget requests funding for the railroad research, development and technology program. 

The program is a new, unauthorized program. The Committee 

notes that it has not received formal legislative proposal for such 

program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the railroad research, 

development and technology program in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation is the same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted level, and 

$54,750,000 below the budget request. 

RAIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2 $3,660,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,660,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

2The Administration budget requested $3,660,000,000 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. The 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
45 

Committee has not received a formal legislative proposal for such 

a program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the rail service improvement program in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation is the 

same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted level, and $3,660,000,000 

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 and 110 miles per hour. 

Congressional budget justification.—The Committee appreciates 

the level of detail in the fiscal year 2014 budget justifications and 

directs Amtrak to continue to submit justifications with a similar 

level of detail in all future budget years. 

OPERATING GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER

CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... 1 $466,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2 – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥116,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ +350,000,000 1Does not include $32,000,000 appropriated in P.L. 113–2 to Amtrak for operating losses associated with 

Hurricane Sandy. Total appropriation level, including funding from P.L. 113–2, for Amtrak operating grants 

in fiscal year 2013 is $498,000,000. Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB 

ATB. 2FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested 

$2,700,000,000 for the Current Passenger Rail account, which includes both operating and capital funds for 

Amtrak. According to FRA, the amount it requested for operating grants equates to $450,000,000, which it 

based on Amtrak’s Fiscal Year 2012–2016 Five Year Financial Plan. 

Amtrak runs a deficit each year and requires a federal subsidy 

to cover both operating losses and capital investments. The Committee notes, however, that the President’s budget continues to request more in operating subsidy funds than it actually needs. For 

example, from fiscal years 2010 through 2013, the administration 

requested $2,382,000,000 for Amtrak operating grants. This 

amount exceeded the Corporation’s actual loss of $1,618,000,000 by 

$764,000,000—about one-third more than it needed. In fiscal year 

2013, Amtrak’s operating subsidy request will exceed projected 

losses by $241,000,000, about 38 percent more than needed. 

The Administration’s Operating Request Consistently Exceeds Need 

FY 2010–FY 2013 

Funding Levels (in millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 2 Total 

FY 2010–2013 

President’s Budget Request 1 ............................... $572 $563 $616 $631 $2,382 

Actual Loss ............................................................ 420 446 362 390 1,618 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
46 

The Administration’s Operating Request Consistently Exceeds Need—Continued 

FY 2010–FY 2013 

Funding Levels (in millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 2 Total FY 2010–2013 

Excess Request ..................................................... 152 117 254 241 764 

1 In fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014, the President requested funds for Amtrak as mandatory. In fiscal years 2013 and 2014, the

administration‘s budget assumed a new structure for Amtrak. Equivalent amounts for operating grants are noted. 2 The fiscal year 2013 figures do not include amounts associated with Hurricane Sandy. In fiscal year 2013, the Administration requested 

$32,000,000 for operating losses associated with Hurricane Sandy, all of which the Committee provided. Amtrak’s actual operating losses associated with Hurricane Sandy total $50,000,000. 

From fiscal years 2010 through 2013, the Committee provided 

Amtrak with $2,057,000,000 in operating subsidy. Over these four 

fiscal years, the Corporation’s actual loss totaled $1,618,000,000, 

resulting in an excess appropriation of $439,000,000, or 21 percent 

more than it needed. 

Amtrak’s Operating Request and Appropriation Exceeds Actual Need 

FY 2010–FY 2013 

Funding Levels 

(in millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 1 Total FY 2010–2013 

Appropriation ..................................... $562 $563 $466 $466 $2,057 

Actual Loss ........................................ 420 446 362 390 1,618 

Excess Appropriation ......................... 142 117 104 76 439 

1 Fiscal year 2013 figures do not include amounts associated with Hurricane Sandy. The Committee provided $32,000,000 consistent with 

the administration’s request. Amtrak’s actual loss was $50,000,000 

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. 

Amtrak’s Profit/(Loss) By Line of Business 

FY 2011–FY 2014 

Line of Business FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

(Forecast) 1

FY 2014 

(Forecast) 

Northeast Corridor .......................................................................... 255 283 365 308 

State Corridors ............................................................................... (148) (156) (150) (73) 

Long Distance Routes .................................................................... (554) (558) (606) (610) 

National Assets .............................................................................. 1 69 (49) 2 

Total Profit/Loss .................................................................... (446) (362) (440) (373) 

1 The fiscal year 2013 figures include Hurricane Sandy impacts, which resulting in an operating loss of $50,000,000. Amtrak’s operating 

loss excluding losses associated with Hurricane Sandy equate to $390,000,000. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for operating grants for Amtrak, which is $116,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $350,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee determined the level by adjusting the projected fiscal year 

2013 loss for operating losses associated with Hurricane Sandy and 

for proceeds associated with section 209 state supported routes. 

The Committee includes bill language allowing the Secretary to 

retain up to one-half of one percent for FRA to implement Amtrak 

Operating Grants as authorized by section 103 of the Passenger 

Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA). FRA requires such 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
47 

funds to oversee the operating grants to Amtrak, to ensure prudent 

use of federal funds and to foster transparency. 

Operating Subsidy Budget Estimates.—As noted above, the administration has consistently requested about one-third more in operating subsidy than its actual operating losses. The Committee relies on good estimates to allocate its limited resources among the 

entire discretionary budget. The Committee directs FRA to submit 

a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by 

January 25, 2014 detailing improvements it will make in its budget 

estimating process. The report shall include a list of operating line 

items and their associated budget request compared to the actual 

need for the prior two fiscal years. For each item that exceeded estimates by 10 percent or more, the report shall detail reasons for 

the delta, and efforts the administration will undertake to improve 

the estimates. 

Section 209.—Enacted October 16, 2008, PRIIA (Section 209) directed the states and Amtrak to ‘‘develop and implement a single, 

nationwide standardized methodology for establishing and allocating the operating and capital costs among the States and Amtrak’’ for trains that operate on corridors of 750 miles or less. Section 209 will allocate a proportionate set of costs that reflect the 

routes’ relative use while ensuring that Amtrak treats all states 

equally. Although the states and Amtrak worked cooperatively and 

developed a plan to implement this initiative, the administration’s 

budget proposes to delay the execution of section 209, and instead, 

shift the funding burden to the Federal government. Despite this, 

Amtrak intends to implement section 209 in fiscal year 2014 consistent with law, and forecasts it will receive $85,000,000 from 

states to offset state corridor losses. The Committee supports Amtrak’s decision to follow the law and implement section 209 in fiscal 

year 2014. 

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 loss totaled $313,000,000 from 

fiscal years 2010 through 2013 (forecast). In fiscal year 2013, Amtrak estimates that expenses will exceed revenue by nearly 

$75,000,000, reflecting a cost recovery of only 64 percent. 

AMTRAK’S FOOD AND BEVERAGE LOSSES AND COST RECOVERY

FY 2009—FY 2012 

In millions 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

(forecast) 

Total 

FY 2010– 

FY 2013 

Total Revenue ........................................................ $109.3 $121.5 $132.9 $133.5 $497.2 

Total Expenses ...................................................... 191.7 206.0 204.9 208.3 810.9 

Loss ....................................................................... (82.4) (84.6) (72.0) (74.9) (313.9) 

Cost Recovery ........................................................ 57% 59% 65% 64% 61% 

The majority of these losses are attributable to long distance 

routes and labor costs. While Amtrak has made progress at reducing commissary and support costs, labor costs have increased mainly due to wage increases. Currently, the average salary of an onboard service attendant is between $24.11 and $27.09 per hour. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
48 

1 According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Mean Hourly Wage of Transportation Attendants, Except Flight Attendants is $11.64. People working in this field provide services to 

ensure the safety and comfort of passengers aboard ships, buses, trains, or within the station 

or terminal. They perform duties such as greeting passengers, explaining the use of safety 

equipment, serving meals or beverages, and answering questions related to travel. This definition excludes ‘‘Baggage Porters and Bellhops’’ 2 According to Amtrak Financials and BLS data. 

This is more than twice the average salary of a transportation attendant across various transportation modes 1, and over 20% higher 

than the average salary of a flight attendant.2 Further, in Amtrak’s 

last negotiated labor agreement in 2010, on-board service attendants were guaranteed a 3% wage increase per year until 2014. 

The Committee is concerned that the taxpayer is footing the bill 

for Amtrak’s consistently unprofitable food, beverage and first class 

service. The Committee directs Amtrak to create performance 

metrics in its next five year financial plan to reduce costs in food 

service, especially in labor costs and commissary and support costs. 

Further, the Committee directs the Amtrak Inspector General 

(IG) to submit an analysis of the cost of providing food service. The 

IG should conduct a comprehensive cost comparison of current 

services versus the alternative of Amtrak contracting out these 

services. This cost comparison should include the total cost of potential buy-outs of current employees. Further, the IG should submit an analysis of which positions in food service can be contracted 

out and which positions cannot. This analysis and report shall be 

provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

by November 1, 2014. 

Amtrak Overtime.—The Committee commends Amtrak for making progress in reducing overtime expenses. Overtime expenses decreased from $209,091,000 in calender year 2010 to $162,461,000 

in calender year 2012, a reduction of 22 percent. In addition, Amtrak contained the number of employees that exceed $35,000 in 

overtime payments to 703 in 2012, a reduction of 585 people from 

2010. The fiscal year 2013 overtime increases are attributable to 

additional safety and other work resulting from Hurricane Sandy. 

Amtrak Overtime 

CY 2010–CY 2012 

CY 2010 CY 2011 CY 2012 CY 2013 

(forecast) 

Number of Employees with Overtime Exceeding $35,000 ................................ 1,288 1,123 703 1,141 

Total Overtime Wages ................... $209,091,000 $200,781,000 $162,461,000 $180,866,000 

To ensure the Corporation continues to make progress on 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 for employees that exceed $35,000 per year, and provide that information to the Committee. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
49 

CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD

PASSENGER CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $952,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 2 ..................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥352,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

2FRA’s budget request for Amtrak assumed a new structure for the Corporation. It requested $2,700,000,000 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 $2,150,000,000. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for capital grants, 

debt service and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities 

Act. The Committee’s recommendation is $352,000,000 below the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2013. 

Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission.—The Committee recommends up to $3,000,000, instead of 

up to one half of one percent of the funds provided under this heading, as enacted in fiscal year 2013. The Committee directs the 

Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission to submit its fiscal year 2015 budget request to the Appropriations Committees in a similar format and substance as those 

submitted by other executive agencies of the federal government. 

Rolling stock acquisitions.—The Committee encourages Amtrak 

to apply to the Department of Transportation for a Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing loan to finance its Acela cars 

for the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak estimates the cars to cost 

$200,000,000. The Committee notes that the RRIF program was 

created to fund this type of investment and it is the view of the 

Committee that Amtrak would be eligible to receive credit assistance under RRIF. 

Chief Financial Officer.—The Committee understands that Amtrak has hired a firm to assist it in its search for a chief financial 

officer (CFO). The Committee encourages Amtrak to hire a CFO 

that has Federal budget experience and is familiar with the appropriations process that is critical to Amtrak’s capital and operating 

program. 

CURRENT PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 1 $2,700,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥2,700,000,000 1The administration requested $2,700,000,000 in mandatory spending from the Highway Trust Fund for a 

new rail service improvement program, which includes both capital and operating grants. 

In fiscal year 2014, the FRA budget documents include a new 

Current Passenger Rail Service Program that replaces the National 

Passenger Rail program. The Committee has not received a formal 

legislative proposal for such a program. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
50 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the Current Passenger Rail Service Program in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation is the same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted level, and 

$3,660,000,000 below the budget request. 

NORTHEAST CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

(RESCISSION)

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ............................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥$4,419,000 

Bill compared with: 

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ........................................................ ¥4,419,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥4,419,000 

The Committee recommends the permanent rescission of $4,419,000 previously appropriated. 

NEXT GENERATION HIGH SPEED RAIL

(RESCISSION)

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ............................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥$1,973,000 

Bill compared with: 

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ........................................................ ¥1,973,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,973,000 

The Committee recommends the permanent rescission of $1,973,000 previously appropriated. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

Section 150. The Committee retains a provision that ceases the 

availability of Amtrak funds if a railroad contracts for services outside the United States for any service performed by a full-time or 

part-time Amtrak employee as of July 1, 2006. 

Section 151. 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 152. 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 153. The Committee continues a provision that limits overtime to $35,000 per employee, allows Amtrak’s president to 

waive this restriction for specific employees for safety or operational efficiency reasons, and requires notification to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of granting such waivers. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
51 

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). During 

the authorization period provided under, the 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. 

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $102,713,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 109,888,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 102,713,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥7,175,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $102,713,000 for FTA’s administrative expenses, the same as the fiscal year 2013 level, and 

a decrease of $7,175,000 below the budget request. 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. These 

funds, when adjusting for a lack of sequester cuts, plus the administration funds provided in the Sandy Supplemental, should be 

more than sufficient for the day-to-day operations of the agency. 

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 2014. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
52 

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, 2014. 

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 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 2016; (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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
53 

TRANSIT FORMULA GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Liquidation of 

contract 

authorization 

Limitation on 

obligations 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ........................................................................................... $9,400,000,000 $8,400,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... 9,500,000,000 8,595,000,000 

Recommended in the bill .................................................................................................... 9,500,000,000 8,595,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................................................. +100,000,000 +195,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .............................................................................. – – – – – – 

MAP–21 provided contract authority for the transit formula 

grant programs from the mass transit account of the highway trust 

fund. These programs include: urbanized area formula, state safety 

oversight program, state of good repair grants, formula grants for 

rural areas, growing states and high density states, mobility for 

seniors and persons with disabilities, bus and bus facility formula 

grants, the bus testing facility, planning programs, transit oriented 

development, National Transit Institute, and the National Transit 

Database. The Appropriations Act sets an annual obligation limitation for such authority. This account is the only FTA account funded from the highway trust fund. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an obligation limitation of 

$8,595,000,000 for the formula programs and activities which is the 

same as the budget request and $195,000,000 above the fiscal year 

2013 enacted level. The Committee’s recommendation also includes 

$9,500,000,000 in liquidating funds. 

The Committee notes that a number of localities are negatively 

impacted by changes in the Transit Formula Program brought 

about through MAP–21. Funding available for bus replacement, 

purchase, and rehabilitation is significantly reduced from prior 

years, seriously impacting transit entities in medium and smallersized cities and in regions and states that have older bus fleets. 

These states and regions make significant contributions to the balances of the Mass Transit Account and the Highway Trust Fund, 

and they should see a more commensurate return on their contribution. The Committee directs FTA to study the impact of this 

formula change, and report on the differences between funding levels and percentages of overall formula funding by state, and provide suggestions on alternative distribution methodologies that can 

constructively address this MAP–21 shortcoming. 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $25,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥25,000,000 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
54 

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, however, this program does not replace 

the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) capital assistance program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation does not include funds for this 

new account. First and foremost, the Committee will make funding 

determinations for emergency funds on a case-by-case basis and is 

not willing to spend $25,000,000 to sit in FTA’s Treasury account. 

Second, the Committee provided $10,900,000,000 for this account 

after the Sandy storm hit the Northeast, and the Committee prefers to evaluate the methods, oversight and effectiveness of how 

this money, and this program is administered before committing 

new funds in 2014. The Committee, particularly the THUD Subcommittee and the Homeland Security Subcommittee, question the 

memorandum of agreement (MOA) signed by FEMA and FTA as 

the MOA doesn’t clearly delineate the costs and responsibilities assigned to each agency. Further, if the FTA program does not replace FEMA’s program, the Committee can’t help but wonder if 

this program is duplicative in nature and unnecessary. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND DEPLOYMENT

PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $30,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +20,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to conduct research activities that improve the safety, reliability, efficiency, and sustainability of public 

transportation by investing in the development, testing, and deployment of innovative technologies, materials and processes. FTA 

is also authorized to award grants to demonstrate and deploy new 

technologies that promote clean energy and improve air quality 

with low-emission or no-emission vehicles. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for transit research and 

development, $10,000,000 below the budget request. Prior to MAP– 

21, FTA had one main research account most recently funded at 

$44,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. MAP–21 broke out many of the activities into four different accounts. 

Consistent with the direction that was provided in previous 

years, the Committee requires FTA to report by May 15, 2014, on 

all FTA-sponsored research projects from fiscal year 2013 and 

2014. For each project, the report should include information on 

the national relevance of the research, relevance to the transit industry and community, expected final product and delivery date, 

sources of non-FTA funding committed to the project or research 

institute, and FTA funding history. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
55 

Emerging transit technologies.—The Committee acknowledges 

there are efforts to research and develop automated personal rapid 

transit systems and zero emission buses that can serve as an alternative to travel by car or traditional light or heavy rail. These technologies are emerging in Europe and Asia as the result of significant government sponsored investment. The Committee encourages 

FTA to explore efforts to demonstrate the proof of concept of the 

next generation of hardware and vehicle control systems for automated personal rapid transit technology as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 

5312. In addition, the Committee supports FTA’s efforts to develop, 

demonstrate and commercialize advanced transportation technologies, particularly zero emission bus technologies and alternative fuels to achieve energy efficiency and create jobs through 

eventual commercial production. 

TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $7,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +4,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,000,000 

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 $4,000,000 for transit cooperative 

research, $3,000,000 below the budget request. Prior to MAP–21, 

FTA had one main research account most recently funded at 

$44,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. MAP–21 broke out many of the activities into four different accounts. 

Similar to the other research accounts, the Committee requires 

FTA to report by May 15, 2014, on all FTA-sponsored research 

projects from fiscal year 2013 and 2014 at the National Academy 

of Sciences. For each project, the report should include information 

on the national relevance of the research, relevance to the transit 

industry and community, expected final product and delivery date, 

sources of non-FTA funding committed to the project or research 

institute, and FTA funding history. 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $7,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +4,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
56 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for technical assistance 

and standards development, $3,000,000 below the budget request. 

Prior to MAP–21, FTA had one main research account most recently funded at $44,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. MAP–21 broke out 

many of the activities into four different accounts. 

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 explore 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. 

HUMAN RESOURCES AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,000,000 

MAP–21 authorizes FTA to carry out human resource and training activities and to establish a competitive workforce development 

grant program, with the goal of improving the skill and capability 

of the transit industry workforce to operate increasingly complex 

transit vehicles and fixed guideway systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for human resources and 

training, $3,000,000 below the budget request. Prior to MAP–21, 

FTA had one main research account most recently funded at 

$44,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. MAP–21 broke out many of the activities into four different accounts. 

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $1,955,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 1,981,472,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,815,655,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥139,345,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥165,817,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
57 

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 $1,815,655,000 for capital investment grants which is $139,345,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $165,817,000 below the budget request. The administration proposed to use $151,388,000 in prior year unused transit 

funds for 2014 projects bring the request to $2,132,860,000. 

Within the amount provided, the Committee includes a total of 

$17,977,000, or approximately one percent, for oversight activities 

related to the investments in this account. 

The fiscal year 2014 recommendation provides $1,684,756,000 for 

all current and on-going full funding grant agreements as requested in the budget. In addition, $25,086,000 is provided for two 

existing small start projects, and $87,836,000 is provided for small 

start projects new in fiscal year 2014 as requested. No funds are 

provided for new full funding grant agreements, and no funds are 

provided for the new core capacity program. 

The Committee assumes funding for the following projects that 

were included in the fiscal year 2014 budget request: 

FY 2014 Funding 

Signed FFGAs.

Dallas Northwest Southeast LRT, TX ............................................................................................................... $8,727,000 

New York East Side Access, NY ....................................................................................................................... 215,000,000 

New York Second Ave Subway, NY ................................................................................................................... 14,640,000 

Seattle University Link, WA .............................................................................................................................. 110,000,000 

Dulles Extension to Wiehle Ave, VA ................................................................................................................. 96,000,000 

Central Corridor LRT, MN ................................................................................................................................. 98,444,000 

Hartford New Britain Busway, CT .................................................................................................................... 58,716,000 

Central Florida Commuter Rail, FL .................................................................................................................. 4,195,000 

RTD Eagle Denver, CO ...................................................................................................................................... 150,000,000 

South Sacramento Corridor Phase 2, CA ......................................................................................................... 2,506,000 

Third Street Light Rail Phase 2—Central, CA ................................................................................................ 150,000,000 

Silicon Valley Barryessa Extension, CA ............................................................................................................ 150,000,000 

Honolulu, HI ...................................................................................................................................................... 250,000,000 

Charlotte Lynx Blue Line NE, NC ..................................................................................................................... 100,000,000 

Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail, OR ................................................................................................................... 100,000,000 

Houston North Corridor, TX .............................................................................................................................. 88,264,000 

Houston Southeast Corridor, TX ....................................................................................................................... 88,264,000 

Small Starts.

Central Mesa LRT, AZ ...................................................................................................................................... $20,617,000 

Silver Line BRT, MI ........................................................................................................................................... 4,469,000 

Fresno Area Blackstone/Kings BRT, CA ........................................................................................................... 10,000,000 

JTA BRT North Corridor, FL ............................................................................................................................... 19,075,000 

JTA BRT Southeast Corridor, FL ....................................................................................................................... 19,101,000 

West Eugene EmX Extension, OR ..................................................................................................................... 24,423,000 

Dyer Corridor BRT, TX ....................................................................................................................................... 15,237,000 

For years, the Committee has directed FTA to better manage the 

new starts account and the pipeline of projects so as not to create 

an unrealistic funding requirement for existing FFGAs. However, 

this budget proposal is really quite duplicitous. FTA proposed to 

fund two new projects in the Los Angeles area that were anticipated to reach FFGA in September 2013 (one of which is now being 

re-evaluated), and one project in Washington State slated for an 

FFGA in May 2014. What the budget doesn’t relay is that two 

other projects—one in Massachusetts and one in Florida, would acVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
58 

tually reach their FFGA milestones prior to the Washington State 

project, yet the Florida and the Massachusetts projects were not selected for funding. FTA instead proposed to leap frog one project 

over two others. And because of the earmark rules, this Committee 

would be powerless to direct funds to the projects that reach their 

FFGA milestone first because the President did not include those 

projects in his request. Yes, the Committee directed FTA to give a 

closer look at the projects moving through the grant pipeline and 

be more selective on which projects receive Federal dollars. Picking 

and choosing favorites was not the intention. 

The Committee continues to direct FTA to only further projects 

to a full funding grant agreement if the project requires a less than 

60 percent new starts share and rates medium high or high in the 

categories related to finance and reducing congestion. 

A number of medium-sized cities have contacted the Committee 

expressing concern about the changes to the New Starts Program 

in MAP–21 related to the cost-effectiveness ratings and boarding 

requirements. Recent guidance penalizes a number of cost-effective 

bus projects in these medium-sized cities through revised, but outof-reach rider thresholds. The new threshold requirments effectively block funding opportunities for corridor-based bus projects in 

these markets. At a time when FTA professes to encourage the 

broader use of public transit in all cities, this recent guidance has 

the potential to block transit development in less dense, but growing regions of the country. 

WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $150,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 150,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 125,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥25,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥25,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $125,000,000 for preventive maintenance and capital grants for WMATA, which is 

$25,000,000 less than both the budget request and the fiscal year 

2013 enacted level. The Committee directs WMATA to continue addressing the safety issues within the agency, specifically, those 

identified by the National Transportation 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
59 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

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 includes a provision that rescinds a 

total of $151,338,000 from unobligated prior year funds. 

Section 164. 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 165. The Committee continues the provision that prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project with a new 

starts share greater than 50%. 

Section 166. The Committee includes a provision regarding a certain fixed guideway project in Houston, Texas. 

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $32,259,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 32,855,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 30,582,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,677,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥2,273,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
60 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $30,582,000 

to fund the operations, maintenance, and capital asset renewal 

needs of the SLSDC. This funding level is $1,677,000 lower than 

the fiscal year 2013 appropriation and $2,273,000 lower than the 

2014 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. 

MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is responsible for programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime industry in support of the 

Nation’s security and economic needs, as authorized by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936. MARAD’s mission is to promote the development and maintenance of an adequate, well-balanced United 

States merchant marine, sufficient to carry the Nation’s domestic 

waterborne commerce and a substantial portion of its waterborne 

foreign commerce, and capable of serving as a naval and military 

auxiliary in time of war or national emergency. MARAD, working 

with the Department of Defense (DoD), helps provide a seamless, 

time-phased transition from peacetime to wartime operations, 

while balancing the defense and commercial elements of the maritime transportation system. MARAD also manages the maritime 

security program, the voluntary intermodal sealift agreement program and the ready reserve force, which assures DoD access to 

commercial and strategic sealift and associated intermodal capability. Further, MARAD’s education and training programs through 

the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and six state maritime academies help create skilled U.S. merchant marine officers. 

MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $174,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 208,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 174,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥34,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $174,000,000 for this account, the 

same as the fiscal year 2013 funding level and $34,000,000 below 

the request. This recommendation provides funding directly to 

MARAD and assumes that MARAD will continue to administer the 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
61 

program with support and consultation from the Department of Defense. Funds are available until expended. The Committee does not 

provide the $25,000,000 requested for new payments to shippers 

since the Committee has not adopted changes to the food aid program. 

OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $156,258,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 152,168,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 143,768,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥12,490,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥8,400,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $143,768,000 for MARAD operations and training expenses, $12,490,000 less than the fiscal year 2013 

funding level and $8,400,000 below the fiscal year 2014 budget request. 

MARAD Operations.—Of the funds provided, $45,000,000 is for 

headquarters and regional office operations, and maritime program 

expenses. This proposal reflects a reduction of $1,199,000 from the 

fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $2,000,000 below the request. 

The Committee notes that MARAD provided little to no justification for the headquarters budget request in the budget documents. 

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 2014 budget submission. 

National Maritime Heritage Grants.—The Committee is concerned with delays in the administration of the National Maritime 

Heritage Grants Program as authorized under P.L. 103–451, and 

encourages the Maritime Administration to place priority on the 

prompt implementation of this grant program. 

Short-sea shipping innovations.—The Committee acknowledges 

the potential for cost savings and increased economic efficiency 

through the use of short-sea shipping, and appreciates the attention MARAD has focused on the concept in recent years. The Committee encourages MARAD to continue devoting resources to the 

development of innovative solutions, such as proposed designs for 

an articulated tug-barge, that could enable companies to use shortsea shipping routes to reach both new and old markets at substantially lower costs than traditional overland shipping routes. 

N.S. Savannah.—The Committee does not adopt the proposal to 

fund the N.S. Savannah under this account and will instead fund 

these activities under the ship disposal account. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
62 

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 $79,268,000 in fiscal year 2014 for the USMMA, of which 

up to $67,268,000 is for Academy operations and not less than 

$12,000,000 is for capital improvements. 

State Maritime Academies.—The Committee recommends 

$17,500,000 for the state maritime academies. Of the funds provided, $3,600,000 is for direct payments, $2,400,000 is for student 

payments, and $11,500,000 is for schoolship maintenance and repair. 

SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $5,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ +2,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

MARAD serves as the federal government’s disposal agent for 

government-owned merchant vessels weighing 1,500 gross tons or 

more. The ship disposal program provides resources to dispose of 

obsolete merchant-type vessels in the National Defense Reserve 

Fleet (NDRF). The Maritime Administration was required by Public Law 106–398 to dispose of its obsolete inventory by the end of 

2006. These vessels pose a significant environmental threat due to 

the presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid 

and liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). As reported in the fiscal year 2014 budget documents, MARAD has custody of approximately 35 obsolete vessels that are not yet under contract for disposal, a reduction of 14 ships from the 49 reported in the 2013 

budget. The obsolete ships are located at the James River Reserve 

Fleet site in Virginia (10 ships—a reduction of 4 from the prior 

year), the Suisun Bay Reserve Fleet (SBRF) site in California (17 

ships—a reduction of 10 from the prior year), and the Beaumont 

Reserve Fleet site in Texas (5 ships—3 less than the prior year). 

MARAD anticipates removing another 6 ships from the SBRF during fiscal year 2014. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for this account, 

$1,500,000 below the fiscal year 2013 funding level and $2,000,000 

over the budget request. Funds are available until expended. 

The Committee rejects the budget proposal to move funds for the 

maintenance and safeguarding of the Nuclear Ship Savannah to 

the operations and training account and has provided $2,000,000 

for these activities under this heading. The proposal to move to operations and training sends the signal that MARAD is not actively 

working toward disposing of this ship. The Committee encourages 

MARAD and the Administration to make funds available for disposal in the next budget as the costs associated with these activities only multiply year after year, and the deadline is looming. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
63 

The remaining funds are for ship disposal activities. The Committee notes MARAD has successfully put a number of ships out 

for sale rather than contracting for disposal, thus saving the taxpayer millions. The fiscal year 2014 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. 

MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI) PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $3,740,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2,655,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,655,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,085,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $2,655,000 for 

the Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program, $1,085,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2013. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Section 170. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and services and 

make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy involving government property under the control of MARAD and rental payments 

shall be paid into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. 

Section 171. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

MARAD ship disposal. 

PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) administers nationwide safety programs designed to protect the public and the environment from risks inherent in the 

commercial transportation of hazardous materials by pipeline, air, 

rail, vessel, and highway. Many of these materials are essential to 

the national economy. The agency’s highest priority is safety, and 

it uses safety management principles and security assessments to 

promote the safe transport of hazardous materials and the security 

of the nation’s pipelines. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
64 

OPERATIONAL EXPENSES

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $21,360,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 21,654,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,167,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥193,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥487,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $21,167,000 for PHMSA operational 

expenses, of which $639,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline 

Safety Fund. This is $193,000 below fiscal year 2013, and $487,000 

below the budget request. The Committee includes bill language directing PHMSA to transfer $1,000,000 to the pipeline safety program to fund pipeline information grants to communities. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

Appriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ............................................................ $42,338,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 45,801,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 42,762,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +424,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,039,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $42,762,000, to continue the Agency’s hazardous materials safety program, which is $424,000 above 

fiscal year 2013 and $3,039,000 below the budget request. This 

amount reflects the maximum authorized funding level. The Committee recommends $1,725,000 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 a new fee on the processing and 

enforcing of special permits and approvals. Additional fees within 

this account should be considered in the context of authorizing legislation originating in the committees of jurisdiction. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
65 

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 2013 1 ......................... $90,679,000 $18,573,000 $109,252,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ........................ 133,000,000 18,573,000 $2,000,000 153,573,000 

Recommended in the bill ..................................... 90,679,000 18,573,000 2,000,000 111,252,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ................... – – – – – – 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............... ¥42,321,000 – – – – – – ¥42,321,000 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage prevention, education and training, development and enforcement of regulations 

and policies, research and development, grants for states pipeline 

safety programs, and emergency planning and response to accidents. The pipeline safety program is responsible for a national 

regulatory program to protect the public against the risks to life 

and property in the transportation of natural gas, petroleum and 

other hazardous materials by pipeline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $111,252,000 to continue pipeline 

safety operations, research and development, and state grants-inaid, which is $2,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 and $42,321,000 

below the budget request. Of the total, $18,573,000 is from the oil 

spill liability trust fund, $90,679,000 is from the pipeline safety 

fund, and $2,000,000 is from the pipeline safety design review 

fund. These amounts reflect the maximum authorized funding levels. 

The Committee recommends $1,058,000 of the funds provided to 

be used for the one-call State grant program. The Committee recommends $52,000,000 of the funds provided to remain available 

until September 30, 2016. 

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 2014, then no fees 

will be collected and these funds will not be expended. 

Self-contained breathing apparatus.—The Committee is advised 

that the approval processes for Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) respirator cylinders by both PHMSA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health may be duplicative and potentially restrictive of competitive options. The Committee directs PHMSA to conduct a study within one year of enactment on whether these approval processes can be made more efficient. 

Pipeline emergencies training.—Given the aging U.S. pipeline infrastructure, and the vulnerability of that infrastructure to safety 

and environmental threats posed by the condition of the infrastrucVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
66 

ture, it is critical that those individuals charged with responding 

to pipeline and pipeline-related emergencies, are properly trained. 

The Committee urges PHMSA take a more active role in promoting 

ways to deliver such training. The Committee directs PHMSA to 

report to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees within 

180 days after enactment of this Act on its assessment of pipeline 

emergency response training and where improvements can be 

made. 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

(Emergency preparedness fund) 

(Emergency 

preparedness 

grant program) 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ........................................................................................ $188,000 ($28,318,000) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................................................... 188,000 (28,318,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................................................... 188,000 (28,318,000) 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ................................................................................. – – – (– – –) 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .............................................................................. – – – (– – –) 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 2013 

and the budget request. These amounts reflect the maximum authorized funding levels. 

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 2013 1 ....................................................... $79,624,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 85,605,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 79,624,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥5,981,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
67 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $79,624,000 for fiscal 

year 2014, which is the same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted level 

and $5,981,000 below the budget request. The Committee continues 

to highly value the work of the IG in oversight of departmental 

programs and activities. 

Unfair Business Practices.—The bill maintains language first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the IG 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 IG 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. 

Houston METRO Finances.—The Committee directs the IG to 

conduct an audit into the financial solvency of Metropolitan Transit 

Authority of Harris County, Texas (Houston METRO). As part of 

this audit, the IG should conduct a stress test to determine if 

Houston METRO has adequate finances to pay for the construction 

of new rail lines as well as the operation and maintenance of existing rail lines and the operation and maintenance of buses. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $29,310,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 30,775,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 29,310,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,465,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 indeVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
68 

pendent, 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 $29,310,000 for 

fiscal year 2014, which is equal to the fiscal year 2013 enacted 

level and $1,465,000 below the fiscal year 2013 budget request. The 

STB is estimated to collect $1,250,000 in fees which will offset the 

appropriation for a total program cost of $28,060,000. 

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. 

Section 185. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used to make a grant unless the Secretary of 

Transportation notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling $500,000 or more 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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
69 

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 late 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 California High-Speed Rail. 

Section 193. The Committee includes a provision rescinding unobligated funds from the MagLev program and providing funds instead for rail grade crossings and rail corridor planning. 

Section 194. 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(70) 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $1,331,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 1,339,100,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,266,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥65,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥73,100,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

Management and Administration provides operating support to 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Executive Offices, Administrative Support Offices, and Program Offices. 

Funding under this account 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. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,266,000,000 for HUD management and administration expenses, which is $65,500,000 below fiscal year 2013 and $73,100,000 below the budget request. 

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. 

To facilitate resource management across fiscal years and to minimize the need for transfer authority, the Committee has made a 

small portion of resources appropriated for each subaccount under 

this heading available through September 30, 2015. 

Reorganizations.—The Committee includes language to make 

clear that any office, program, or activity reorganizations require 

advance approval from the Committee and that such requests must 

allow at least one month notice for review. Additionally, the Committee requires notice on a monthly basis of all ongoing litigation, 

including any negotiations or discussions, planned or ongoing, reVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
71 

garding a consent decree between the Department and any other 

entity, including the estimated costs of such decrees. 

New initiatives.—The Committee reiterates that no changes may 

be made to any program, project, or activity if it is construed to 

have policy implications, without prior approval of the Committees 

on Appropriations. 

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $14,540,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥2,540,000 

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 (formerly 

known as the Office of Hearings and Appeals), the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, the Office of Public 

Affairs, and the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. 

The Immediate Office of the Secretary provides program and policy guidance, and operations management and oversight in administering all programs, functions and authorities of the Department. 

The Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary provides operations management and helps the Department achieve its strategic 

goals by providing management support to program offices under 

the direction of the Office of the Secretary. 

The Office of Adjudicatory Services, formerly known as the Office 

of Hearings and Appeals, conducts hearings and makes determinations regarding formal complaints or adverse actions initiated by 

HUD based upon alleged violations of federal statutes and implementing regulations. 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and 

Intergovernmental Relations is responsible for coordinating Congressional and intergovernmental relations activities involving program offices to ensure the effective and accurate presentation of 

the Department’s views. 

The Office of Public Affairs educates the American people about 

the Department’s mission through media outreach and other communication tools such as press releases, press conferences, the 

Internet, media interviews, new media and community outreach. 

The Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives conducts 

outreach, recommends changes to HUD policies and programs that 

present barriers to grassroots organizations, and initiates special 

projects, such as grant writing training. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee accepts in part the request to streamline salaries 

and expenses accounts by consolidating six offices into a single Executive Office account. The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for 

this new account, which is $2,540,000 below the fiscal year 2014 

budget request. Further, the committee directs that the offices 

within this account shall have no more than 78 Full Time Equivalents. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
72 

The Secretary shall provide a spend plan which outlines how resources are distributed among the six offices in the form of a report 

to the Committee within 90 days of enactment. The bill also 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. 

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OFFICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $505,313,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 479,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥26,313,000 

The Administrative Support Offices account funds the salaries 

and expenses of the Office of Administration, the Office of the Chief 

Human Capital Officer, the Office of General Counsel, the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer, the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, the Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, 

the Office of Field Policy and Management, the Office of Strategic 

Planning and Management, and the Office of the Chief Information 

Officer. 

The Office of Administration provides general operational support services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. These 

services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure 

in the following areas: nationwide management and operation of 

buildings, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) processing, records 

management, Privacy Act administration, protective and physical 

security for HUD’s Secretary and Deputy Secretary, and disaster 

and emergency response coordination. 

The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer provides human 

resource services to all offices and divisions throughout HUD. 

These services include HUD’s non-information technology infrastructure in the following areas: strategic human capital management, enterprise level training and learning, recruitment and staffing, workforce planning, retention, engagement, succession planning and Departmental performance management. 

The Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM) serves as the 

principal advisor providing oversight and communicating Secretarial priorities and policies to field office staff and HUD clients. 

The Regional and Field Office Directors act as the operational managers in each of the field offices and manage and coordinate crossprogram delivery in the field. 

The Office of the Chief Procurement Officer’s (OCPO) mission is 

to provide high-quality acquisition support services to all HUD program offices by purchasing necessary operational and mission-related goods and services; provide advice, guidance and technical assistance to all departmental offices on matters concerning procurement; assist program offices in defining and specifying their procurement needs; develop and maintain all procurement guidance 

including regulations, policies, and procedures; and assist in the 

development of sound acquisition strategies. 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) provides leadership in instituting financial integrity, fiscal responsibility and acVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
73 

countability. The CFO is responsible for all aspects of financial 

management, accounting and budgetary matters; ensuring the Department establishes and meets financial management goals and 

objectives; ensuring the Department is in compliance with financial 

management legislation and directives; analyzing budgetary implications of policy and legislative proposals; and providing technical 

oversight with respect to all budget activities throughout the Department. 

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is led by the 

Chief Information Officer (CIO) who reports to the Office of the 

Secretary/Deputy Secretary. HUD’s CIO advises senior managers 

on the strategic use of information technology to support core business processes and to achieve mission critical goals. OCIO is responsible for providing modern information technology that is secure, accessible and cost effective while ensuring compliance with 

applicable regulatory requirements. 

The General Counsel, as the chief legal officer and legal voice of 

the Department, is the legal adviser to the Secretary and other 

principal staff of the Department. It is the responsibility of the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) to provide legal opinions, advice 

and services with respect to all programs and activities, and to provide counsel and assistance in the development of the Department’s 

programs and policies. 

The mission of the Office of Departmental Equal Employment 

Opportunity (ODEEO) is to ensure the enforcement of Federal laws 

relating to the elimination of all forms of discrimination in the Department’s employment practices. The mission is carried out 

through the functions of three divisions: the Affirmative Employment division, the Alternative Dispute Resolution division, and the 

Equal Employment Opportunity division. 

The Office of Strategic Planning and Management drives organizational, programmatic, and operational change across the Department to maximize efficiency and performance. The office will facilitate HUD’s strategic planning process by identifying the Department’s strategic priorities and transformational change initiatives, 

create and manage work plans for targeted transformation projects, 

and develop key program performance measures and targets for 

monitoring. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $479,000,000 for this account, which 

is $26,313,000 below the fiscal year 2014 budget request. The committee directs that the offices within this account shall have no 

more than 2,063 Full Time Equivalents. 

The Committee recommendation reflects reduced funding for 

non-personnel expenses and the expectation that HUD will find 

ways to lower contracting expenses and other non-personnel costs 

in 2014. The Committee directs the Department to conduct a comprehensive review of its non-personnel expenses, especially expenses associated with outside contractors, and to report to the 

Committee within 90 days of enactment on a plan to reduce these 

expenses (excluding rent, utilities, and security) by at least 10%. 

The Committee recommendation provides no funding for non-personnel expenses requested specifically for the ‘‘Broadcasting’’ funcVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
74 

tion and expects the Department to support media and public outreach activities from within the public affairs resources already 

budgeted elsewhere. 

Funding shall be distributed as follows: 

Office Total funding 

Office of Administration ....................................................................................................................................... $189,000,000 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................................................................................... 44,000,000 

Office of the General Counsel ............................................................................................................................. * 91,000,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer ......................................................................................................... 49,000,000 

Office of Field Policy and Management .............................................................................................................. 50,000,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer .............................................................................................................. 17,000,000 

Office of the Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity ............................................................................... 3,000,000 

Office Strategic Planning and Management ....................................................................................................... 5,000,000 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ............................................................................................................... 34,000,000 

*Includes $1,000,000 provided for claims and indemnities. 

PROGRAM OFFICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $200,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 220,299,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 197,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥3,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥23,299,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $197,000,000 for this account, which 

is $3,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013, and 

$23,299,000 below the fiscal year 2014 budget request. The Committee directs that PIH have no more than 1,512 FTE. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $100,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 109,740,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 99,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,740,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
75 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $99,000,000 for this account, which 

is $1,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013, and 

$10,740,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs that 

CPD shall have no more than 785 FTE. 

Office of Economic Resilience.—The Committee provides no funding or FTE for the Office of Economic Resilience. 

HOUSING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $391,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 383,375,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 377,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥14,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥6,375,0000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $377,000,000 for this account, which 

is $14,500,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013, and 

$6,375,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs that 

the Office of Housing shall have no more than 3,000 FTE. 

Office consolidation and reorganization.—The Committee supports efforts at HUD to deliver more effective program oversight at 

lower cost through a reorganization of how the Office of Housing 

does business. The Committee directs HUD to deliver a progress 

report on its reorganization plans within 60 days of enactment that 

details by quarter through fiscal year 2019 HUD’s estimated cost 

savings including both personnel and non-personnel cost reductions, severance and other early separation costs, recruitment and 

retraining costs, office space alteration and closure costs, and any 

other material costs or savings identified by HUD. The report 

should also include an analysis of potential risks associated with 

the reorganization, including loss of experienced and skilled staff, 

increased risk to FHA insurance funds, and an explanation of what 

steps HUD is taking to monitor and mitigate such risks. The report 

should also include an analysis of obstacles to a successful reorganization and how HUD plans to navigate these obstacles. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $22,211,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 21,687,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,211,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥687,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) directs 

the Department’s annual research agenda to support the research 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
76 

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 economic information. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $21,000,000 for this account, which 

is $1,211,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and 

$687,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs that 

PD&R shall have no more than 141 FTE. 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $72,600,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 76,504,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 71,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,600,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥5,504,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $71,000,000 for this account, which 

is $1,600,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and 

$5,504,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs that 

the FHEO shall have no more than 571 FTE. 

OFFICE OF HEALTHY HOMES AND LEAD HAZARD CONTROL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $7,400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 7,642,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥642,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
77 

programs, and enforces the Lead Disclosure Rule issued under 

Title X. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for this account, which is 

$400,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and the 

$642,000 below the budget request. The Committee directs that 

OHHLHC shall have no more than 54 FTE. 

PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $18,939,369,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 19,899,216,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 18,610,564,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥328,805,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,378,652,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $18,610,564,000 for tenant-based 

rental assistance, which is $328,805,000 below the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level and $1,378,652,000 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, 2014. 

Voucher Renewals.—The Committee provides $17,000,000,000 for the renewal of tenant-based vouchers. This level is $242,351,000 

below the enacted level and $968,278,000 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 $75,000,000 for tenant protection vouchers, which is the same as the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level and $75,000,000 below the budget request. 

Administrative Fees.—The Committee provides $1,350,000,000 

for allocations to PHAs to conduct activities associated with placing 

and maintaining individuals under Section 8 assistance. This 

amount is $25,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and 

$335,374,000 below the budget request. 

Mainstream Voucher Renewals.—The Committee provides 

$110,564,000 to renew expiring Section 811 tenant-based subsidies. 

This level is equal to the budget request and $1,454,000 below the 

fiscal year 2013 enacted level. The Committee directs HUD to issue 

guidance to the housing agencies administering these vouchers to 

continue to serve people with disabilities upon turnover. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
78 

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 2013. 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 

in the program, and increases in veteran self-sufficiency by March 

1, 2014. 

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 2014. 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 several provisions that result in cost-saving 

measures that provide administrative relief to PHAs. The Committee commends the Administration for proposing these reforms, 

particularly given the increasing costs of the HCV renewals each 

year. These rising costs have crowded out other HUD programs 

that address key priorities of community development, home ownership, and homelessness. The Committee is fully supportive of any 

reforms that relieve administrative burdens and enable housing authorities to serve more families, and to work to lift them to selfsufficiency. 

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 2014 so that the amounts provided in this bill more efficiently and effectively serve needy individuals and families. 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. 

RENTAL ASSISTANCE DEMONSTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $10,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
79 

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 is unable to provide funding for this program due 

to the constrained budget environment and the overall pressures of 

renewals across the Department’s housing programs. 

HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

(RESCISSION)

The Housing Certificate Fund, until fiscal year 2005, provided 

funding for both the project-based and tenant-based components of 

the Section 8 program. Project-Based Rental Assistance and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance are now separately funded accounts. 

The Housing Certificate Fund retains balances from previous years’ 

appropriations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Language is included to allow unobligated balances from specific 

accounts may be used to renew or amend Project-Based Rental Assistance contracts. 

PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $1,875,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2,000,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,500,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥375,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥500,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $1,500,000,000 for the Public Housing Capital Fund, which is $375,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level and $500,000,000 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 of 

the Real Estate Assessment Center; 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
80 

—$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 2014; and 

—$15,000,000 is provided for a Jobs Plus program to improve 

employment opportunities and earnings of public housing residents. 

PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $4,262,010,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 4,600,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,262,010,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥337,990,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The Public Housing Operating Fund subsidizes the costs associated with operating and maintaining public housing. This subsidy 

supplements funding received by public housing authorities (PHA) 

from tenant rent contributions and other income. In accordance 

with section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula to public housing authorities for 

the following purposes: utility costs; anti-crime and anti-drug activities, including the costs of providing adequate security; routine 

maintenance cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,262,010,000 for the federal share 

of PHA operating expenses. This amount is the same as the fiscal 

year 2013 enacted level and $337,990,000 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 

no information on how it would identify and budget for capital and 

operating needs in the future if this authority to merge funds were 

approved. The Committee urges the Department and the Financial 

Services Committee to consider this issue among other legislative 

and regulatory changes that would provide regulatory relief so that 

local public housing authorizes can serve greater numbers of residents, and lead greater numbers of residents to achieve self-sufficiency. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
81 

CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE

(RESCISSION)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 400,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥400,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. This program remains unauthorized, and the 

Committee urges the Administration to work with the authorizing 

committees prior to requesting new programs in the budget request. The Committee believes that many of the objectives of the 

Choice Neighborhood Initiative, including affordable housing and 

community development, are commendable, but can only be 

achieved in the current budget environment through more comprehensive reforms that bring down the escalating costs of renewals across a host of programs across the Department. 

Rescission.—The Committee recommendation includes a rescission of $120,000,000 of unobligated balances of the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. 

FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... $75,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 60,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. * 60,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥15,000,000 1This program was funded within the Tenant-Based Rental Assistance account in fiscal year 2013. 

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 

$60,000,000 to support the Family Self-Sufficiency program. This is 

the same as the level provided in the tenant-based rental assistance account for Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinators in fiscal year 

2013, and $15,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee 

expects the Department to prioritize assistance to individuals and 

families that results in job stability, increased tenant incomes, and 

greater rent contributions. The Committee also expects the Department to report to the 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
82 

NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $650,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 650,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥50,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $600,000,000 for Native American 

Housing Block Grants, which is $50,000,000 below the fiscal year 

2013 level and $50,000,000 below the budget request. Of the 

amounts made available under this heading: 

—$2,000,000 is for Title VI loan guarantees up to $16,530,000. 

—$2,000,000 is for national or regional organizations representing Native American housing interests to provide training and technical assistance to Indian housing authorities and 

TDHEs. Of concern to the Committee is that HUD has selected 

regional organizations without specific knowledge of Tribal 

housing issues to provide assistance to tribes. The Committee 

directs that any national or regional organization chosen by 

HUD to provide technical assistance must have proven experience providing such assistance to tribal entities. 

Timely Expenditure of Funds.—The Committee continues language requiring fiscal year 2014 funds to be spent within 10 years. 

NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $13,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 13,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥13,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥13,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $13,000,000 below the budget request and $13,000,000 

below the fiscal year 2013 level. This program is not authorized. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
83 

INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Credit subsidy: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ..................................................................................... $12,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................... 6,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ....................................................................................... ¥6,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................... – – – 

Limitation on guaranteed loans: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ....................................................................................... 976,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................... 1,818,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................................................ 1,818,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ....................................................................................... +842,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................................... – – – 

1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $6,000,000 in new credit subsidy for 

the Section 184 loan guarantee program, which is $6,200,000 below 

the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and the same as the budget request. This will guarantee a loan volume of $1,818,000,000, which 

is $842,000,000 above the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and the 

same as the budget request. The Committee includes language allowing the Secretary to increase loan guarantee fees to support this 

increased loan volume. 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $332,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 332,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 303,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥29,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥29,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $303,000,000 for the 

HOPWA program, which is the $29,000,000 below fiscal year 2013 

and $29,000,000 below the budget request. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
84 

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 other homeless prevention and support programs. 

HIV and Federal Housing Programs.—In the early 1990s, the 

HOPWA program was established within HUD because existing 

housing resources at the time were not meeting the needs of people 

with AIDS. However, since the original authorization of the program, much has changed within Federal housing programs, and 

the HIV epidemic itself has been transformed through advances 

both in care and monitoring. The Committee directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to provide an update to its March 

1997 report to the Committee entitled ‘‘Housing: HUD’s Program 

for Persons with AIDS’’, including updated background information 

and an updated review of the five aspects of HOPWA considered 

in the original report, within 120 days of enactment. In addition, 

GAO shall include an evaluation of the ability of relevant Federal 

programs, including HOPWA, to meet the housing needs of people 

who are afflicted with chronic illnesses and other serious health 

conditions. The Committee directs GAO to give special attention to 

each program’s relative strengths and weaknesses in meeting the 

housing needs of the HIV-infected persons which they serve. The 

report should also inventory and describe Federal programs that 

deliver supportive services to people infected with HIV and examine the extent to which HUD’s programs, including HOPWA, overlap or are coordinated with these programs. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $3,308,090,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 3,143,100,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,696,813,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥1,611,277,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,446,287,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $1,696,813,000 for the 

Community Development Fund account, which is the 

$1,611,277,000 below fiscal year 2013 and $1,446,287,000 below the 

budget request. 

Of the amounts made available: 

—$1,636,813,000 is for the Community Development Block 

Grants (‘‘CDBG’’) formula program for entitlement communities and states. This is $1,311,277,000 below fiscal year 2013 

and $1,161,287,000 below the budget request; —$60,000,000 is for the Native American Housing and Economic 

Development Block Grant (also known as ‘‘Indian CDBG’’), 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
85 

which is the same as fiscal year 2013 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 2013 and the budget request. 

—No funding is provided for either the Neighborhood Stabilization Program or Integrated Planning and Investment Grants. 

Neither of these programs was funded in 2013. 

The Committee recommendation does not include the request to 

make reforms to the way CDBG formula funds are distributed. The 

recommendation continues language requiring the Department to 

notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act. 

EMPOWERMENT ZONES/ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES/RENEWAL

COMMUNITIES

(RECISSION)

The Committee includes language rescinding unobligated funds 

provided or recaptured under these program headings. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $5,952,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥5,952,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 accepts the request to convert the Section 108 

Loan Guarantee program into a borrower-paid subsidy program 

and therefore recommends providing no budget authority, which is 

$5,952,000 below fiscal year 2013 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 

$260,000,000 above fiscal year 2013 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 2013. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
86 

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $1,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 950,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥300,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥250,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $700,000,000 for activities funded 

under this account, which is $300,000,000 below fiscal year 2013 

and $250,000,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee continues language to prevent newly participating jurisdictions from being permanently added to the HOME 

program. The Committee continues language providing much-needed reforms to the HOME program. The Department is finalizing 

similar reforms into permanent regulations expected to be published in 2013. Therefore, the recommended reform provisions shall 

be superseded by such final rule once it has been published. 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. 

SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $53,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 30,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 30,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥23,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 

Additionally, Section 4 Capacity Building funds are set-aside 

within this account for activities described under section 4(a) of the 

HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note). Section 4 

funds are awarded to a limited number of non-profits, which use 

the funds to develop the capacity of community development corporations (CDCs) and community housing development organizations (CHDOs). The CDCs and CHDOs then undertake community 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
87 

development and affordable housing activities. Section 4 funds 

must be matched by recipients with at least three times the grant 

amount in private funding. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the Self Help Homeownership Opportunity Program account which includes funding 

for both the SHOP and Section 4 Capacity Building grant programs. The Committee rejects the budget proposal to reorganize 

SHOP under the Home Investment Partnerships account and create a new account for Capacity Building. The recommended funding level for these activities is $23,500,000 below fiscal year 2013 

and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation provides $10,000,000 for the 

SHOP program and does not adopt reforms proposed in the request. The recommendation provides $15,000,000 for the Section 4 

Capacity Building program and includes $5,000,000 specifically for 

capacity building in rural areas by national rural housing organizations. 

SHOP Administrative Costs.—The Committee directs HUD to 

evaluate the history of administrative costs in the SHOP program, 

including the extent to which HUD’s imposition of various requirements such as mandatory site visits and Energy-Star certifications 

has resulted in higher administrative costs. The Committee directs 

the Secretary to report to the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations within 180 days of enactment on whether current 

administrative costs are reasonable, what portion of administrative 

costs are attributable to HUD requirements, and what actions can 

be taken by both HUD and grantees to reduce the administrative 

burden of this program. 

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $2,033,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2,381,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,088,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +55,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥293,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $2,088,000,000, which is $55,000,000 above fiscal 

year 2013 and $293,000,000 below the budget request. The recommendation includes funding to support Continuum of Care 

project renewals of no less than $1,882,000,000 as well as at least 

$200,000,000 in Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG). 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
88 

Continuum of Care Grant Renewal Costs.—While the Secretary 

is permitted to prioritize funding of renewals, this is only to the extent sufficient funding is available and such renewal decisions 

must be mindful of the relative effectiveness of projects up for renewal and the scarcity of fiscal resources. The growing cost of sustaining previously funded commitments is a problem throughout 

HUD including the Continuum of Care as the cost of upholding 

current service levels irrespective of effectiveness is growing 

unsustainably. The growing cost of these liabilities is already 

crowding out funding for other priorities and, given current fiscal 

constraints, HUD cannot afford to blindly renew all projects based 

solely on the fact that they were once funded in the past. The Committee directs the Department to report to the Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment on how the Continuum 

of Care program can be made more competitive at both the national and local level, and how the program would need to be administered in order to operate at no more than the current funding 

level year-over-year. 

Emergency Solutions Grants.—The Committee recommends 

$200,000,000 for Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG). The ESG program, authorized by subtitle B of the HEARTH Act, provides funding for homelessness prevention and rapid re-housing efforts, in addition to traditional emergency shelter and outreach activities. 

While the Committee supports ESG’s innovative focus on preventing homelessness, funding cannot be increased because the 

growing cost of Continuum of Care renewals is consuming the entire increase that is available for this account. 

HOUSING PROGRAMS

PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $9,339,672,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 10,272,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 9,050,672,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥289,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,221,328,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $9,050,672,000 for the annual 

renewal of project-based contracts, of which up to $200,000,000 

may be transferred to the Office of Housing for the cost of contract 

administration. This funding level is $289,000,000 below the enVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
89 

acted level for fiscal year 2013 and $1,221,328,000 below the budget request. 

Section 8 Contract Administration.—The Committee agrees with 

GAO’s finding that a HAP contract payment by HUD to a property 

owner cannot be considered as the transfer of a thing of value to 

a public housing authority (PHA). The Committee also agrees with 

GAO that any administrative fees paid to PHAs in conjunction 

with Section 8 housing assistance payment (HAP) contract administration is compensation for the provision of a service that would 

otherwise be performed by HUD, and that such fees are not provided as general assistance to PHAs in performance of their mission. The Committee expects HUD to take responsibility for the administration of its contracts and either administer the contracts 

itself or outsource the provision of this service through procurement processes that are truly competitive and comply with Federal 

law. In light of the above conclusions, the Committee directs HUD 

to administer contracts funded under this heading through the Office of Housing and, to the extent it is necessary to outsource contract administration, to carry out GAO’s recommendation to solicit 

the provision of HAP contract administration services for the 

Project-Based Section 8 Rental Assistance Program through a procurement instrument that will result in the award of contracts. 

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $374,627,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 400,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 374,627,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... ¥25,373,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $374,627,000, which is equal to the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $25,373,000 below the budget request. However, the Committee includes new language allowing 

HUD to recoup residual receipts that have accumulated in situations where the subsidies and tenant rent payments provided have 

exceeded actual costs. The language allows HUD to use the funds, 

estimated at $28,000,000 in fiscal year 2014, to provide housing assistance for seniors. The sum of the appropriation and residual receipts equate to a fiscal year 2014 program level of $402,627,000, 

which will fully fund project rental assistance contract renewals 

and amendments to existing section 202 projects as well as new 

awards. 

The recommendation allocates available funding as follows: 

• $310,000,000 for the renewal and amendment of project 

rental assistance contracts (PRAC); 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
90 

• Up to $70,000,000 for service coordinators and the continuation of congregate services grants; and 

• $22,627,000 for new awards of project rental assistance. 

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 2013 1 ....................................................... $165,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 126,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 126,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥39,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $126,000,000 for Section 811 activities, $39,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and equal 

to the budget request. The Committee includes new language that 

allows FHA to collect residual receipts, estimated to yield an additional $12,000,000. The appropriation plus the residual receipts 

will result in a fiscal year 2014 program total of $138,000,000. This 

level will fully fund the estimated $106,000,000 in project rental 

assistance and project assistant contract renewals and amendments in fiscal year 2014, and provide $32,000,000 for new project 

rental assistance awards to support housing for persons with disabilities. 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. 

OTHER ASSISTED HOUSING PROGRAMS

HOUSING COUNSELING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $45,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 55,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥10,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥20,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
91 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for housing counseling, $10,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and 

$20,000,000 below the budget request. 

RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $1,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 21,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +19,700,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 is required for short-term extensions of expiring 

contracts and annual contract amendments. Contract amendments 

provide additional subsidy to below-market contracts where rents 

have been constrained and owners are unable to adequately service 

properties and perform ongoing maintenance. Most of the remaining rent supplement and RAP contracts will expire by fiscal year 

2017. HUD will preserve these units as long-term affordable housing through the Rental Assistance Demonstration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $21,000,000 in funding for the Rental Housing Assistance Program, which is $19,700,000 above the 

level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and the same as the budget request. This appropriation plus projected carryover will fully fund 

an estimated $44,000,000 in contract amendment and extension 

needs in fiscal year 2014. In fiscal year 2013, HUD required only 

$1,300,000 because it had large recaptures resulting from owners 

that prepaid underlying mortgaged and recapitalized their properties. The Committee includes bill language that allows HUD to 

use unobligated balances and recaptured funds for extensions and 

amendments. 

RENT SUPPLEMENT

(RESCISSION)

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ............................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... ¥$3,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥3,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Rescission, fiscal year 2013 ........................................................ ¥3,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 

HUD recovers balances when Rent Supplement and Rental Assistance Payment are terminated due to prepayments. A total of 

$3,500,000 in Section 236 Interest Reduction Payment recaptures 

are available in fiscal year 2014. The Committee notes that this reVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
92 

scission will not impact current contract amendment and extension 

activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a $3,500,000 rescission, the same as 

the budget request and $3,500,000 below the level enacted in fiscal 

year 2013. 

PAYMENT TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $6,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 7,530,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,530,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +30,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥1,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $6,530,000 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 

this account. The recommendation is $30,000 above the fiscal year 

2013 enacted level, and $1,000,000 below 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. 

The Committee is concerned that there has been no permanent 

Administrator of the Office of Manufactured Housing since September 15, 2007. The Committee includes bill language under the 

‘‘Program Office Salaries and Expenses’’ heading that instructs the 

Secretary to appoint an Administrator of the Office of Manufactured Housing within 120 days and reduces Salaries and Expenses 

by $50,000 each day that this directive remains unmet. 

Further, the Committee understands that a substantial backlog 

of recommendations approved by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee exists, and a lack of action and attention in this 

area has meant that codes and standards have not kept pace with 

technological innovation, or allowed the industry to keep pace with 

consumer demand. The Committee looks forward to a more focused 

and responsive office under permanent leadership. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
93 

FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION

MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation of direct 

loans 

Limitation of guaranteed loans Administrative contract 

expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................... $50,000,000 $400,000,000,000 $207,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ...................................... 20,000,000 400,000,000,000 127,000,000 

Recommended in the bill .................................................. 20,000,000 400,000,000,000 127,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ................................ ¥30,000,000 – – – ¥80,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ............................. – – – – – – – – – 

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 $127,000,000 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 the same as the budget request and $80,000,000 less than 

the level enacted in fiscal year 2013. In fiscal year 2014, there is 

no transfer to the working capital fund for development and modifications to information technology systems that serve programs or 

activities under the FHA, accounting for $71,500,000 of the decrease from fiscal year 2013 levels. 

In addition, the Committee includes bill language that lifts the 

statutory aggregate cap of 275,000 HECM loan guarantees in fiscal 

year 2014. The Committee has carried similar language in prior 

years. The Committee notes that HECM volume estimates reflect 

originations for the HECM Saver product only, where both closing 

costs and principal loan limits are lower than the HECM standard 

product. 

Report.—The Committee is concerned about proposals for local 

governments to use eminent domain to seize mortgages. The Committee understands that these seized mortgages would be written 

down, refinanced and repackaged into new securities for a fee. The 

Committee directs HUD to submit a study on the effect that risk 

of using eminent domain for these purposes will have on the housVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
94 

ing market, including the FHA primary and refinance market as 

well as the broader mortgage market, the secondary market, credit 

worthiness, interest rates, homeownership, and affordability by 

April 1, 2014. 

GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of direct 

loans 

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .............................................................................. $20,000,000 $25,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ........................................................................... 20,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ....................................................................................... 20,000,000 30,000,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ..................................................................... – – – +5,000,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................. – – – – – – 

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. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on loan guarantees of 

$30,000,000,000, an increase of $5,000,000,000 from the fiscal year 

2013 level and equal to the budget request. It includes a limitation 

of $20,000,000 for direct loans, which is the same as the fiscal year 

2013 level and the budget request. 

GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Limitation of 

guaranteed loans 

Administrative contract 

expenses 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .............................................................................. $500,000,000,000 $19,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ........................................................................... 500,000,000,000 21,200,000 

Recommended in the bill ....................................................................................... 500,000,000,000 19,000,000 

Bill compared to: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ..................................................................... – – – ¥500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 .................................................................. – – – ¥2,200,000 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
95 

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 

$19,000,000 for the personnel costs of GNMA, to be funded by Commitment and Multiclass fees. The recommendation for personnel 

costs is $500,000 below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and 

$2,200,000 below the budget request. 

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $46,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 50,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 21,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥25,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥29,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $21,000,000 for this account, which 

is a decrease of $25,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 

2013 and $29,000,000 below the budget request. 

Of the activities proposed in the budget, the Committee recommends $18,000,000 for the American Housing Survey and 

$2,000,000 for the new home sales and completions reports. Perhaps HUD will only be able to report quarterly on this economic 

indicator. 

The Committee has provided $5,000,000 for research dissemination. The Committee suggests that the development mobile apps for 

housing data is not the best use of Federal funds. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
96 

FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $70,847,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 71,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 55,847,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥15,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥15,153,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $55,847,000 for this account, which 

is $15,000,000 below the level enacted in fiscal year 2013 and 

$15,153,000 below the request. Of the funds provided, $300,000 is 

for the Limited English Proficiency Initiative and $23,400,000 is for 

the Fair Housing Assistance Program. The Committee recommends 

that the Department focus resources on education, outreach, and 

training initiatives, and supporting local and state organizations. 

The Committee proposes that the National Fair Housing Training 

Academy should be self-sustaining. 

OFFICE OF LEAD HAZARD CONTROL AND HEALTHY HOMES

LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 50,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥70,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥70,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
97 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the lead programs, 

which is $70,000,000 below both the level enacted in fiscal year 

2013 and the budget request. Of the amount provided, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Healthy Homes Initiative, 

and $2,500,000 for technical studies. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... 2 $271,753,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 285,100,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥171,753,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥185,100,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

2Total amount through direct appropriations and transfers from other accounts. 

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. The 2014 budget justification proposed funding these activities department-wide through one account named the ‘‘Information Technology Portfolio’’. The Committee has chosen to use the name ‘‘Information Technology Fund’’ 

similar to almost identical accounts in other Cabinet-level departments and agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 in direct appropriations for the Working Capital Fund (WCF) to support Departmentwide information technology system activities, $171,753,000 less 

than the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $185,100,000 below 

than the budget request. 

The Committee has retained 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 modifies 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, 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
98 

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. To this 

end, in order to monitor the Department’s progress, the Committee 

instructed GAO in 2012 to conduct several reviews. In 2013, GAO 

completed a review of the Department’s IT project management 

practices. For fiscal year 2014, the Committee affirms its direction 

for GAO to also evaluate HUD’s institutionalization of governance 

and cost estimating practices. In particular, the Committee remains interested in any achieved cost savings or operational efficiencies that have resulted (or may result) from the Department’s 

improvement efforts. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $124,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 127,672,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 124,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥3,672,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $124,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General, which is the same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted 

level and $3,672,000 below the budget request. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
99 

TRANSFORMATION INITIATIVE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 2 80,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥50,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥80,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

2The 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 was not able to provide funds for the transformation initiative, despite some of the research and successes of 

the program such as OneCPD and other technical assistance. Further, because of the low numbers in other accounts, the Committee 

could not recommend transferring funds. The Committee continues 

to find the mass transfer 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. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
100 

budget justifications for fiscal year 2015 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 authorizes HUD to transfer debt and use agreements 

from an obsolete project to a viable project, provided that no 

additonal costs are incurred, and other conditions are met, as proposed by the House and the Senate. 

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. 

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 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain requirements on adjusted income for certain assisted living projects for counties in Michigan. 

Section 218. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

the recipient of a section 202 grant to establish a single-asset nonprofit entity to own the project and may lend the grant funds to 

such entity. 

Section 219. The Committee continues the provision that allows 

amounts provided under the Section 108 loan guarantee program 

may be used to guarantee notes or other obligations issued by any 

State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State. 

Section 220. 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 221. 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 222. 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 223. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

HUD to provide an annual report on the status of all Section 8 

project-based housing. 

Section 224. The Committee continues language regarding Notice 

of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
101 

Section 225. 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 226. 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 under the heading ‘‘Administration, Operations, and Management.’’ 

Section 227. 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 228. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

PHA salary levels. 

Section 229. The Committee continues a provision that repeals 

the paragraphs under the heading ‘‘Flexible Subsidy Fund.’’ 

Section 230. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

critical access hospitals to be insured under section 242 of the National Housing Act. 

Section 231. The Committee continues a provision that allows 

the Secretary to increase loan guarantee fees under the Indian 

Housing Loan Guarantee Program. 

Section 232. The Committee continues a provision which extends 

the availability of Hope VI funds appropriated in prior years. 

Section 233. The Committee includes a provision that requires 

annual, rather than quarterly, reporting by the Secretary regarding 

duplication of benefits in Community Development Fund disaster 

funding. 

Section 234. The Committee includes a new provision that prohibits funds to require public housing agencies to conduct a Green 

Physical Needs Assessment. 

Section 235. The Committee includes a new provision that prohibits funds for HUD’s Doctoral Dissertation Research Grant program. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(102) 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES 

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $7,400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 7,448,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,400,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥48,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $7,400,000 for the operations of the 

Access Board, which is the same as the fiscal year 2013 enacted 

level and $48,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 ......................................................... $38,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 48,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 38,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 

The Federal Housing Finance Agency Office of Inspector General 

(FHFA) 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 EnterVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
103 

prises (GSE) and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 

FHFA OIG activities are funded from FHFA’s direct assessments 

on the housing GSEs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2014, which is $10,000,000 below the budget request, 

and equal to the fiscal year 2013 level. The Committee notes that 

it did not receive a budget request for fiscal year 2014. The Committee includes language directing the FHFA OIG to submit a fiscal year 2015 budget request in a similar format to other inspector 

general offices. 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $24,100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 25,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 24,200,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +100,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥800,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $24,200,000 for the Federal Maritime Commission, which is $100,000 above the fiscal year 2013 appropriation and $800,000 less than the budget request. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
104 

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $20,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 25,300,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,300,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. +4,800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ – – – 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $25,300,000 for Amtrak’s Office of 

Inspector General (Amtrak OIG), which is $4,800,000 above the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and the same amount proposed in the 

fiscal year 2014 budget. 

Budget justification.—The Committee appreciates that the Amtrak OIG submitted a separate budget request to the Committees 

on Appropriations and directs it to do so in fiscal year 2015. 

NATIONAL TRANSPORATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $102,400,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 103,027,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 102,400,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥627,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

Initially established along with the Department of Transportation (DOT), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent federal 

agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation 

accident in the United States, as well as significant accidents in 

other modes of transportation—railroad, highway, marine and 

pipeline—and issuing safety recommendations aimed at preventing 

future accidents. Although it has always operated independently, 

the NTSB relied on the DOT for funding and administrative support until the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 

93–633) severed all ties between the two organizations effective 

April of 1975. 

In addition to its investigatory duties, the NTSB is responsible 

for maintaining the government’s database of civil aviation accidents and conducting special studies of transportation safety issues 

of national significance. Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international treaties, the NTSB supplies investigators to 

serve as U.S. Accredited Representatives for aviation accidents 

overseas involving U.S.-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or 

major components of U.S. manufacture. The NTSB also serves as 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
105 

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 $102,400,000 for the salaries and 

expenses of the NTSB, which is equal to the fiscal year 2013 level 

and $627,000 below the budget request. 

NTSB Academy.—The agency is encouraged to continue to seek 

additional opportunities to lease out, or otherwise generate revenue 

from the NTSB Academy, so that the agency can appropriately 

focus its resources on the important investigative work that is central to the agency’s mission. In addition, the agency is again directed to submit detailed information on the costs associated with 

the NTSB Academy, as well as the revenue the facility is expected 

to generate, as part of the fiscal year 2015 budget request. 

NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $215,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 204,100,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 185,100,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥30,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥19,000,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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 $185,100,000 for 

fiscal year 2014, which is $30,200,000 below the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level (presequester) and $19,000,000 below the fiscal year 

2014 budget request. 

Of the funds provided, $127,100,000 is for the core program, 

which equal to the fiscal year 2014 request and $8,200,000 below 

the fiscal year 2013 enacted level. 

A total of $58,000,000 is for the National Foreclosure Mitigation 

Counseling (NFMC) Program, $19,000,000 below the fiscal year 

2014 budget request, and $22,000,000 below the fiscal year 2013 

enacted level. The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2007, Congress initially provided ‘‘one-time funding’’ for NFMC in response 

the housing foreclosure crisis. According to RealtyTrac, U.S. ForeVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
106 

closure filing fell in April 2013 to the lowest level in more than six 

years. A total of 144,790 properties received notices of default, auction or seizure, down 5 percent from March 2013 and 23 percent 

from a year earlier. It was the lowest tally since February 2007. 

Recognizing the improvement in the housing market and the reduction in foreclosures, the Committee reduces funding for NFMC. 

UNITED STATES INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 1 ....................................................... $3,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ....................................................... 3,600,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2013 .................................................. ¥300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2014 ................................................ ¥600,000 1 Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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, 2015. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the USICH, which is 

$300,000 below fiscal year 2013 and $600,000 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 USICH to work with agencies over 

the next couple of years to establish permanent working relationships and interagency relationships that will endure beyond 

USICH’s sunset date in 2015. 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 should begin to leverage the resources of those 

agencies to continue interagency coordination on Opening Doors: 

the Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness beyond 2015. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD 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 specifying 

reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new 

offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 405. The Committee continues a provision that ensures 

that 50 percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 

certain purposes. 

Section 406. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

employee training not directly related to the performance of official 

duties. 

Section 407. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for any project that seeks to use the power 

of eminent domain unless eminent domain is employed only for a 

public use. 

Section 408. The Committee continues the provision 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 409. 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 410. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act from being used unless the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 411. The Committee continues the provision prohibiting 

funds from being appropriated or made available to any person or 

entity that has been found to violate the Buy American Act. 

Section 412. 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 413. The Committee continues the provision which prohibits funds in this Act or any prior Act from going to the group 

ACORN or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
108 

violation of Federal law within the preceding 24 months. The Department 0f 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 that prohibits 

funds in this Act from being used to further the implementation of 

the European Union’s greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme. 

Section 416. 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 417. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

the wind down of programs, projects or activities proposed for 

elimination in the future year budget unless provided for in an appropriations Act or through normal reprogramming procedures. 

Section 418. The Committee directs the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development and the Department of Transportation to 

include in future annual budget proposals clearly defined and 

prioritized mission goals and associated, multiyear plans for providing sufficient resources to realize those goals. Performance 

measures in future budget justifications should clearly demonstrate 

the extent to which prior year investments in programs, projects, 

and activities can be tied to progress toward achieving priority 

goals and include estimates for how proposed investments will contribute to additional progress. In particular, performance measures 

should measure outcome (results/impact), output (volume), and efficiency. In order to achieve this endeavor, the Committee includes 

a provision that directs the Departments, working with the Government Accountability Office, to each provide a comprehensive report 

that provides updated performance metrics that are measurable, 

repeatable, and directly linked to requests for funding. 

Section 419. The Committee includes a new provision expressing 

a sense of the Congress regarding poverty. 

Section 420. 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 fundVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
109 

ing: 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. 

RESCISSIONS

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: 

• $237,000,000 from ‘‘National infrastructure investments’’; 

• $2,750,000 from ‘‘Transportation planning, research, and development’’; 

• $26,183,998 from ‘‘Research, engineering and development’’; 

• $95,956,882 from ‘‘Motor carrier safety grants’’; 

• $152,281,282 from ‘‘Highway traffic safety grants’’; 

• $1,973,000 from ‘‘Next generation high-speed rail’’; 

• $4,419,000 from the ‘‘Northeast corridor improvement program’’; 

• $151,338,009 from the Federal Transit Administration (Section 

163); 

• Unobligated balances from section 1307(d) of P.L. 109–59 (Section 193); 

• Such sums that are available from terminated contract authority from fiscal year 1974 and prior from the ‘‘Housing certificate 

fund’’; 

• $120,000,000 from the ‘‘Choice neighborhoods initiative’’; 

• Such sums that are available from ‘‘Empowerment zones/Enterprise communities/Renewal communities’’; 

• Such sums that are available from the ‘‘Community development loan guarantees program account’’; and 

• $3,500,000 from ‘‘Rent supplement’’. 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the transfers of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 

UNDER TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Office of the Secretary ............................ Office of the Secretary .......................... ≤5% of certain funds subject to conditions 

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 

MARAD: Operations & Training ............... Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) 

Program Account.

$2,655,000 

Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration.

Pipeline Safety ....................................... $1,000,000 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
110 

UNDER TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT

Account from which the transfer is made Account to which the transfer is made Amount 

Project-Based Rental Assistance ............ Program Office Salaries and Expenses, 

Housing.

Up to $200,000,000 

Management and Administration (Sec. 

226).

Program Office Salaries and Expenses ≤5% or $5,000,000, whichever is less, 

subject to conditions 

Program Office Salaries and Expenses 

(Sec. 226).

Management and Administration .......... ≤5% or $5,000,000, whichever is less, 

subject to conditions 

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 XII, 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): 

NATIONAL HOUSING ACT 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—MORTGAGE INSURANCE 

* * * * * * * 

MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR HOSPITALS

SEC. 242. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(i) TERMINATION OF EXEMPTION FOR CRITICAL ACCESS HOSPITALS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The exemption for critical access hospitals 

under subsection (b)(1)(B) shall have no effect after øJuly 31, 

2011¿ July 31, 2016. 

(2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 3 years after July 

31, 2003, the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress detailing the effects of the exemption of critical access hospitals 

from the provisions of subsection (b)(1)(B) on— 

(A) the provision of mortgage insurance to hospitals 

under this section; and 

(B) the General Insurance Fund established under section 519. 

* * * * * * * 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
111 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 

(Public Law 110–161) 

AN ACT Making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, and 

related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes. 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION K—TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 

ACT, 2008 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 

* * * * * * * 

HOUSING PROGRAMS 

* * * * * * * 

øFLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

ø(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

øFrom the Rental Housing Assistance Fund, all uncommitted 

balances of excess rental charges as of September 30, 2007, and 

any collections made during fiscal year 2008 and all subsequent fiscal years, shall be transferred to the Flexible Subsidy Fund, as authorized by section 236(g) of the National Housing Act.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS HURRICANES 

IN THE GULF OF MEXICO, AND PANDEMIC INFLUENZA 

ACT, 2006 

(Public Law 109–148) 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION B 

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS HURRICANES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO AND PANDEMIC INFLUENZA, 2006 

That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in 

the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to address hurricanes in 

the Gulf of Mexico and pandemic influenza for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, namely: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
112 

TITLE I 

* * * * * * * 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

* * * * * * * 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

For an additional amount for the ‘‘Community development 

fund’’, for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term 

recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in the most impacted 

and distressed areas related to the consequences of hurricanes in 

the Gulf of Mexico in 2005 in States for which the President declared a major disaster under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 

in conjunction with Hurricane Katrina, Rita, or Wilma, 

$11,500,000,000, to remain available until expended, for activities 

authorized under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–383): Provided, That no State 

shall receive more than 54 percent of the amount provided under 

this heading: Provided further, That funds provided under this 

heading shall be administered through an entity or entities designated by the Governor of each State: Provided further, That such 

funds may not be used for activities reimbursable by or for which 

funds are made available by the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That 

funds allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 

amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this 

heading: Provided further, That each State may use up to five percent of its allocation for administrative costs: Provided further, That Louisiana and Mississippi may each use up to $20,000,000 

(with up to $400,000 each for technical assistance) from funds 

made available under this heading for LISC and the Enterprise 

Foundation for activities authorized by section 4 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note), as in effect immediately before June 12, 1997, and for activities authorized under 

section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 

1996, including demolition, site clearance and remediation, and 

program administration: Provided further, That in administering 

the funds under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 

Development shall waive, or specify alternative requirements for, 

any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the 

use by the recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment), upon a request by the State that such 

waiver is required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, 

and a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be inconsistent with the overall purpose of the statute, as modified: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the requirement that 

activities benefit persons of low and moderate income, except that 

at least 50 percent of the funds made available under this heading 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
113 

must benefit primarily persons of low and moderate income unless 

the Secretary otherwise makes a finding of compelling need: Provided further, That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date 

of such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the 

Secretary must be reconsidered according to the three previous provisos on the two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary published the waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, That 

prior to the obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan to 

the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will address 

long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That each State will report quarterly to the Committees on 

Appropriations on all awards and uses of funds made available 

under this heading, including specifically identifying all awards of 

sole-source contracts and the rationale for making the award on a 

sole-source basis: Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify 

the Committees on Appropriations on any proposed allocation of 

any funds and any related waivers made pursuant to these provisions under this heading no later than 5 days before such waiver 

is made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication of benefits and report øquarterly¿ annually to the Committees on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to prevent fraud and abuse 

of funds made available under this heading including duplication 

of benefits: Provided further, That the amounts provided under this 

heading are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to 

section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006. 

* * * * * * * 

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT 

FOR DEFENSE, THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, AND 

HURRICANE RECOVERY, 2006 

(Public Law 109–234) 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II 

FURTHER HURRICANE DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 9 

* * * * * * * 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
114 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For an additional amount for the ‘‘Community development 

fund’’, for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term 

recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in the most impacted 

and distressed areas related to the consequences of Hurricanes 

Katrina, Rita, or Wilma in States for which the President declared 

a major disaster under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), 

$5,200,000,000, to remain available until expended, for activities 

authorized under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–383): Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be administered through an entity 

or entities designated by the Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may not be used for activities reimbursable 

by or for which funds are made available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the amount of any formula assistance received by a 

State under this heading: Provided further, That each State may 

use up to five percent of its allocation for administrative costs: Provided further, That not less than $1,000,000,000 from funds made 

available on a pro-rata basis according to the allocation made to 

each State under this heading shall be used for repair, rehabilitation, and reconstruction (including demolition, site clearance and 

remediation) of the affordable rental housing stock (including public and other HUD-assisted housing) in the impacted areas: Provided further, That no State shall receive more than 

$4,200,000,000: Provided further, That in administering the funds 

under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may waive, or specify alternative requirements for, any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in 

connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the use by the 

recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the 

environment), upon a request by the State that such waiver is required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, and a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be inconsistent 

with the overall purpose of the statute: Provided further, That the 

Secretary may waive the requirement that activities benefit persons of low and moderate income, except that at least 50 percent 

of the funds made available under this heading must benefit primarily persons of low and moderate income unless the Secretary 

otherwise makes a finding of compelling need: Provided further, 

That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 

of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date of such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the Secretary 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
115 

must be reconsidered according to the three previous provisos on 

the two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary published the 

waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, That prior to the 

obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan to the Secretary 

detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will address long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That prior 

to the obligation of funds to each State, the Secretary shall ensure 

that such plan gives priority to infrastructure development and rehabilitation and the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the affordable rental housing stock including public and other HUD-assisted 

housing: Provided further, That each State will report quarterly to 

the Committees on Appropriations on all awards and uses of funds 

made available under this heading, including specifically identifying all awards of sole-source contracts and the rationale for making the award on a sole-source basis: Provided further, That the 

Secretary shall notify the Committees on Appropriations on any 

proposed allocation of any funds and any related waivers made 

pursuant to these provisions under this heading no later than 5 

days before such waiver is made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication of benefits and report øquarterly¿ annually to 

the Committees on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken 

to prevent fraud and abuse of funds made available under this 

heading including duplication of benefits: Provided further, That of 

the amounts made available under this heading, $12,000,000 shall 

be transferred to ‘‘Management and Administration, Salaries and 

Expenses’’, of which $7,000,000 is for the administrative costs, including IT costs, of the KDHAP/DVP voucher program; $9,000,000 

shall be transferred to the Office of Inspector General; and 

$6,000,000 shall be transferred to HUD’s Working Capital Fund: 

Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this heading may be used by a State or locality as a matching requirement, 

share, or contribution for any other Federal program: Provided further, That the amounts provided under this heading are designated 

as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. 

Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 

for fiscal year 2006. 

* * * * * * * 

SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 

(Public Law 110–252) 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—DOMESTIC MATTERS 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 6—HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

* * * * * * * 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
116 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

For an additional amount for ‘‘Community Development Fund’’, 

for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in areas covered by a declaration of major disaster under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 

as a result of recent natural disasters, $300,000,000, to remain 

available until expended, for activities authorized under title I of 

the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 

93–383): Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be 

administered through an entity or entities designated by the Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may not be 

used for activities reimbursable by or for which funds are made 

available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the 

Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds allocated 

under this heading shall not adversely affect the amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this heading: Provided 

further, That each State may use up to five percent of its allocation 

for administrative costs: Provided further, That in administering 

the funds under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 

Development shall waive, or specify alternative requirements for, 

any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the 

use by the recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment), upon a request by the State that such 

waiver is required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, 

and a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be inconsistent with the overall purpose of the statute, as modified: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the requirement that 

activities benefit persons of low and moderate income, except that 

at least 50 percent of the funds made available under this heading 

must benefit primarily persons of low and moderate income unless 

the Secretary otherwise makes a finding of compelling need: Provided further, That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date 

of such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the 

Secretary must be reconsidered according to the three previous provisos on the two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary published the waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, That 

prior to the obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan to 

the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will address 

long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That each State will report quarterly to the Committees on 

Appropriations on all awards and uses of funds made available 

under this heading, including specifically identifying all awards of 

sole-source contracts and the rationale for making the award on a 

sole-source basis: Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify 

the Committees on Appropriations on any proposed allocation of 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
117 

any funds and any related waivers made pursuant to these provisions under this heading no later than 5 days before such waiver 

is made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication of benefits and report øquarterly¿ annually to the Committees on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to prevent fraud and abuse 

of funds made available under this heading including duplication 

of benefits. 

* * * * * * * 

CONSOLIDATED SECURITY, DISASTER ASSISTANCE, AND 

CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009 

(Public Law 110–329) 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE III—NATURAL DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 6—HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

* * * * * * * 

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

For an additional amount for ‘‘Community Development Fund’’, 

for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in areas covered by a declaration of major disaster under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 

as a result of recent natural disasters, $300,000,000, to remain 

available until expended, for activities authorized under title I of 

the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 

93–383): Provided, That funds provided under this heading shall be 

administered through an entity or entities designated by the Governor of each State: Provided further, That such funds may not be 

used for activities reimbursable by or for which funds are made 

available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the 

Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds allocated 

under this heading shall not adversely affect the amount of any formula assistance received by a State under this heading: Provided 

further, That each State may use up to five percent of its allocation 

for administrative costs: Provided further, That in administering 

the funds under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 

Development shall waive, or specify alternative requirements for, 

any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the 

use by the recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment), upon a request by the State that such 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
118 

waiver is required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees, 

and a finding by the Secretary that such waiver would not be inconsistent with the overall purpose of the statute, as modified: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the requirement that 

activities benefit persons of low and moderate income, except that 

at least 50 percent of the funds made available under this heading 

must benefit primarily persons of low and moderate income unless 

the Secretary otherwise makes a finding of compelling need: Provided further, That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before the effective date 

of such waiver: Provided further, That every waiver made by the 

Secretary must be reconsidered according to the three previous provisos on the two-year anniversary of the day the Secretary published the waiver in the Federal Register: Provided further, That 

prior to the obligation of funds each State shall submit a plan to 

the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will address 

long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That each State will report quarterly to the Committees on 

Appropriations on all awards and uses of funds made available 

under this heading, including specifically identifying all awards of 

sole-source contracts and the rationale for making the award on a 

sole-source basis: Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify 

the Committees on Appropriations on any proposed allocation of 

any funds and any related waivers made pursuant to these provisions under this heading no later than 5 days before such waiver 

is made: Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish procedures to prevent recipients from receiving any duplication of benefits and report øquarterly¿ annually to the Committees on Appropriations with regard to all steps taken to prevent fraud and abuse 

of funds made available under this heading including duplication 

of benefits. 

* * * * * * * 

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 describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly 

or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Language is included under Office of the Secretary, ‘Salaries and 

expenses’ specifying certain amounts for individual offices of the 

Office of the Secretary and official reception and representation expenses; specifying transfer authority among offices; allowing up to 

$2,500,000 in user fees to be credited to the account; and prohibiting the establishment of Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs. 

Language is included under the Office of the Secretary, ‘Research 

and technology’ which limits the availability of funds; transfers the 

functions and personnel of the Research and Innovative Technology 

Administration to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for ReVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
119 

search and Technology; 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, ‘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, ‘Office of 

civil rights’, which provides funds for implementation of the civil 

rights laws and departmental civil rights policies in all official actions and programs. 

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. 

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, and prohibits funds to communities that require a 

rate of subsidy per passenger in excess of $500. 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
120 

Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, 

‘Operations’ that specifies funds for certain activities and specifies 

transfers authority among activities; derives some funds from the 

Airport and Airway Trust Fund; 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’ to fund various activities from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund; that limits the availability of funds, 

that 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 and limits and/or prohibits 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
121 

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 7 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 conducts public outreach to 

aviation stakeholders and has reported its justification of its fees 

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, 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. 

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 repurposes funds made available in prior fiscal years 

for the administrative expenses of the Federal Highway Administration. 

Section 124 prohibits tolling in Texas, with exceptions. 

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; makes funds available until expended; specifies 

amounts available for specific activities; and prohibits funds for 

outreach and education from being transferred. 

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; specifies amounts available for various programs; and permanently rescinds funds available from unobligated balances of contract authority. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
122 

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. 

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; limits the availability of funds; specifies the 

amounts for various programs; provides a liquidation of contract 

authorization from the Highway Trust Fund; prohibits and limits 

funds for specific purposes; and rescinds unobligated balances of 

prior year contract authority. 

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’ limiting the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Railroad research and development’ limiting 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 502 through 504 of the Railroad Revitalization and 

Regulatory Reform Act and prohibits new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments in 2014 that use Federal funds for the credit 

risk premium. 

Language is included under the Federal Railroad Administration, 

‘Operating subsidy grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation’ that provides funds to the Secretary of Transportation for 

a specified purpose and limits the availability of funds; allows the 

Secretary to make quarterly grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation; 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, monthly performance 

reports, and the 5–Year Financial Plan separately account for ridership, revenues, capital and operating expenses for the Northeast 

Corridor, commuter service, long-distance Amtrak service, StateVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
123 

supported service, each intercity train route, and commercial activities; requires that the 5–Year Financial Plan include a description 

of work, associated cost estimates, and completion dates; requires 

the budget, business plan, and the 5–Year Financial Plan include 

annual information on maintenance, refurbishment, replacement, 

and expansion for Amtrak rolling stock consistent with the comprehensive fleet plan; requires that the business plan be submitted 

semiannually in electronic format, and that it describe work completed, explain changes, identify and justify sole-source contracts, 

and describe progress against the 2012 performance improvement 

plan milestones; requires the Corporation to display the budget and 

all plans on its Web site following submission to appropriate entities and requires plans to be accompanied by a comprehensive fleet 

plan for Amtrak rolling stock addressing specific issues and containing specified information; requires the Corporation to follow the 

provisions of the direct loan agreement; 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; and requires Amtrak to submit a 2015 

budget similar to other Federal agencies. 

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 requirements of the Americans with Disability Act; allows the Secretary to retain some funds 

to be used for oversight; bars a portion of these funds under this 

section to be used by the Corporation as a working capital account 

to cover 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 ceases the availability of Amtrak funds if the railroad contracts for services outside the United States for any service 

performed by a full-time or part-time Amtrak employee as of July 

1, 2006. 

Section 151 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 152 authorizes the Secretary to allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase such stock sold to the Department. 

Section 153 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 notification to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of 

granting such a waiver, and requires the Corporation to submit 

monthly and annual reports with specified information related to 

overtime. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘Administrative expenses’ specifying amounts for certain activities; 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
124 

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 limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, ‘Research, development, demonstration, and deployment program’’ 

that limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration 

‘Transit cooperative research program’ that limits the availability 

of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration 

‘Technical assistance and standards development’ that limits the 

availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration 

‘Human resources and training’ that limits the availability of 

funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Capital investment grants’ that limits the availability of funds. 

Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, 

‘Washington metropolitan area transit authority’ that limits the 

availability of funds; that requires the Secretary to review projects 

before a grant is made; that 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 September 30, 

2015, 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 rescinds prior year unobligated funds. 

Section 164 permits the Secretary to consider significant private 

contributions when calculating the non-Federal share of new starts 

projects. 

Section 165 prohibits a full funding grant agreement for a project 

with a new starts share greater than 50 percent. 

Section 166 prohibits funds for a certain fixed guideway project 

in Houston, Texas. 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation that authorizes expenditures, contracts, and commitments as may be necessary. 

Language is included under the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation ‘Operations and maintenance’ that provides 

funds derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language is included under Maritime Administration, ‘Maritime 

security program’ that provides funds to preserve a U.S. flag merchant fleet. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
125 

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, ‘Ship disposal’ that limits the availability of funds. 

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 specifies the 

amount derived from the pipeline safety fund and requires that 

$1,000,000 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. 

Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration, ‘Hazardous materials safety’ that credits 

certain funds received for expenses incurred for training and other 

activities incurred in performance of hazardous materials exemptions and approval functions. 

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 

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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
126 

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 grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 

three full business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling $500,000 or 

more is announced by the department or its modal administrations. 

Section 186 allows funds received from rebates, refunds, and 

similar sources to be credited to Department of Transportation appropriations. 

Section 187 allows amounts from improper payments to a third 

party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the Department of 

Transportation to be available to cover expenses incurred in recovery of such payments. 

Section 188 stipulates that the Committees on Appropriations 

solely approve or deny any funds provided or limited in this Act 

that are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to 

be provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 189 prohibits the Surface Transportation Board from 

charging or collecting filing fees for late complaints in an amount 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
127 

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 California High Speed Rail. 

Section 193 rescinds prior year unobligated balances from the 

magnetic levitation train program and appropriates funds for rail 

safety crossings and rail planning. 

Section 194 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. 

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 ‘Administrative support offices;’ specifies funding for claims and indemnities, Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer, Office of the General Counsel, Office of 

the Chief Human Capital Office, Office of Field Policy 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; 

allows a certain amount of funds to remain available through fiscal 

year 2015; 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, ‘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, 2014; 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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
128 

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; and sets eligibility requirements for 

multi-family properties to participate in the program. 

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. 

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 emergency capital needs; makes funds available for bonuses for high performing PHAs; specifies the amount for a Jobsplus 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 

provide public notice of any waiver or alternative requirement. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Public housing operating fund’ which allows the Secretary to take into account flat rents and medical thresholds on 

public housing agencies’ formula income levels. 

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 exVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
129 

penses, 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. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Family self-sufficiency’ which allows the Secretary to 

waive or specify certain requirements to better fulfill the purposes 

of the family self-sufficiency program. 

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 

the allocation of funds and renewal of contracts. 

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; specifies the amount made available for grants to federallyrecognized 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, ‘Empowerment zones/enterprise communities/renewal communities’ that permanently rescinds unobligated balances from carryover and recaptures. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Community development loan guarantees program 

account’ which limits the availability of funds; directs the Secretary 

to collect fees from borrowers adequate to result in credit subsidy 

cost of zero; specifies how to define the costs of modifying loans; 

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 that 

are effective until the Final Rule entitled ‘Home Investment Partnerships Program; Improving Performance and Accountability; Updating Property Standards’ is published and effective; specifies certain conditions on prior year technical assistance funding; and directs HUD to notify formula grantees no later than 60 days after 

enactment of the Act. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity 

program’ which limits the availability of funds; and specifies the allocation of certain funds for certain purposes. 

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 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
130 

purposes; specifies matching requirements; requires grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social service providers; allows transferred and recaptured balances to be used for project renewals; 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; allows the transfer of funds to the Office of Housing for the cost of contract administration; and allows the Secretary 

to recapture residual receipts from certain properties. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for the elderly’ which limits the availability 

of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; designates certain 

funds to be used only for certain grants; allows funds to be used 

for specified inspections or inspection-related activities; allows the 

Secretary to waive certain provisions governing contract terms; allows the Secretary to recapture residual receipts from certain properties and limits availability of these receipts; allows unobligated 

balances, including recaptures, carryover and other specified remaining funds to be used for the current purposes authorized. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing for persons with disabilities’ which limits 

the availability of funds; specifies the allocation of certain funds; 

allows funds to be used for inspections or inspection-related activities; allows funds to be used to renew certain contracts; allows the 

Secretary to recapture residual receipts from certain properties; allows unobligated balances, including recaptures, carryover and 

other specified remaining funds to be used for the current purposes 

authorized. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Housing counseling assistance’ which provides funds 

for grants for counseling and advice to tenants and homeowners; 

limits the availability of funds; specifies amounts to be used for administrative contract services; and requires the Secretary to make 

grants within 120 days of enactment. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Other assisted housing’ ‘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’ 

which limits the availability of funds; 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; requires collection to be deposited into the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust 

Fund; allow 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 the transfer of certain funds; allows for additional conVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
131 

tract 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; 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, and allows 

specified receipts to be credited as offsetting collections. 

Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, ‘Policy development and research’ which limits the 

availability of funds and specifies authorized uses. 

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, 

specifies a matching requirement for grants, requires certification 

of grantee capacity, and allows for a reallocation of grant funds 

based on demand for such 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
132 

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. 

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 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain requirements on adjusted income for certain assisted living projects for 

counties in Michigan. 

Section 218 allows the recipient of a section 202 grant to establish a single-asset nonprofit entity to own the project and may lend 

the grant funds to such entity. 

Section 219 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 220 instructs HUD that PHAs that own and operate 400 

units or fewer of public housing are exempt from asset management requirements. 

Section 221 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 222 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 223 requires HUD to provide an annual report on the 

status of all Section 8 project-based housing. 

Section 224 sets requirements regarding Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcements and publication. 

Section 225 provides that funding for indemnities is limited to 

non-programmatic litigation and is restricted to the payment of attorney fees only. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
133 

Section 226 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 227 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 228 sets limitations on funds used for PHA salary levels. 

Section 229 repeals paragraphs under the heading ‘Flexible subsidy fund.’ 

Section 230 allows critical access hospitals to be insured under 

section 242 of the National Housing Act. 

Section 231 allows the Secretary to increase loan guarantee fees 

under the Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program. 

Section 232 extends the availability of Hope VI funds appropriated in prior years. 

Section 233 requires annual, rather than quarterly, reporting by 

the Secretary regarding duplication of benefits in Community Development Fund disaster funding. 

Section 234 prohibits fund to require a Green Physical Needs Assessment. 

Section 235 prohibits funds for a doctoral dissertation research 

grant program. 

TITLE III—RELATED AGENCIES 

Language is included for the Access Board, ‘Salaries and expenses’ that allows for the credit to the appropriation of funds received for publications and training expenses. 

Language is included for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, 

Office of Inspector General that limits funds for necessary expenses, derives funds from various banks and corporations, and requires the office to submit a budget justification concurrent with 

the President’s budget. 

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 official reception and representation expenses. 

Language is included for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Office of Inspector General, ‘Salaries and expenses’ to provide funds for an independent, objective unit responsible for detecting and preventing fraud, waste, abuse, and violations of law; promoting 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 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
134 

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 specifies reprogramming procedures by subjecting 

the establishment of new offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process. 

Section 405 provides that fifty percent of unobligated balances 

may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 406 prohibits Federal training not directly related to the 

performance of official duties. 

Section 407 prohibits funds from being used for any project that 

seeks to use the power of eminent domain unless eminent domain 

is employed only for a public use. 

Section 408 prohibits the transfer of funds made available in this 

Act to any instrumentality of the United States Government except 

as authorized by this Act or any other appropriations Act. 

Section 409 prohibits funds in this Act from being used to permanently replace an employee intent on returning to his past occupation after the completion of military service. 

Section 410 prohibits funds in this Act from being used unless 

the expenditure is in compliance with the Buy American Act. 

Section 411 prohibits funds from being appropriated or made 

available to any person or entity that has been found to violate the 

Buy American Act. 

Section 412 prohibits funds for first-class airline accommodations 

in contravention of section 301–10.122 and 301–10.123 of title 41 

CFR. 

Section 413 prohibits funds in this Act or any prior Act from 

going to the group ACORN or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or 

allied organizations. 

Section 414 prohibits convicted felons from receiving certain Federal funds. 

Section 415 prohibits funds from being used to further the implementation of the European Union’s greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme. 

Section 416 prohibits funding to corporations with any unpaid 

Federal tax liability. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
135 

Section 417 prohibits funds from winding down programs slated 

for termination in the President’s budget request unless provided 

for in an appropriations Act, or with sunset or termination dates 

in previously enacted laws. 

Section 418 requires the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to submit a report in 

conjunction with the Government Accountability Office on program 

goals and performance metrics. 

Section 419 expresses a Sense of the Congress regarding poverty. 

Section 420 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): 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
136 

Program Last year of authorization Authorization level Appropriations in last year of authorization Appropriations in this bill 

Title I—Department of Transportation 

Maritime Administration: 

Operations and Training ...................................................................................................................... 2013 $156,258 $155,945 $143,768 Ship Disposal ....................................................................................................................................... 2013 12,717 5,489 4,000 Maritime Security Payments ................................................................................................................ 2013 186,000 173,994 174,000 Title XI .................................................................................................................................................. 2013 3,750 3,733 2,655 

Federal Railroad Administration: 

Safety and Operations ......................................................................................................................... 2013 293,000 178,238 184,500 Operating Subsidy Grants to Amtrak .................................................................................................. 2013 631,000 465,068 350,000 Capital and Debt Service Grants to Amtrak ....................................................................................... 2013 1,602,000 950,096 600,000 Corridor Planning ................................................................................................................................. 2013 30,000 — Up to $83,655 

Surface Transportation Board 1998 12,000 13,850 29,310 

Title II—Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Rental Assistance: 

Section 8 Contract Renewals and Administrative Expenses .............................................................. 1994 $8,446,173 $5,458,106 $9,050,672 

Public Housing Capital Fund ........................................................................................................................ 2003 3,000,000 2,712,555 1,500,000 Public Housing Operating Fund .................................................................................................................... 2003 2,900,000 3,576,600 4,262,010 Native American Housing Block Grants ....................................................................................................... 2013 Such sums as necessary 616,001 600,000 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund .......................................................................................................... 2007 Such sums as necessary 6,000 6,000 Housing Opportunity for Persons with AIDS ................................................................................................. 1994 156,300 156,000 303,000 Community Development Fund ..................................................................................................................... 1994 4,168,000 4,877,389 1,696,813 Community Development Loan Guarantee 1 ................................................................................................. 1994 Not Applicable Not Applicable 0 

Home Investment Partnership ...................................................................................................................... 1994 2,173,612 1,275,000 700,000 Self-Help Homeownership ............................................................................................................................. 2001 Such sums as necessary 48,000 30,000 Opportunity Program Homeless Assistance .................................................................................................................................... 2011 Such sums as necessary 1,901,190 2,088,000 Housing for the Elderly ................................................................................................................................. 2003 Such sums as necessary 783,286 374,627 Housing for Persons with Disabilities .......................................................................................................... 2003 Such sums as necessary 250,515 126,000 FHA General and Special Risk Program Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans ....................................................................................................... 1995 — [20,885,072] [30,000,000] Limitation on Direct Loans .................................................................................................................. 1995 — [220,000] [20,000] Administrative Expenses ...................................................................................................................... 1995 — 197,470 127,000 

GNMA Mortgage Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account: 

Limitations on Guaranteed Loans ....................................................................................................... 1996 [110,000,000] [110,000,000] [500,000,000] Administrative Expenses ...................................................................................................................... 1996 — 9,101 19,000 

Policy Development and Research ................................................................................................................ 1994 36,470 35,000 21,000 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
137 

Fair Housing Activities, Fair Housing Program ............................................................................................ 1994 26,000 20,481 55,847 Lead Hazard Reduction Program .................................................................................................................. 1994 250,000 150,000 50,000 Salaries and Expenses .................................................................................................................................. 1994 1,029,496 916,963 1,263,000 

Title III—Related Agencies 

Access Board ................................................................................................................................................ 2003 $5,401 $5,401 $7,400 National Transportation Safety Board .......................................................................................................... 2008 96,625 91,000 102,400 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness .................................................................................. 2011 Such sums as necessary 2,680 3,000 

1 The Community Development Loan Guarantee program authorization only limits commitment authority. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
138 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of other Federal 

program, a program that was included in any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 

of Public Law 111–39, 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 2014 TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL PREPARED TIN 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 and Housing and Urban Development .................... .................... .................... ..............................

Mandatory ................................................................... 0 0 0 1 0 

Discretionary ............................................................... 44,100 114,931 44,100 114,928 

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: 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2014 ............................................................................ n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 34,594 

2015 ............................................................................ n.a. n.a. n.a. 32,170 

2016 ............................................................................ n.a. n.a. n.a. 12,586 

2017 ............................................................................ n.a. n.a. n.a. 5,099 

2018 and future years ................................................ n.a. n.a. n.a. 6,559 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

n.a.: not applicable. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
139 

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: 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2014 ................................................................................ n.a. n.a. 28,522 2 29,423 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

n.a.: not applicable. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
140 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 040 here HR136.001

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. I 

Date: June 27, 2013 

Measure: Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, FY 2014 

Motion by: Mr. Serrano 

Description of Motion: To replace 201312014 sequester with revenue increases and spending reductions. 

Results: Defeated 21 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. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Alexander 

Mr. Bonner 

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.Kingston 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
141 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 41 here HR136.002

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIlI 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: June 27, 2013 

Measure: Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, FY 2014 

Motion by: Mr. Price 

Description of Motion: Provides funds for the National Infrastructure Investments account and deletes the 

rescission, with no offset. 

Results: Defeated 2 I 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. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr. Alexander 

Mr. Bonner 

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. Kingston 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
142 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 42 here HR136.003

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.3 

Date: June 27, 2013 

Mea,ure: Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, FY 2014 

Motion by: Mr. Fattah 

Description of Motion: Increases funding for the Community Development Fund, with no offset. 

Results: 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. Alexander 

Mr. Bonner 

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. Kingston 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 
143 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 43 here HR136.004

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XflI 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: June 27, 2013 

Measure: Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies. FY 2014 

Motion by: Mr. Price 

Description of Motion: Increases funding for the Capital and Debt Services Grants to the National Railroad 

Passenger Corporation, 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. Alexander 

Mr. Bonner 

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. Kingston 

Mr. Latham 

Mr. Nunnelee 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Wolf 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 

Insert offset folio 44 here HR136.005jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUOGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 ANO REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

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 

Ut i 1 i zat ion .................. , .. , .............. . 

Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency 

Response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. , ....... "., .. ,., .. . 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ........ . 

Research and Development. ..... , ...... ,.,."."., .... . 

National Infrastructure Investments ................ . 

Resci ssi on ....................... .. . ......... . 

Aviation Consumer Call Center (legislative proposal) .. 

Fi nanci al Management Capital. . ..................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

102,481 

(2,618) 

(984) 

(19,515) (10,107) (10,538) 

(2,500) 

(25,469) 

(2,020) (1,595) 

(1,369) 

(10,778) (14,988) 

500,000 

4,990 

FY 2014 

Request 

113,108 

14,765 

500,000 

7,500 

10,000 

Bi 11 

102,481 

(2,618) 

(984) 

(19,867) 

(10,107) 

(11,572) 

(2,500) 

(23,376) 

(2,020) (1,595) 

(1,369) 

(10,778) (15,695) 

14,220 

-237,000 

4,990 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

(+352) 

(+1,034) 

(-2,093) 

(+707) 

+14,220 

-500,000 -237,000 

B

R

-1

(+

(+

(+

(+

(+

(+

(((

(+(+

-5-2

Insert offset folio 45 here HR136.006jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Cyber Security Initiatives ........................... . 

Office of Civil Rights .............................. . 

Transportation Planning, Research, and Development ... . 

Rescission of unobligated balances ............ , .. . 

Subtotal ... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ............. . 

Working Capital Fund ................................. . 

Minority Business Resource Center Program ......... , .. . 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................ . 

Minority Business Outreach ........................... . 

Payments to Air Carriers (Airport & Airway Trust Fund) 

Total, Office of the Secretary. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Operations ....................... , ........... ""'" 

Air traffic organization ..................... . 

Avi at i on safety.................. . .............. . 

Commercial space transportation ....... . 

Fi nance and management ........................... . Human resources programs............. .. 

Staff offi ces. . ..... , ........................... . 

NextGen. . . . . .. . ................................. . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

10,000 

9,384 

9,000 9,000 

(172,000) 

922 

(18,367) 

3,068 

143,000 

782,845 

9,653,395 

(7,442,738) (1,252,991) 

(16,271) 

(582,117) 

(98,858) 

(200,286) 

(60,134) 

FY 2014 

Request 

6,000 

9,551 

9,750 

-2,750 

7,000 

925 

(18,367) 

3,088 

146,000 

817,937 

9,707,000 

(7,311,790) (1,204,777) 

(16, Oil) 

(807,646) (306,994) 

(59,782) 

Bill 

2,000 

9,384 

8,000 

-2,750 

3.250 

(172.000) 

922 

(18,367) 

3,068 

100,000 

3,315 

9.521.784 

(7. 182.664) (1.199.777) 

(14,160) 

(777 .198) (291.348) 

(56.637) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-8.000 

-3,000 -2,750 -5,750 

-43.000 

-779,530 

-131,611 

(-260,074 ) 

(-53.214) 

(-2,111 ) 

(+195,081) 

(-98.858) (+91,062) 

( -3.497) 

B

R

-

--

(+17

-4

-81

-18

( -12

(-(-

(-3(-1

(-

Insert offset folio 46 here HR136.007jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Facilities and Equipment (Airport & Airway Trust Fund) 

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 ................. . 

Total. Federal Aviation Administration ......... . 

Limitations on obligations .... 

Total budgetary resources ..... . 

Federal Highway Administration 

Limitation on Administrative Expenses ..... 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

2.730,731 

167,556 

(3,435,000) (3,350,000) 

(101,000) 

(15,000) (29,250) 

(6,000) 

12,551,682 

(3,350,000) 

(15,901,682) 

(412,000) 

FY 2014 

Request 

2,777,798 

166,000 

(3,200,000) 

(2,900,000) 

(106,600) 

(15,000) (29,500) 

-450,000 

12,200,798 

(2,900,000) 

(15,100,798) 

(429,855) 

Bill 

2,155,000 

145,000 

-26,184 

(3,200,000) 

(3,350,000) 

(106,600) 

(15,000) (29,500) 

11,795,600 

(3,350,000) 

( 15 , 145 , 600) 

(417,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-575,731 

-22,556 -26,184 

(-235,000) 

(+5,600) 

(+250) 

(-6,000) 

-756,082 

( -756,082) 

(+5,000) 

B

R

-62

-2-2

(+45

+45

-40

(+4

(+4

( -1

Insert offset folio 47 here HR136.008jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUOGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Federal-Aid Highways (Highway Trust Fund): 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ............ . 

(Limitation on obligations) ..................... . 

(Exempt contract authority) ..................... . 

Total, Federal Highway Administration .......... . 

L i mit at ions on ob 1 i gat ions. . . . . . . . . . . .. . ...... . 

Exempt contract authority ..................... . 

Total budgetary resources .. 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

Motor Carrier Safety Operations and Programs (Highway 

Trust Fund) (Liquidation of contract authorization) .. 

(Limitation on obligations) ..................... . 

Motor Carrier Safety Grants (Highway Trust Fund) 

(Liquidation of contract authorization) ... . 

(Limitation on obligations) .................... . 

Rescission of contract authority .................. . 

Total, Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration ......... . 

Limitations on obligations ................. . 

Total budgetary resources ...................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

(39,699,000) 

(39,699,000) 

(739,000) 

(39,699,000) 

(739,000) 

FY 2014 

Request 

(40,995,000) (40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,438,000) (40,995,000) 

(251,000) (259,000) (251,000) (259,000) 

(310,000) (313,000) (310,000) (313,000) 

Bi 11 

(40,995,000) (40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,256,000) 

(739,000) 

(40,995,000) 

(259,000) (259,000) 

(313,000) (313,000) 

-95,957 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

(+1,296,000) 

(+557,000) 

(+557,000) (+557,000) 

(+8,000) (+8,000) 

(+3,000) (+3,000) 

-95,957 

____ __ ______ __ ____ ___________ 

• 

_______ 

-95,957 -95,957 

(561,000) (572,000) (572,000) (+11,000) 

(561,000) (572,000) (476,043) (-84,957) 

B

-

--

-

(-

Insert offset folio 48 here HR136.009jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUOGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

*Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

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) .. 

Hi gh vi si bil ity enforcement.................. .. 

Adm; ni strati ve expenses ........... . ........ . 

Rescission of contract authority 

Total, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration ......... . 

Limitations on obligations ..... 

Total budgetary resources. 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

140,146 

(115,500) (115,500) 

255,646 

(554,500) 

(554,500) 

(235,000) (265,000) 

(29,000) (25,500) 

140,146 

(670,000) (810,146) 

FY 2014 

Request 

148,343 

(118,500) 

(118,500) 

266,843 

(581,500) (561,500) (235,000) 

(272,000) 

(29,000) (25,500) 

148,343 

(680,000) (828,343) 

Bi 11 

117 ,000 

(139,175) (139,175) 

256,175 

(561,500) (561,500) (235,000) (272,000) 

(29,000) (25,500) 

-152,281 

-35,281 

(700,675) (665,394) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-23,146 

(+23,675) (+23,675) 

+529 

(+7,000) (+7,000) 

(+7,000) 

-152,281 -175,427 

(+30,675) 

(-144,752) 

B

R

-3

(+2(+2

-1

-15

-1

(+

(-16

Insert offset folio 49 here HR136.010jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Safety and Operati ons ................................ . 

Railroad Research and Development .................... . 

Research Development and Technology .................. . Rail Service Improvement Program ..................... . 

Northeast Corridor Improvement Program (rescission) .. 

Next Generation High-Speed Rai 1 (resei ssion) ..... . 

National Railroad Passenger Corporation: 

Operating Grants to the National Railroad 

Passenger Corporati on .......................... . 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to the National 

Rail road Passenger Corporati on. . . . . . .. . ...... . 

Current Rail Passenger Service ................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

178,596 

35,000 

466,000 

952,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

184,500 

35,250 

54,750 

3,660,000 

2,700,000 

Bi 11 

184,500 

35,250 

-4,419 -1,973 

350,000 

600,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+5,904 

+250 

-4,419 -1,973 

-116,000 -352,000 

B

R

-5

-3,66

+3+6

-2,70

----------

.. 

-- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ................... . 

Total, Federal Railroad Administration ........ . 

Federal Transit Administration 

Administrative Expenses ................. . 

Formula and Bus Grants (Hwy Trust Fund, Mass Transit 

Account (Liquidation of contract authorization) ... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ..................... . 

1,418,000 2,700,000 

---------- -- -------- - -- -

1,631,596 

102,713 

(9,400,000) (8,478,000) 

6,634,500 

109,888 

950,000 -468,000 -1,75

------

.. 

-

... ., .. ------_ ... ----- -------- 

1,163,358 

102,713 

-468,238 

(-9,400,000) (-8,478,000) 

-5,47

Insert offset folio 50 here HR136.011jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

-Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program ....... . 

Transit Formula Grants (Hwy Trust Fund, Mass Transit 

Account (Liquidation of contract authorization) .... . 

(Limitation on obligations) ...................... . 

Research and University Research Centers ............. . 

Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment 

Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ............. . 

Transit Cooperative Research ......................... . 

Technical Assistance and Standards Development ....... . 

Human Resources and Training ......................... . 

Capital Investment Grants ............................ . 

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

Capital and Preventive Maintenance ............... . 

Rescission (H. Sec. 163) ........................... .. Rescission of contract authority. (H. Sec. 163) ....... . 

Total, Federal Transit Administration ..... . 

Limitations on obligations .. •••••• > , •••••••• 

Total budgetary resources .... " .. , , ........ 

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 

Operations and Maintenance (Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund) ......................................... 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

44,000 

955,000 

150,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

25,000 

(9,500,000) (8,595,000) 

30,000 

7,000 7,000 

5,000 

1,981,472 

150,000 

- --- -------------

2,251,713 2,315,360 

(8,478,000) (8,595,000) 

Bill vs. 

Bill Enacted 

(9,500,000) (+9,500,000) (8,595,000) (+8,595,000) 

-44,000 

20,000 +20,000 

4,000 +4,000 4,000 +4,000 

2,000 +2,000 

1,815,655 -139,345 

125,000 -25,000 

-81,338 -81,338 -70,000 -70,000 

--------- -------_ .. __ .. _-

1,922,030 -329,683 

(8,595,000) (+117 ,000) 

----------

.. 

-- --_ .. ------ .... - ---- --------- ............ _ .. 

-

_ ...... 

(10,729,713) (10,910,360) (10,517,030) (-212,683) 

32,259 32,855 30,582 -1,677 

B

-

-

-1

---

-3

(-3

Insert offset folio 51 here HR136.012jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Maritime Administration 

Maritime Security Program ..................... . 

Ope rat ions and Trai ni ng .... , .......... . ............ . 

Shi P Di sposal ........................................ . 

Assistance to Small Shipyards ........................ . 

Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account: 

Administrative expenses .......................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

174,000 156,258 

5,500 

9,980 

3,740 

FY 2014 

Request 

208,000 

152,168 

2,000 

2,655 

Bill 

174,000 

143,768 

4,000 

2,655 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-12,490 

-1,500 -9,980 -1,085 

B

R

-3

-

+

---- --

..... 

-

.. .. 

-

.. 

- -

.. 

-

.... "" ..... '" --'"--- .... -- .... ,.. .. ----- -- .. "'---- ...... ---- -- 

Total, Maritime Administration ......... . 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

Operational Expenses: 

General Fund .................................... . 

Pipeline Safety Fund ............................. . Pipeline Safety information grants to communities. 

Subtotal ............. . 

Hazardous Materials Safety: 

General Fund .................... . 

Special Permit and Approval Fees. 

Subtotal ............. , ............... . ..... . 

349,478 364,823 324,423 -25,055 -4

20,721 21,015 20,528 -193 

639 639 639 

(1,000) (1,500) (1,000) 

-_ .. ,.. -- .... ---_ .... _ ............. - ....... --------- .. _ ...... --_ ... _ .... _ .. _--_ ..... __ .. --_ 

21,360 

42,338 

42,338 

21,654 

45,801 

-6,000 

39,801 

21,167 

42,762 

42,762 

-193 

+424 

+424 

Insert offset folio 52 here HR136.013jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Pipeline Safety: 

Pi pel i ne Safety Fund ............................. . 

Oi 1 Spi 11 L i abil i ty Trust Fund. . .. .., .. 

Pipeline Safety Design Review Fund, .. , ... , ....... . 

Subtotal .............. , .......... , .... , ...... . Subtotal, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Admi ni st rat ion ................... , .. . 

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 ... ".,., ......... , .. , ..... , .. . 

Research and Innovative Technology Administration 

Research and Development .................. . 

Office of Inspector General 

Sa 1 ari es and Expenses .............................. . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

90,679 

18,573 

109,252 172,950 

-91,318 

(28,318) 

(188) 

81,632 

15,981 

79,624 

FY 2014 

Request 

133,000 

18,573 

2,000 

153,573 215,028 

-133,639 

-2,000 

(28,318) 

(188) 

79,389 

85,605 

Bi 11 

90,679 

18,573 

2,000 

111 ,252 

175,181 

-91,318 

-2,000 

(28,318) 

(188) 

81,863 

79,624 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+2,000 

+2.000 +2,231 

-2,000 

+231 

-15,981 

B

-

--

+

Insert offset folio 53 here HR136.014jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

"Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Surface Transportation Board 

Sal ari es and Expenses ................... . 

Offsetting collections ................ . 

Total, Surface Transportation Board. 

General Provisions, this Title 

Section 193: 

(a) Deployment of MagLev Projects (rescission) ... . 

(b) Rail crossing safety and planning programs ... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

29,310 

-1,250 

28.060 

FY 2014 

Request 

30,775 

-1,250 

29,525 

Bi 11 

29,310 

-1,250 

28,060 

·80,000 

80,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-80,000 

+80,000 

B

R

·8

+

============= ============= ============== ============== ========

Total, title I, Department of Transportation .. 17,945,016 22,709,135 15,297,617 -2,647,399 -7,41

Appropriations ........................... (17 , 946,266) (23,169,135) (16,050,769) (-1,895,497) ( -7 , 1

Rescissions ............................... (-2,750) (-433,664 ) (-433,664 ) (-43

Rescissions of contract authority ......... (-450,000) (-318,238) ( -318,238) (+1

Offsetting collections ................. (-1,250) (-7,250) (-1,250) (

Limitations on obligations,., ....... , ..... ",. (52,758,000) (53,003,000) (53,473.675) (+715,675) (+4

Total budgetary resources ..... "",., ... ,.,. (70,703,016) (75,712,135) (68,771,292) ( -1 ,931 ,724) (-6,94

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Insert offset folio 54 here HR136.015jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

TITLE II - DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Management and Administration 

Executive Offices ... """'" , .. ," ,.""" 

Administration, Operations and Management", ,., Administration Support Offices"", .. """, '" 

Program Office Salaries and Expenses: 

Public and Indian Housing ............ " ......... , 

Community Planning and Development."",. ,. """ 

Hous i ng, , , , , , " , ... "."".""".,.",.,.""", 

Policy Development and Research."""", "',.,,' Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity"""" .. "", 

Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control", 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

537,769 

200,000 

100,000 

391,500 

22,211 

72,600 

7,400 

FY 2014 

Request 

14,540 

505,313 

220,299 

109,740 

363,375 

21,667 

76,504 

7,642 

Bi 11 

12,000 

479,000 

197,000 

99,000 

377,000 

21,000 

71,000 

7,000 

Bill vs, 

Enacted 

+12,000 

-537,769 

+479,000 

-3,000 -1,000 

-14,500 

-1,211 -1,600 

-400 

Bi 

R

-2

-2-1

------------- ---------- _._-_.-------- -- --------

Subtotal, , , , , . , , .. , , . , , ... , , , . , , , , , ,. .," ". 

Total, Management and Administration."" 

Public and Indian Housing 

Tenant-based Rental Assistance: 

Renewa 1 s ' , , , , . , , . , , , , , , , , , , ...... . 

Tenant protection vouchers .. , ....... , ..... , ,. " .. 

Administrative fees ... , ... ,',"", .. , ... . 

Family self-sufficiency coordinators,., .. ,.", .... 

793,711 619,247 772,000 -21,711 -4

--- ---.-- ------------- ---- -- ----- -------------- -------

1,331,500 

17,242,351 

75,000 

1,375,000 

60,000 

1,339,100 

17,968,278 

150,000 

1,685,374 

1,263,000 

17,000, 000 

75,000 

1,350,000 

-68,500 -7

-242,351 -9

-7

-25,000 -3

-60,000 

Insert offset folio 55 here HR136.016jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Veterans affairs supportive hOusing .............. . 

Sec. 811 mainstream voucher renewals ............ . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

75,000 

112,018 

Subtotal (available this fiscal year)......... 18,939,369 

Advance appropr i at ions ........................... . 

Less appropriations from prior year advances ..... . 

Total, Tenant-based Rental Assistance 

appropriated in this bill .................. . 

Rental Assistance Demonstration ...................... . 

Public Housing Capital Fund .......................... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Public Housing Operating Fund ....................... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

Choice neighborhoods .............................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ........ . 

Resci ssi on. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ....... . 

Family Self-Sufficiency ............................. . 

Native American Housing Block Grants ................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) 

Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant ................ . 

Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account ... . 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

18,939,369 

1,875,000 

4,262,010 

120,000 

650,000 

13,000 12,200 

(976,000) 

FY 2014 

Request 

75,000 

110,564 

(-15,000) 

19,989,216 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

19,989,216 

10,000 

2,000,000 

(-10,000) 

4,600,000 

(-8,000) 

400,000 

( -2,000) 

75,000 

650,000 

(-3,000) 

13,000 

6,000 

(1,818,000) 

Bi 11 

75,000 

110,564 

18,610,564 

4,000,000 

-4,000,000 

18,610,564 

1,500,000 

4,262,010 

-120,000 

60,000 

600,000 

6,000 

(1,818,000) 

Bi 11 vs. 

Enacted 

-1,454 

-328,805 

-328,805 

-375,000 

-120,000 -120,000 

+60,000 

-50,000 -13,000 

-6,200 

(+842,000) 

B

R

(+

-1,37-1,37

-

-50

(+

-3

(

-40

(

-12

--5

(

-

Insert offset folio 56 here HR136.017jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec 3004 OMB ATB 

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 formula .................................. .. 

Indian CDBG ..................................... . Integrated planning and investment grants ........ . 

Neighborhood stabilization program ............. . 

Di saster re 1 i ef . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ................ . 

Subtotal.. . ......... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ...... . 

Community Development Loan Guarantees (Section 108): 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................ . 

Credit subsidy ............................ . 

Rescission ................................... . 

HOME Investment Partnerships Program .............. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ......... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

386 

(41,504) 

25,871,965 

332,000 

2,948,090 

60,000 

300,000 

3.308,090 

(240,000) 

5,952 

1,000,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

27,743,216 

332,000 

( -2,000) 

2,798,100 

70,000 75,000 

200,000 

3,143,100 

(-15,000) (500,000) 

950,000 

(-5,000) 

Bill 

24,918,574 

303,000 

1,636,813 

60,000 

1,696,813 

(500,000) 

-3,000 

700,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-386 

(-41,504) 

-953,391 

-29,000 

-1,311,277 

-300,000 

-1,611,277 

(+260,000) 

-5,952 -3.000 

-300,000 

B

R

-2,82

-2

(+

-1.16

-1-7

-20

-1,44

(+

-25

(+

Insert offset folio 57 here HR136.018jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUOGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Self-help and ASSisted Homeownership Opportunity 

Program ............................................ . 

Capacity Building ................................... . 

Homeless ASSistance Grants ........................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

53,500 

2,033,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

20,000 

2,381,000 

Bi 11 

30,000 

2,088,000 

Bill VS. 

Enacted 

-23,500 

+55,000 

B

R

+

-2

-2

-------_ .. _-- -------------- _ .. _--- ----- -------.

Total, Community Planning and Development ..... . 

Housing Programs 

Project-based Rental Assistance: 

Renewal s ................................ . 

Contract administrators ........... . 

Subtotal (available this fiscal year) ...... . 

Transformation initiative (transfer out) ........ . 

Advance appropriations ......................... . 

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). 

Housi ng Counsel i ng Assi stance. .. .. . ................ . 

Renta I Hous i ng Ass i stance. . . . . . . .. . ................. . 

6,732,542 6,826,100 4,814,813 -1,917,729 

9,050,672 10,007,000 9,050,672 

289,000 265,000 -289,000 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

9,339,672 

400,000 

-400,000 

9,339,672 

374,627 

165,000 

45,000 

1,300 

10,272,000 

(-15,000) 

400,000 

-400,000 

10,272,000 

400,000 

(-2,000) 

126,000 

(-1,000) 

55,000 

21,000 

9,050,672 

400,000 

·400,000 

9,050,672 

374,627 

126,000 

35,000 

21,000 

-289,000 

-289,000 

-39,000 -10,000 

+19,700 

-2,01

-9-2

-1,22

(+

-1,22

-

(

(

-

Insert offset folio 58 here HR136.019jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Rent Supplement (rescission) ....................... . 

Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund ................. . 

Offsetting collections .......................... . 

Total, Housi ng Programs.. ...... . .. . ..... .. 

Appropri at ions. . . . . . . . . .. ........ . ..... . 

Resci ssi ons. . . . . . . . . . .. . ........... . 

Offsetting collections ............. . 

Federal Housing Administration 

Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) .......... . (Limitation on direct loans) ............. . 

Offsetti ng recei pts. . . . . . . . . .. ... ..... . ....... . 

Proposed offsetting receipts (HECM) .............. . 

Administrative contract expenses ............... . 

Transformati on i nit; ati ve (transfer out). . ...... . 

General and Special Risk Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . (Limitation on direct loans) .................... . 

Offsetting receipts .............................. . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

6,500 

-4,000 

9,928,099 

(9,932,099) 

(-4,000) 

( 400 , 000 , 000 ) 

(50,000) 

-9,676,000 

-170,000 

207,000 

(25,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-588,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

-3,500 

7,530 

-6,530 

10,871,500 

(10,881,530) 

(-3,500) 

(-6,530) 

(400,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-10,841,000 

-57,000 

127,000 

(-1,000) 

(30,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-926,000 

Total, Federal Housing Administration ......... -10,227,000 -11,697,000 

Bi 11 

-3,500 

6,530 

-6,530 

9,603,799 

(9,613,829) 

(-3,500) (-6,530) 

(400,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-10,841,000 

-57,000 

127,000 

(30,000,000) 

(20,000) 

-926,000 

-11,697,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-3,500 

+30 

-2,530 

-324,300 

( -318,270) 

(-3,500) (-2,530) 

(-30,000) 

-1,165,000 

+113,000 

-80,000 

(+5,000,000) 

-338,000 

-1,470,000 

B

R

-

-1,26

(-1 ,26

(+

Insert offset folio 59 here HR136.020jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Government National Mortgage Association 

Guarantees of Mortgage-backed Securities Loan 

Guarantee Program Account: 

(Limitation on guaranteed loans) ................. . 

Admi ni strati 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 ................ . 

Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control 

Lead Hazard Reduction ............................. . 

Transformation initiative (transfer Qut) 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

(500,000,000) 

19,500 

-100,000 

-647,000 

-23,000 

-750,500 

46,000 

70.847 

120,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

(500,000,000) 

21,200 

-100,000 -707,000 

-12,000 

1,000 

Bi 11 

(500,000,000) 

19,000 

-100,000 

-707,000 

-12,000 

1,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-500 

-60,000 

+11,000 

+1,000 

--------------

-796,800 

50,000 

71,000 

120.000 

(-1, 000) 

-799,000 -48,500 

21,000 -25,000 

55,847 -15,000 

50,000 -70,000 

B

-

--

(

Insert offset folio 60 here HR136.021jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Management and Administration 

Informat ion Technology Portfol i o. .. . ................ . 

Working Capital Fund ................................. . 

{By transfer) .................................... . 

Offi ce of Inspector General.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ..... . 

Transformation Initiative .......................... . 

(By transfer)..... .......... . ................. . 

Total. Management and Administration ......... . 

(Grand total, Management and Administration) .. 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

199,035 

124,000 

50,000 

FY 2014 

Request 

2B5,100 127,672 

(80,000) 

Bill VS. 

Bi 11 Enacted 

100,000 +100,000 

-199,035 

124,000 

-50,000 

....... ... 

--

......... --_ .. - ....... -- ...... -.. .. ----.. -.. ----_ .... __ ...... _-

373,035 412,772 224,000 -149,035 

(1,704,535) (1,751,872) (1,487,000) (-217,535) 

B

-1

( -

----

.

-1

(-2

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Total, title II, Department of Housing and 

Urban Development............... . ........ . 33,496,488 34,939,888 28,455,033 -5,041,455 -6,4

Appropriations ................. . (40,304,488) (43,192,918) (36,831,063) (-3.473,425) (-6,3

Rescissions ............................. . (-3,500) (-126,500) (-126,500) (-1

Advance appropriations ................... . (4,400,000 ) (4,400,000) (4,400,000) 

Offsetti ng recei pts. . . . . .. . ............. . (-11,204,000) (-12,643,000) (-12,643,000) (-1,439,000) Offsetting collections ................ . (-4,000) (-6,530) (-6,530) (-2,530) 

(by transfer) .................................. . 80,000 -

(transfer out) ................................ . -80,000 +

tation on direct loans) .......... . (70,000) (40,OOO) (40,000) (-30,000) tation on guaranteed loans) ............... . (926,257,504) (932,318,000) (932,318,000) (+6,060,496) 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Insert offset folio 61 here HR136.022jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

TITLE III - OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Access Board ........ , ... , ... , , , . , ... , . , .............. . 

Federal Housing Finance Agency, Office of Inspector 

General (legislative proposal)., .. " .. , ..... , , ... ,. 

Offsetting collections (legislative proposal) .... . 

Federal Maritime Commission ............. ' ............ . 

National Passenger Rail Corporation Inspector General. 

National Transportation Safety Board ..... , .' ........ . 

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation .. " , ......... , 

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness .... , 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

7,400 

24,100 

20,500 

102,400 

215,300 

3,300 

FY 2014 

Request 

7,448 

48,000 

-48,000 

25,000 25,300 

103,027 

204,100 

3,595 

Bi 11 

7,400 

38,000 

-38,000 

24,200 25,300 

102,400 185,100 

3,000 

Bill vs, 

Enacted 

+38,000 

-38,000 

+100 

+4,800 

-30,200 

-300 

B

-

+

-

;;;========== ============= ============== ============== =======

Total, title Ill, Other Independent Agencies .... 373,000 368,470 347,400 -25,600 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

OTHER APPROPRIATIONS 

Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (P,L. 113-2) 

Department of Transportation 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Facilities and Equipment (emergency) , ..... ,. 29,600 -29,600 

Insert offset folio 62 here HR136.023jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Federal Highway Administration 

Emergency Rel ief Program (emergency) ................. . 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Operating Subsidy Grants to the National Railroad 

Passenger Corporation (emergency) .............. . 

Capital and Debt Service Grants to the National 

Railroad Passenger Corporation {emergency) ...... . 

Federal Transit Administration 

Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program (emerg) 

Total, Department of Transportation ........... . 

Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Community Planning and Development 

Community Development Fund (emergency) ...... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

2,022,000 

32,000 

86,000 

10,900,000 13,069,600 

16,000,000 

FY 2014 

Request Bi 11 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-2,022,000 

-32,000 -86,000 

-10,900,000 -13,069,600 

16,000,000 

Bi 

R

============= ============= ============== ============== ========

Total, Other Appropriations .......... , ..... . 29,069,600 -29,069,600 

============= ============= ============== ============== ========

Insert offset folio 63 here HR136.024jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR 2013 AND REQUEST AND RECOMMENDED AMOUNTS FOR 2014 

(Amounts in thousands) 

'Enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

Grand total.................. . ................ . 

Appropriations ............................. . 

Rescissions .................. "., ..... ," 

Rescissions of contract authority, , ....... ,. 

Advance appropri at ions ... , , , .. , , .. , . , ...... . 

Emergency appropriations ................... . 

Offsetting receipts ........................ . 

Offsetting collections ..................... . 

(by transfer) .................................. . 

(transfer out) ................................ . 

(Limitation on obligations) .................... . 

FY 2013 

Enacted 

80,884,104 

(58,623,754) 

(4,400,000) 

(29,069,600) 

(-11,204,000) 

(-5,250) 

(52,758,000) 

FY 2014 

Request 

58.017,493 

(66.778,523) 

(-6,250) 

(-450,000) 

(4,400,000) 

(-12.643,000) 

(-61,780) 

80,000 

-80,000 

(53,003,000) 

Bill 

44,100,050 

(53,267,232) 

(-560,164) 

(-318,238) 

(4,400,000) 

(-12,643,000) 

(-45,780) 

(53,473,675) 

Bill vs 

Enacted 

-36,784,054 

(-5,356,522) 

(-560,164 ) (-318.238) 

(-29,069,600) 

(-1.439.000) 

(-40,530) 

(+715,675) 

Bi

R

-13,91

(-13,51

(-55

(+13

(+1

-8

+8

(+47

Total budgetary resources., ..................... (133,642,104) (111,020,493) (97,573,725) (-36,066.379) (-13.44
(164) 

MINORITY VIEWS OF NITA M. LOWEY AND ED PASTOR 

The devastating impacts of the Ryan Budget are on full display 

in the Fiscal Year 2014 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies (T–HUD) bill. The Ryan Budget is 

detached from reality, and the overall allocation provided to this 

Committee was unworkable from the start. It forced impossible 

choices and is, predictably, creating winners and losers among our 

twelve subcommittees. Chairman Latham was given an impossible 

allocation of $44.1 billion, which is $4.4 billion below the Fiscal 

Year 2013 sequestration level. 

As a result, draconian and senseless cuts were levied on program 

after program within the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These are the very initiatives that help revitalize our communities through economic development and provide an important 

safety net for our nation’s most vulnerable citizens. Within the Department of Transportation, major reductions were made to capital 

programs designed to modernize our air traffic control system; 

maintain and improve our intercity passenger rail network; and relieve congestion through additional public transportation capacity. 

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) would be funded 

at $1.6 billion in this bill, the lowest level since the program started in 1975. In contrast, last year’s bill contained $3.3 billion for 

CDBG, $1.7 billion higher than this bill. During floor consideration 

of Fiscal Year 2013 T–HUD bill, Representative Chaffetz offered an 

amendment to cut the CDBG program to $2.95 billion, still $1.3 billion higher than the level in today’s bill. 

Members on the majority side of this committee, including the 

subcommittee Chairman, spoke out against the cut, noting how important CDBG was to cities and States across the country. In fact, 

seventeen Republican appropriators including Chairman Rogers 

and Chairman Latham helped to defeat this wrongheaded cut by 

a vote of 157–267. 

On April 17th of this year, in his statement at the HUD budget 

hearing, Chairman Latham chastised the Administration for including nearly a billion dollars for new Administration initiatives. 

He remarked: ‘‘These increases are particularly puzzling in the context of a request that also proposes to cut core state and local partnerships like CDBG and HOME.’’ The President’s request for 

CDBG is $1.1 billion higher than this bill. 

Similarly, the HOME program receives $700 million in this bill, 

the lowest level in its history. Underfunding this program ensures 

that the demand for affordable housing will continue to greatly exceed the supply. The Public Housing Capital Fund is funded at its 

lowest level since 1987. 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. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
165 

It is imperative that the Financial Services Committee address 

the Administration’s proposal to reform HUD’s housing programs. 

The authorizing committee has considered reform proposals to the 

Section Eight program since the 108th Congress. Every year that 

the authorizing committee fails to act, Congress leaves millions of 

dollars in savings on the table. If the Majority insists on marking 

up bills at these risible numbers, they ought to ensure that their 

authorizers provide appropriators with every cost-saving tool available. 

The Chairman tried to ensure that every person in housing at 

the end of Fiscal Year 2013 has a place in the program in Fiscal 

Year 2014. However, this bill assumes that there will be fewer tenants in the Section Eight program at the end of Fiscal Year 2013 

than at the beginning of the year. If there is even a slight change 

in HUD’s cost or attrition estimates, the funding provided for Section Eight will be insufficient to support all tenants and evictions 

could result. Regardless, this bill makes the Section Eight cuts 

from sequestration permanent. 

In Fiscal Year 2010, the Housing for the Elderly program funded 

renewals of existing units and 3,500 new units. When that bill was 

written, estimates showed that an additional 730,000 units of elderly housing were needed by 2030 and 10 seniors were on waiting 

lists for each unit. This year, the bill barely funds renewals for all 

existing units. This stark policy change might lead the casual observer to conclude that we had fixed the elderly housing problem 

in the intervening years. They would be wrong. There is still a 

need for additional units; more than 90 percent of existing units 

maintain a waiting list and about 10 percent of those are closed to 

new applications because the waiting lists are already too long. 

Choosing to use the Ryan budget as the basis for an allocation has 

starved the Committee of the resources it needs to fulfill its responsibilities. 

Our colleagues in the majority know there are valuable, necessary programs in the bill that are needed in their communities. 

Yet, this bill underfunds and undermines the very initiatives that 

will create jobs and provide housing for vulnerable Americans. 

The bill also contains major cuts to key infrastructure programs 

at the Department of Transportation, including unsustainable reductions to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The bill 

cuts FAA’s operations by $185 million below the President’s budget 

request. While there may be sufficient funds to avoid furloughs of 

FAA employees, including air traffic controllers, safety inspectors 

and technicians, it is unclear whether the current hiring freeze will 

be lifted. If FAA is unable to replace controllers, inspectors and 

technicians lost through attrition and retirement, FAA could face 

a critical gap of experienced safety and air traffic professionals. 

The bill cuts FAA’s facilities and equipment (F&E) account by 

more than $575 million or 21 percent below the Fiscal Year 2013 

continuing resolution level. This is the lowest level since Fiscal 

Year 2000. The F&E account is responsible for maintaining and 

improving all of the navigation equipment and facilities that support our nation’s air traffic control system. Many of FAA’s facilities 

were built in the 1960’s and are in need of rehabilitation or reVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:46 Jul 03, 2013 Jkt 081684 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR136.XXX HR136

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
166 

placement. This bill will force FAA to defer improvements to these 

aging facilities. 

The FAA’s NextGen program will also be impacted. NextGen is 

a multi-year effort to modernize the air traffic control system by 

transitioning from a ground-based navigation system to a satellitebased navigation system. The bill may preserve funding for the 

NextGen programs currently under deployment; however, it will 

most certainly delay progress on the next phase. Since the legacy 

infrastructure programs have already been substantially reduced in 

the bill, we assume that the majority of the remaining $364.3 million undistributed cut will come from NextGen programs. Contracts 

to advance these new technologies won’t be awarded in the near 

term, thereby delaying the capacity and efficiency improvements 

that our air carriers expect to receive in return for installing the 

avionics mandated by regulation. 

We should not be disinvesting in our air traffic control system at 

a time when FAA estimates that the national cost of airport congestion and delays was almost $22 billion last year. Air travelers 

may not face furlough-related delays, but they will likely continue 

to be frustrated with the pace of air travel because investments 

aren’t being made to meet the technological needs of a growing 

aviation system. Our aviation industry contributes nearly $1.3 trillion to the U.S. 

economy. FAA’s air traffic controllers manage nearly 70,000 flights 

per day which, on an annual basis, carry more than 730 million 

passengers. With such a vital role in our economy, now is not the 

time to underfund our air traffic control system. With regard to Amtrak, last year’s bill included $1.45 billion for 

Amtrak’s capital grant program. This was the highest funding level 

for capital that Amtrak has ever received and included a bold new 

initiative of $500 million to bring Amtrak’s aging bridges and tunnels up to a state-of-good-repair. The bill adopted by the Majority 

cuts Amtrak’s funding by nearly $400 million bringing it to the 

lowest level in more than a decade. Amtrak’s President has stated 

that funding at this level will jeopardize Amtrak’s long-distance 

trains and some short-haul routes. Amtrak will have to suspend 

mechanical overhauls on equipment resulting in slow orders and 

furloughs of hundreds of mechanical employees and engineers. 

These cuts will surely be felt by the 30 million yearly passengers 

who rely on Amtrak for business and recreational travel. Less visible is the impact to the numerous companies throughout the country that won’t have their contracts renewed to provide valuable 

services. According to the Railway Supply Institute, which represents more than 500 companies that employ more than 90,000 

people with business totaling more than $20 billion a year, a quarter of their member companies rely on business with Amtrak, commuter railroads and transit authorities. 

The bill also includes two controversial riders prohibiting funds 

for California High Speed rail. This program has been approved by 

the voters, funded by the legislature, and the California delegation 

overwhelmingly opposed the rider last year on the floor of the 

House. 

The Federal Transit Administration’s capital investment grant 

program was cut by $139 million below the FY 2013 CR level and 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
167 

$317 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 only 

funds major projects that are currently in construction and all of 

the smaller transit projects that were in the President’s budget. 

Five projects that are expected to go into construction in Fiscal 

Year 2014—two in Los Angeles, California; one between Portland, 

Oregon and Vancouver, Washington; one in Cambridge, Massachusetts; and one in Orlando, Florida—did not receive funding in the 

bill. Three of these projects were requested in the budget. 

The Texas A&M Transportation Institute’s most recent report on 

urban mobility stated that the average commuter spends 38 hours 

a year sitting in congestion at an annual cost of $121 billion. To 

help alleviate chokepoints on our highways, we ought to be investing more in public transportation not less. Finally, the bill rescinds $237 million in Fiscal Year 2013 funds 

for the National Infrastructure Investment (TIGER) program. The 

Department of Transportation has already solicited and received 

568 applications totaling nearly $9 billion for Fiscal Year 2013 

TIGER funds. The bill cuts the funding available for this program 

in half. The TIGER program has been enormously effective at investing in major surface transportation projects. 

We are pleased that the Committee adopted three amendments. 

One amendment made a modest increase to HUD’s Housing for 

People with Aids program. The second amendment provided additional funds for grade crossing safety and corridor planning. The 

third amendment included language that expresses the sense of 

Congress that spending cuts shouldn’t increase poverty. 

We are disappointed that Democratic amendments to reject cuts 

to the Community Development Block Grant program, Amtrak, 

TIGER, Housing for People with Aids, and the Homeless Assistance Grant program were all rejected by a party line vote. 

Had the Chairman been given a realistic allocation that reflects 

the pressing housing and transportation needs of our country, we 

are confident that he could have produced a bill that would have 

enjoyed broad bipartisan support. Instead, the majority has decided 

to double down on sequestration and adopt a more draconian Ryan 

budget that is detached from reality. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

ED PASTOR. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS