|
|
 |
|
[From the House Reports Online via GPO Access.
Check for accuracy before quoting or citing.]
104th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 104-177
_______________________________________________________________________
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL,
1996
_______
July 11, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Wolf, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2002]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for the Department of Transportation and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996.
INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT
Page number
Bill Report
Narrative summary of Committee action...................... 1
2
Program, project, and activity.............................
4
Title I--Department of Transportation:
Office of the Secretary.................... 2
11
Coast Guard................................ 7
22
Federal Aviation Administration............ 12
44
Federal Highway Administration............. 16
77
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration......................... 18
107
Federal Railroad Administration............ 21
120
Federal Transit Administration............. 25
135
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation............................ 30
157
Research and Special Programs
Administration......................... 31
159
Office of Inspector General................ 33
168
Title II--Related Agencies:
Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board....................... 33
169
National Transportation Safety Board....... 34
169
Interstate Commerce Commission............. 35
171
Panama Canal Commission.................... 35
172
Title III--General Provisions...................... 36
173
Title IV--National Capital Area Interest
Arbitration Standards Act of 1995.............. 55
175
House Report Requirements:
Inflationary impact statement..............
176
Rescissions................................
176
Transfers of funds.........................
177
``Ramseyer'' rule..........................
177
Changes in existing law....................
179
Comparison with budget resolution..........
183
Five-year projections of outlays...........
184
Assistance to state and local governments..
184
Tabular summary of the bill................
185
------
Summary of the Bill
The accompanying bill would provide $13,182,101,806 in new
budget (obligational) authority for the programs of the
Department of Transportation and related agencies, a decrease
of $1,011,419,194 below the fiscal year 1995 level.
The Committee has also recommended limitations on
obligations for a number of programs that are, for the most
part, financed by multi-year contract authority in legislative
acts. The total of the limitations on obligations for these
programs is $22,646,915,000, an increase of $876,017,000 above
the levels enacted in fiscal year 1995. An additional
$2,311,932,000 is estimated to be obligated for federal-aid
highway programs exempt from the obligation limitation in the
bill.
The total recommended obligational authority (new budget
authority, limitations on obligations, and exempt obligations)
amounts to $38,140,948,806. This is $91,171,194 less than
comparable fiscal year 1995 enacted levels, and $1,739,215,975
more than the budget request.
Bill Highlights
Faced with a smaller federal budget for transportation, the
bill reflects an overall reduction of $1.4 billion in budget
authority, a reduction of nearly 10 percent from fiscal year
1995 levels. Unlike the President's budget that called for a
reduction of $2.5 billion in infrastructure programs without
providing any specifics or details, this bill makes specific
recommendations by program and places a high priority on public
safety and investments in the future.
This year the Committee has placed a high priority on trust
fund spending in order to ensure highway and aviation users
that their tax receipts are spent, and spent in an efficient
manner. For example, the Committee recommendation spends 98.7
percent of the highway trust fund revenues collected this year.
Similarly, the Committee has included $2.8 billion from the
highway trust fund for transit formula and discretionary
grants--the full amount authorized. In the case of the aviation
trust fund, the Committee's recommendation for fiscal year 1996
is estimated to result in total spending (outlays) from the
aviation trust fund of $5.9 billion, $90 million more than
estimated trust fund tax receipts.
Major Recommendations
Selected major recommendations in the accompanying bill
are:
(1) A provision providing for total obligations,
including exempt obligations, of $20,311,932,000 for
federal-aid highways, an increase of $884,321,000 above
fiscal year 1995;
(2) The appropriation of $4,600,000,000 for
operations of the Federal Aviation Administration, an
increase of $4,606,000 above the fiscal year 1995
level, including the 5 percent air traffic
revitalization pay for controllers;
(3) The appropriation of $2,000,000,000 for
facilities and equipment of the Federal Aviation
Administration, a decrease of $87,489,000 below the
fiscal year 1995 appropriation;
(4) The appropriation of $2,566,000,000 for operating
expenses of the Coast Guard, a decrease of $32,000,000
below the fiscal year 1995 level;
(5) The appropriation of $628,000,000 for grants to
the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak),
subject to authorizing legislation, to cover operating
losses, capital expenses, and transition costs;
(6) A total of $2,000,000,000 for the Federal Transit
Administration's formula grants program, including
$400,000,000 for transit operating assistance;
(7) Two provisions to mitigate the reduction in
transit operating assistance: (a) the repeal of section
13(c) of the Federal Transit Act and an abrogation of
existing labor agreements; and (b) amendment of federal
transit laws to permit periodic bus overhauls to be
considered as a capital expense;
(8) A provision providing for obligations of not to
exceed $1,665,000,000 for the discretionary grants
program of the Federal Transit Administration;
(9) An appropriation of $200,000,000 for construction
of the Washington, D.C. metrorail system; and
(10) A total of $215,477,500 for the Office of the
Secretary, $36,711,500 below fiscal year 1995 and
$354,425,500 below the budget request. The Committee
did not approve the request for $331,000,000 for
headquarters facilities.
Tabular Summary
A table summarizing the amounts provided for fiscal year
1995 and the amounts recommended in the bill for fiscal year
1996 compared with the budget estimates is included at the end
of this report.
Committee Hearings
The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the
programs and projects provided for in the Department of
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for
fiscal year 1996. These hearings are contained in eight
published volumes totaling approximately 9,700 pages. The
Committee received testimony from officials of the executive
branch, Members of Congress, officials of the General
Accounting Office, officials of state and local governments,
and private citizens.
The bill recommendations for fiscal year 1996 have been
developed after careful consideration of all the information
available to the Committee.
Program, Project, and Activity
During fiscal year 1996, for the purposes of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and
activity'' shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is
contained in an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions
providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or
accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory
statements of the committee of conference. This definition
shall apply to all programs for which new budget (obligational)
authority is provided, as well as to discretionary grants,
Federal Transit Administration, and interstate transfer grants-
highways, Federal Highway Administration. In addition, the
percentage reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to
funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal
Aviation Administration, and for acquisition, construction, and
improvements, Coast Guard, shall be applied equally to each
``budget item'' that is listed under said accounts in the
budget justifications submitted to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations as modified by subsequent
appropriations Acts and accompanying committee reports,
conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the
committee of conference.
Non-Technical Training
This year the Committee held a special hearing on non-
technical training in the Department of Transportation as a
result of serious concerns raised in a DOT Inspector General
investigative report regarding alleged abuses in management
training and diversity training. What the Committee found in
that report, and heard firsthand in the hearing, was nothing
short of shocking.
Witnesses described training methods and practices which
were offensive to many employees' religious beliefs and which
prescribed clearly theological readings. Some employees were
forced to reveal and discuss highly personal feelings and
traumatic experiences from their past, in the hope of changing
their values or the values of other training participants.
According to the Office of Inspector General (OIG), a
distinguishing feature of much of this training was the use of
confrontation by instructors, for the stated purpose of
changing personal values and behavior. One male witness
described the humiliation of being made to walk between a
``gauntlet'' of females, who assaulted him physically,
ostensibly to change his values and attitudes toward women. At
least two female witnesses described the need for professional
psychological help after going through the training. The Office
of Inspector General called this type of training a form of
``psychic roulette'', which some lost. Although top FAA and OST
officials were aware of complaints from employees, they
sacrificed some individuals for what they considered the larger
good.
Much of this fit the following description of ``new age''
training methods by management consultant Peter Drucker:
In most cases, managers are simply told to attend.
Even if there is ostensible choice, it is made pretty
clear, or so managers think, that non-attendance would
be seen as a sign of `disloyalty' or negative
attitudes. They are ordered to attend this session
aimed at changing their personality because somebody
claims that it is likely to be good for them, or maybe
good for the company.
Drucker goes on to say that, in his view:
Company-ordered psychological seminars of this kind
are, in other words, an invasion of privacy that is not
justified by any company need. They are morally
indefensible. And they are bitterly resented as such by
a good many of the people who are being subjected to
them.
Several management abuses occurred within the department
which, in the Committee's view, should never have been allowed
to happen. Although some administrative guidance was in place,
the guidance allowed too much discretion to human resource
managers infatuated with ``experiential'' training, was vaguely
worded, and had few if any enforcement sanctions. Taken
together, these abuses describe an organization which abandoned
well-established principles for human resource management and
training in an effort to sustain contracts with certain
individuals. These abuses include:
1. Little or no distribution of course evaluations to
students.
2. Little or no prior information provided to students on
course content or methods.
3. Sole source contracting and split bid purchasing, which
skirted competition.
4. Harassment of employees who expressed concern over
methods or content used during the training.
5. Little or no background check of the instructors hired.
6. No inquiry to determine why students were pledged to
secrecy in some cases.
Given the findings of this hearing, the Committee has
included a new general provision (Sec. 338) which is designed
to ensure that training abuses such as these never happen again
in the Department of Transportation. The provision would
prohibit training which is likely to induce high levels of
psychological stress, attempts to change participants' personal
values or lifestyle outside the workplace, or which relates to
skills or knowledge which has no bearing on one's official
duties in the workplace. It bans training which contains
methods associated with religious or quasi-religious belief
systems, including so-called ``new age'' beliefs. The provision
requires the use of end-of-course evaluations, and requires
that employees be notified in advance of the content and
methods to be used during the training.
Finally, the provision prohibits HIV/AIDS awareness
training other than that necessary to make employees more aware
of the medical ramifications of HIV/AIDS and the workplace
rights of HIV-positive employees. The Committee was concerned
to learn this year of some HIV/AIDS training classes which
overstepped the boundary of what the Committee considers
proper, by attempting to change participants' attitudes
concerning certain lifestyles. The Committee wants to support
awareness training which informs employees about the medical
aspects of AIDS and which promotes a greater sense of
compassion toward people with HIV/AIDS and their families.
However, the Committee does not support training which attempts
to change one's personal values or promote certain lifestyles.
If acceptable government-wide policy changes are made later in
the appropriations process, the Committee will review the need
for separate action in this bill.
Safety Programs
In this bill, the Committee has worked hard to protect
funding for essential safety-related programs of the Department
of Transportation and the independent agencies. This has been
difficult, but not impossible, given the budget constraints
faced by the Federal Government this year. In some cases, funds
have been added to the administration's request for safety-
related activities. However, if, in the judgment of
departmental officials any of the Committee's recommendations
would significantly harm transportation safety, or if
unanticipated safety needs arise during the course of the
appropriations process, the Committee welcomes discussions with
the administration to adjust individual funding levels and
provide the funding needed. The bill also allows significant
flexibility through the reprogramming process, which requires
no further legislative action. The Committee will work with
administration officals to reprogram funds for safety programs
if that should be required.
TITLE I
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.........................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... $24,392,976,000
Recommended in the bill.................................................
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.....................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -24,392,976,000
The budget requested by the Administration proposed that
certain programs for the Department of Transportation be funded
from the Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment
Program (UTIIP). This new account is structured in two parts--
federal activities and state and local activities.
In total, infrastructure spending would decrease from
comparable 1995 levels by $2,500,000,000. Flexible funding
mechanisms are proposed to allow states and localities to
leverage reduced federal dollars. The new programs include an
$18,000,000,000 Unified Allocation Grant that will be available
to states and localities to spend on their transportation
priorities. The UTIIP also includes a $1,000,000,000
discretionary grant to focus on projects of national or
regional significance and $2,000,000,000 to capitalize state
infrastructure banks. Funding for such activities as Amtrak,
Northeast Corridor and transit operating assistance which were
separately appropriated in previous years are included as
separate line items in UTIIP. Also included is $1,142,972,000
for prior commitments including full funding grant agreements
for transit new start projects, WMATA, and existing airport
letters of intent. The following table compares funding levels
for fiscal year 1995 and those proposed in 1996 both under
UTIIP and current law:
UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM
[Appropriations and obligation limitations--In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 President's budget
Comparable -------------------------------
1995 \1\ Current
law Current policy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and local
initiative:
Unified grant....... \2\ $22,911,25
8 \2\ $23,941,66
3 $18,000,000
State infrastructure
banks.............. .............. .............. 2,000,000
Transit operating
assistance......... 710,000 500,000 500,000
Prior commitments
(LOIs, New starts,
WMATA)............. 1,009,018 1,142,972 1,142,972
Rhode Island rail
development........ 5,000 10,000 10,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total, state and
local............ 24,635,276 25,594,635 21,652,972
===============================================
Direct Federal program:
Discretionary grants
(new program)...... .............. \4\ 300,000 1,000,000
Federal lands....... 448,000 \3\ 348,432 441,775
Research &
development \5\.... 239,079 217,237 219,027
Grants to Amtrak.... 772,000 750,000 750,000
NECIP............... 200,000 235,000 235,000
Penn Station
redevelopment...... 40,000 50,000 50,000
Administrative
expenses \6\....... 43,060 44,202 44,202
-----------------------------------------------
Total, direct
Federal.......... 1,742,139 1,944,871 2,740,004
===============================================
Total, UTIIP...... 26,377,415 27,539,506 24,392,976
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects the impact of reductions pursuant to ISTEA Sec. 1003(c),
e.g. Federal Lands.
\2\ Includes portions of Federal-Aid Highways, Grants-in-Aid for
Airports (except for existing LOIs), transit Formula capital and
Discretionary Grants (except for FFAs), and Local Rail Freight
Assistance (FY 1995 only).
\3\ Estimated obligations.
\4\ Congestion Relief Initiative.
\5\ Includes in each year Intelligent Transportation Systems, University
Transportation Centers, and Transit Planning and Research.
\6\ Includes Transit only; FHWA Limitation on General Operating Expenses
included as drawdown under Unified Grant.
The department's proposal is based on proposed legislation
which has not been considered by the appropriate authorizing
committees. Legislative language to effectuate the President's
proposed program was not submitted until May 2, 1995. During
extensive hearings on the department's proposed budget, the
Committee requested that the department submit a budget based
upon current law, distributing the reduction of $2,500,000,000
in the Department of Transportation's core infrastructure
programs. During those hearings, the Deputy Secretary informed
the Committee that the department would not provide specific
budgetary recommendations by program, other than for salaries
and expense accounts.
The Committee rejects the department's proposed UTIIP
proposal. Such a radical transformation in transportation
programs and their delivery requires significant Congressional
review and an authorization. Inasmuch as the administration and
the department chose not to recommend specific budgetary levels
for the Department's largest programs, the Committee has made
the hard choices and the decisions that the department and the
administration chose to avoid.
Department of Transportation Reorganization
Related to the proposed new UTIIP, the department has
proposed a reorganization. The Department of Transportation
proposal for consolidation, which was submitted to Congress on
April 4, 1995, involves three major areas. First, all surface
and maritime activities (other than the Coast Guard and the
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC)) would be
combined in a single Intermodal Transportation Administration
(ITA). Second, the Federal Aviation Administration would
continue its safety and security functions, incorporating also
commercial space activities now housed with the Office of the
Secretary. Third is the Coast Guard--a military service that
transfers to the Navy upon declaration of war or when the
President directs, and which has a distinct set of functions.
No change in the Coast Guard's current status or activities is
proposed, except for transfer of bridges activities related to
the functions of the Intermodal Transportation Administration.
The SLSDC is already a wholly owned government corporation and
would be made a free-standing independent entity. The following
table lists those accounts affected by the proposed
reorganization:
accounts proposed to be merged into the intermodal transportation
administration
Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program
Federal-Aid Highways
Right-of-Way Revolving Fund Liquidating Account
Highway-Related Safety Grants
Motor Carrier Safety Grants
Motor Carrier Safety
Operations and Research (NHTSA)
Operations and Research, Trust Fund (NHTSA)
Highway Traffic Safety Grants
Office of the Administrator (FRA)
Railroad Safety
Railroad Research and Development
Next Generation High-Speed Rail
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Program Account
Trust Fund Share of Next Generation High-Speed Rail
Violent Crime Reduction Programs
Alteration of Bridges
Operating-Differential Subsidies
Maritime Security Program
Operations and Training (Maritime Administration)
Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account
Research and Special Programs
Pipeline Safety
Emergency Preparedness Grants
accounts proposed to be included in the federal aviation administration
Operations
Aviation Insurance Revolving Fund
Aircraft Purchase Loan Guarantee Program
Facilities and Equipment
Research, Engineering, and Develpment
accounts proposed to be included in the coast guard
Operating Expenses
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements
Environmental Compliance and Restoration
Retired Pay
Reserve Training
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
account proposed to be established as an independent agency
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation: Operations and Maintenance
The Committee has deferred consideration of the major
reorganization of the department. Any large scale
reorganization as contemplated by the department would be
premature pending consideration and authorization of the
proposed consolidated grant program. The Committee has, where
appropriate, concurred with less significant components of the
reorganization.
In testimony before the Committee, Department of
Transportation officials stated that the Department planned to
focus on changes to the field structure in fiscal year 1997,
after headquarters reorganizations were made in fiscal year
1996. The Committee acknowledges the need for a review of the
organizational structure of the department, but suggests that
rather than a comprehensive reorganization of the five surface
modal administrations into one, a review and down-sizing of the
department's field structure is more appropriate. DOT's role
has been altered by changes that have occurred in the federal
surface transportation landscape, particularly since the
passage of ISTEA. For example, the Federal Highway
Administration's field structure was put in place during the
construction of the Interstate Highway System, when FHWA's
primary customers, the state highway agencies, needed the
technical expertise and guidance in their state capital that
only a permanent presence could provide. The Interstate system
is complete now, FHWA's customer base has expanded considerably
to include, for example, metropolitan planning organizations in
the major urban centers, citizens groups, and others. As the
following chart indicates, 161 surface transportation field
offices currently exist in the fifty states and the District of
Columbia, and some cities have several offices. Given that
DOT's customers are in virtually every city in the U.S., some
type of field structure is appropriate. However, there is an
opportunity to consolidate the regional and division offices
and collocate field offices, thereby reaping benefits of shared
administrative services, such as reception, printing, mailing,
copying, and space. The existing field structure does not take
advantage of collocation. As the chart indicates, the Denver
metropolitan area, for example, has seven DOT surface
transportation field offices, some located downtown and others
outside of Denver.
The Committee, therefore, has included a general provision
(Sec. 336) canceling appropriations for personnel compensation
and administrative expenses totaling $25,000,000. The Secretary
is directed to reduce the existing field office structure and
to the extent practicable, collocate the department's surface
transportation field offices. To assist in this effort, the
Committee has provided the department flexibility to transfer
funds made available for personnel compensation and benefits
and other administrative expenses to other appropriations
accounts, provided that no appropriation shall increase or
decrease by more than ten percent.
<GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Workers' Compensation
The bill includes a new general provision (Sec. 340) which
prohibits workers' compensation payments to DOT employees
(excluding the Maritime Administration) on the workers'
compensation rolls who are eligible to retire, or who become
eligible to retire during fiscal year 1996, allowing a six-
month grace period after the retirement eligibility point is
reached. The Committee believes that, since workers'
compensation provides more income (including tax-exempt status)
for employees than would be realized under federal retirement
benefits, many employees who are retirement-eligible have no
incentive to retire, and little or no incentive to go back to
work within the department. This provides an unnecessary drain
on agency operating budgets.
The vast majority of workers' compensation cases within the
department are FAA employees. According to the FAA, many of
their workers' compensation employees are over 60 years old,
many having been on workers' compensation for at least twenty
years. Most of these long-term cases are not currently re-
employable by the FAA in any capacity. However, many are
eligible for a civil service disability retirement, but have
little incentive to apply since workers' compensation provides
a higher income. Since workers' compensation payments are
included as a discretionary part of the budget, and therefore
in competition with the safety-related discretionary programs
funded in this bill, the Committee cannot continue making these
payments at the detriment of other critical programs.
The Committee's recommended bill language does not mandate
that these employees retire. However, should they choose to do
so, their benefits would be the same as other federal retirees.
The bill makes no change in their retirement eligibility or
benefits.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Salaries and Expenses
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995......................... \1\ $58,094,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... 62,164,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 55,011,500
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... -3,082,500
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -7,152,500
\1\ Reductions of $469,000 to comply with working capital fund, awards
and transfer of $5,187,928 for consolidated civil rights office not
reflected.
The bill provides $55,011,500 for salaries and expenses of
the various offices comprising the Office of the Secretary
(OST). This is $3,082,500 below the level enacted last year.
The Committee recommendation assumes the following reductions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
from the budget estimate:
Reductions in staff: Amount
2 public affairs specialists........................ -$120,000
3 congressional affairs officers.................... -180,000
3 international transportation specialists.......... -206,250
3 attorney advisors................................. -300,000
4 management analysts............................... -352,250
Hold reception and representation costs to 1995 levels.. -20,000
Hold travel to $365,000................................. -150,000
Reduce contractual services for acquisition, maintenance
and repair of ADP equipment and commercial online
data information systems, and other reductions...... -1,210,000
In addition, the Committee recommendation assumes $91,000
and 1 FTE for aviation information management.
Budget justifications.--Though the Committee has approved
again the consolidated office-by-office appropriation for OST,
the Committee wants to ensure adequate Congressional oversight
and control over these expenses. The Committee is unable to
ensure that oversight given the lack of detail and inadequacy
of the budget justifications. Therefore, the department is
directed to return to an office-by-office justification in the
1997 Congressional submissions.
Staffing.--The Committee recommendation eliminates a number
of positions in the Office of the Secretary, including 2 public
affairs specialists (-$120,000), 3 congressional affairs
officers (-$180,000), 3 international transportation
specialists (-$206,250), 3 attorney advisors (-$300,000) and 4
management analysts (-$352,250). In light of severe budget
constraints and government downsizing, it is the Committee
belief that these positions can be eliminated without affecting
the core responsibilities, functions and duties of the
Department.
Travel.--The Committee notes the significant increases in
travel performed by the secretarial offices. In fiscal year
1995, the Department estimates that the secretarial offices
will expend $457,000 on travel, an increase of $211,000 or 86
percent over 1994 levels. Given the serious budget constraints
facing the Committee and the Department, this increase is
excessive and gives the wrong impression when other areas of
the Department are cutting back essential transportation and
other services. Consequently, the Committee believes travel
reductions in the Office of the Secretary are in order and
recommends a reduction of $150,000 from the budget estimate of
$513,000.
Reception and representation.--The recommendation includes
$40,000 for official reception and representation expenses of
the Department, a decrease of $20,000 from the budget request.
Given the serious budget constraints facing the Committee and
the Department, an increase of fifty percent in reception and
representation expenses seems excessive and again sends the
wrong message when other administrative expenses of the
Department are being reduced.
ICC-related activities.--A separate salaries and expenses
request of $4,705,000 was included in the budget for functions
that would be transferred to the Department of Transportation
upon sunset of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The
Administration proposed to sunset the Interstate Commerce
Commission with residual rail and motor carrier functions
transferring to the Department. Handling of consumer complaints
regarding household goods movers and review of rail mergers and
acquisitions were proposed to be transferred to the Federal
Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, respectively.
The Committee has deferred consideration of this request,
pending action by the appropriate authorizing committees of
Congress.
The Committee has included a general provision (Sec. 344)
that provides $8,421,000 to the Department of Transportation to
carryout certain rail and motor carrier functions that are to
be transferred from the Interstate Commerce Commission. These
funds would not become available to the ICC successor agency or
Department until such transfer of functions was authorized in
law. In addition, users fees collected would be available to
carryout the transferred rail and motor carrier functions.
Electronic tariff filing.--The bill includes a provision
that permits the office of the secretary (OST) to credit
$1,000,000 in user fees to support the electronic tariff filing
system. This provision has been carried in Research and Special
Programs Administration (RSPA), ``Research and Special
programs'' in the past but is necessary in OST as this program
has been transferred from RSPA to OST.
The Department of Transportation inherited a 1938
requirement from the former Civil Aeronautics Board that
requires maintaining physical custody of voluminous
international passenger fare tariffs now being filed with the
Department. Since the shift in 1989 to filing tariffs
electronically, the vast majority of tariffs are now filed and
available in more convenient electronic form. These electronic
filings are now being duplicated in physical form by the
Department only to meet the 1938 requirement. In order to
encourage the most efficient use of Departmental staff
resources, the Committee recommendation discontinues this
needless duplication of tariff filings, whether funded by
appropriations or user fees.
Courier services.--The Committee notes that the
Department's courier service has not delivered promptly the
materials requested from the Department. While security has
been tightened on the Capitol grounds in the wake of the
Oklahoma City bombing, the Department is directed to take
immediate corrective action to ensure that materials are
delivered in a timely manner to the Committee.
Hispanic serving institutions.--The Committee applauds the
Department of Transportation on its efforts to enhance
educational and career opportunities for minority students in
the areas of science, technology and transportation matters.
The Committee acknowledges the activities of the Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU),
university transportation centers (UTCs), and the Research and
Special Programs Administration (RSPA) in this regard. The
Committee strongly encourages the department, especially its
planning and research components (including but not limited to
OSDBU, UTCs, and RSPA), to include participation by Hispanic
serving institutions in any current or future plans to increase
its pre-designated or targeted research, development and
education funds.
general provisions
Limitation on political and Presidential appointees.--The
Committee has included a provision in the bill (Sec. 311)
identical to provisions in past Department of Transportation
Appropriations Acts, which limits the number of political and
Presidential appointees within the Department of
Transportation. The ceiling for fiscal year 1996 is 110
personnel, which is the same as provided in fiscal year 1995.
The bill specifies that no political or Presidential appointees
covered by this provision may be detailed outside of the
Department of Transportation.
Advisory committees.--In previous years, the Committee has
limited the funds used for the expenses of advisory committees
of the Department of Transportation. This year the Committee
has deleted this provision, as requested in the budget.
Office of Civil Rights
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995......................... (\1\)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... $12,793,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 6,554,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... +6,554,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -6,239,000
\1\ Transfer authority for $5,376,000 included under Salaries and
Expenses.
The Committee recommends a separate appropriation for the
Office of Civil Rights, totaling $6,554,000. The recommendation
includes an additional $809,000 to be derived from the
limitation on general operating expenses of federal-aid
highways, and reduces amounts budgeted for supplies and
equipment by $371,000.
The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the
Secretary on civil rights and equal opportunity matters and
ensuring full implementation of civil rights and equal
opportunity precepts in all of the Department's official
actions. In fiscal year 1995, the management of internal civil
rights activities was consolidated in the Office of the
Secretary with transfer authority provided in the salaries and
expenses account. In fiscal year 1996, the department requests
a separate appropriation which would fund all civil rights
activities in the department, including handling of external
matters.
Consolidation of civil rights offices.--The Committee
recommendation disallows the transfer of 65 FTE and $5,868,000
to consolidate external civil rights functions in the Office of
the Secretary, as proposed in the budget. The Committee notes
the substantial differences between equal employment
opportunities activities, which are generally personnel
matters, and disadvantaged business enterprise contracting and
other civil rights program activities. The Committee expects
that the department will take no action to reorganize or
otherwise affect changes to the current civil rights programs
of the department.
Transportation Planning, Research, and Development
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995......................... \1\ $ 8,293,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... 15,710,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 3,309,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... -4,984,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -12,401,000
\1\ Reductions of $51,000 to comply with awards and provision not
reflected.
This appropriation finances those research activities and
studies concerned with planning, analysis, and information
development needed to support the Secretary's responsibilities
in the formulation of national transportation policies. The
overall program is carried out primarily through contracts with
other federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit
research organizations, and private firms.
The Committee recommends $3,309,000 for this appropriation,
which represents a decrease of $4,984,000 below the funding
level provided for fiscal year 1995. The recommended level
holds transportation and planning studies to $2,809,000
(-$795,000), an increase of 2.4 percent over last year, and
permits annualization and other pay-related costs for current
FTE. The Committee has included $70,000 for a planned project
to identify factors contributing to successful telecommuting
programs. The analysis should include transportation-related
behavior and potential location changes that could promote
further residential dispersions. The recommendation also
includes $100,000 for analysis of the impacts on Mexico and the
United States related to motor carrier functions under the
North American Free Trade Agreement, and $500,000 for aviation
management system improvements. The recommendation deletes
funding for planned trade promotion activities which should be
provided by the Department of Commerce.
The recommended level reflects elimination of further
funding for the development of the integrated personnel/payroll
system (IPPS) (-$3,911,000 and 3 FTE), the transportation
automated procurement system (TAPS) (-$6,195,000), and the
docket management system (DMS) (-$1,000,000). The Committee's
action will delay phases three through six of the IPPS project.
The TAPS pilot test program and evaluation have yet to begin in
the office of the secretary and, as a result, further
departmental conversion and full implementation is premature.
While the Committee agrees that further improvements are
desirable, they must be deferred due to the high outlays
associated with this account and the tight budget constraints
facing the Congress.
Office of Commercial Space Transportation
operations and research
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995......................... \1\ $6,060,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... (\2\)
Recommended in the bill.................................................
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... -6,060,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996...................................
\1\ Reductions of $53,000 to comply with awards and procurement reform
provisions not reflected.
\2\ Budget amendment transfers activities to the Federal Aviation
Administration.
The Committee recommendation deletes a separate
appropriation for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation
and reflects the Department's proposal to move this office from
the Office of the Secretary to the Federal Aviation
Administration.
Working Capital Fund
Limitation, fiscal year 1995............................ ($93,000,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... (104,364,000)
Recommended in the bill................................\1\ (102,231,000)
Bill compared with:
Limitation, fiscal year 1995........................ (+9,231,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996...................\1\ (-2,133,000)
\1\ In fiscal year 1996, the limitation on working capital fund expenses
is also addressed in a general provision (-$10,000,000).
The working capital fund (WCF) finances common
administrative services that are centrally performed in the
interest of economy and efficiency in the department. Charges
for services rendered are set at rates that return in full all
operating expenses, including a normal reserve for accrued
annual leave and depreciation of equipment. The fund is
reimbursed by the offices being served. The WCF also may
provide services to non-DOT entities on a fee-for-service
basis, which are not constrained by the limitation.
The bill includes language limiting fiscal year 1996
obligations of the Department of Transportation working capital
fund to $102,231,000. In addition, the Committee has included a
general provision (Sec. 327) that reduces, on a pro-rata basis,
the amounts budgeted for the WCF by $10,000,000. The bill,
therefore, provides a limitation of $92,231,000. Recommended
reductions are as follows:
Disallowance of transfer from OST of intermodal data
network............................................. -$906,000
Defer docket management systems maintenance............. -465,000
Hold non-pay inflationary increases to 1.5 percent...... -262,000
Reduction in WCF-funded travel.......................... -300,000
Reduction in executive training and development programs -200,000
The Committee has not agreed with the budget request to
eliminate all appropriations language and create a Service
Bureau financed by the working capital fund to perform common
services. The Committee has, however, modified the bill
language to apply the obligation limitation only to services
provided to DOT entities, enabling the working capital fund to
provide services outside the obligation limitation to non-DOT
entities.
Working capital expenses are calculated by the Department
and imposed on each agency. The Committee understands that on a
per capita basis administrative costs imposed on each mode or
office range from $507 to over $10,405, depending on size and
usage and therefore believes that the Department should
endeavor to reduce administrative positions, consolidate
activities, and eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs
or projects.
General provision.--In previous years, Congress has placed
limitations on expenses of the working capital fund. However,
for technical reasons, the savings resulting from the
limitations have not been scored against the annual
appropriations bills. In order to ensure that WCF funds are
actually reduced in accord with Congressional directions and to
receive proper credit for those savings, the Committee has
continued a general provision (Sec. 327) which provides that
amounts budgeted for the WCF in this bill are hereby reduced,
on a pro rata basis, to the limitation level of $92,231,000.
Payments to Air Carriers
(Liquidation of Contract Authorization)
(Airport and Airway Trust Fund)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligations
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995... ($33,423,000) ($33,423,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996. (\1\) (\1\)
Recommended in the bill........... (15,000,000) (15,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year
1995......................... (-18,423,000) (-18,423,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year
1996......................... NA NA
\1\ The President's budget proposed to consolidate this program into the
Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program.
The essential air service program was created by the
Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a temporary measure to
continue air service to communities that had received federally
mandated air service prior to deregulation. The program
currently provides subsidies to air carriers serving small
communities that meet certain criteria. Subsidies, ranging from
$5 to $320, currently support air service to 82 communities and
serve about 700,000 passengers annually. This program was
established to provide a smooth phaseout of Federal subsidies
to airlines that service small airports.
The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the essential air
service program. The recommendation is $18,423,000 below last
year's level. The President's budget had proposed to roll the
program into the UTIIP and the House-passed budget resolution
called for the termination of the program.
In view of budget constraints and the realization that many
rural communities need access to air service and would not have
that access without the continuation of the essential air
service program, the Committee has recommended a reduction of
55 percent from last year's level and a requirement that the
state, the locality or an other non-federal entity pay at least
fifty percent of the cost of providing such transportation.
Recognizing the vagaries of state and local legislative
calendars, communities may need some time to adjust to this
matching requirement. In addition, the Department of
Transportation will need to know in advance which communities
will be matching and which will not. Hence, the matching
requirement would not be implemented until 90 days after
October 1, 1995.
The bill includes language which (a) applies the matching
requirement to the state of Hawaii and the 48 contiguous
states, (b) applies the mileage criteria to communities of the
48 contiguous states within 70 miles of medium or large hub
airports, and (c) excludes from the per passenger subsidy
criteria essential air service points greater than two hundred
and ten miles from the nearest large or medium hub airport. In
addition, the Committee has included bill language that
provides that communities which cannot generate any reasonable
amount of matching funds would be allocated an amount of
subsidy that is reduced from what it otherwise would be in the
same proportion as the ``unmatched'' funds represent of the
total to be made available in fiscal year 1996.
The Committee is aware that some of the communities
participating in the essential air program have been providing
a match in recent years. It is the Committee's expectation that
a participating community would be required to match the
federal subsidy on a fifty-fifty basis; in other words, those
communities currently providing a match would be required to
provide a total match of fifty percent, not an additional fifty
percent.
The following table lists the projected subsidized
essential air service points in fiscal year 1996:
PROJECTED SUBSIDIZED ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE (EAS) FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average daily
Estimated mileage enplanements at
States/communities to nearest hub EAS point (YE 6/
(S,M, or L) 30/94)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA: Anniston................. 61 10.3
ARIZONA:
Kingman....................... 103 10.7
Page.......................... 274 20.5
Prescott...................... 103 41.1
ARKANSAS:
El Dorado/Camden.............. 108 10.9
Harrison...................... 139 10.3
Hot Springs................... 54 12.9
Jonesboro..................... 71 11.1
CALIFORNIA:
Crescent City................. 233 13.0
Merced........................ 64 24.8
Visalia....................... 40 16.5
COLORADO:
Cortez........................ 253 27.9
Lamar......................... 162 4.1
HAWAII: Kamuela................... 39 4.6
ILLINOIS:
Mattoon/Charleston............ 146 4.4
Mt. Vernon.................... 93 7.9
IOWA: Ottumwa..................... 92 6.3
KANSAS:
Dodge City.................... 156 13.1
Garden City................... 209 21.9
Goodland...................... 190 3.2
Great Bend.................... 116 4.8
Hays.......................... 175 16.7
Liberal/Guymon................ 162 10.1
Topeka........................ 76 31.8
MAINE:
Augusta/Waterville \2\........ 71 13.5
Bar Harbor.................... 164 17.6
Rockland...................... 79 11.2
MINNESOTA:
Fairmont...................... 153 4.0
Fergus Falls.................. 185 10.9
Mankato....................... 75 4.5
Worthington................... 65 2.3
MISSOURI:
Cape Girardeau................ 133 18.8
Ft. Leonard Wood.............. 130 12.2
Kirksville.................... 158 8.4
MONTANA:
Glasgow....................... 279 5.9
Glendive...................... 223 2.9
Havre......................... 251 4.4
Lewistown..................... 129 3.6
Miles City.................... 145 3.0
Sidney........................ 273 7.7
Wolf Point.................... 295 6.3
NEBRASKA:
Alliance...................... 242 2.3
Chadron....................... 301 2.3
Hastings...................... 160 3.0
Kearney....................... 186 11.2
McCook........................ 259 3.4
North Platte.................. 282 5.2
Scottsbluff................... 202 8.6
NEVADA: Ely....................... 236 5.7
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Keene \3\.......... 56 12.3
NEW MEXICO:
Alamogordo/Holloman AFB....... 92 11.6
Clovis........................ 106 14.6
Silver City/Hurley/Deming..... 163 10.4
NEW YORK:
Massena....................... 149 20.1
Ogdensburg.................... 127 10.5
Watertown..................... 69 16.6
NORTH DAKOTA:
Devils Lake................... 403 11.8
Dickinson..................... 313 7.5
Jamestown..................... 304 10.8
OKLAHOMA:
Enid.......................... 91 9.4
Ponca City.................... 88 11.8
PENNSYLVANIA: Oil City/Franklin... 91 30.5
PUERTO RICO: Ponce................ 80 31.2
SOUTH DAKOTA:
Brookings..................... 58 4.0
Mitchell...................... 72 2.1
Yankton....................... 96 10.1
TEXAS: Brownwood.................. 153 4.7
UTAH:
Cedar City.................... 173 18.7
Moab.......................... 241 6.1
Vernal........................ 171 17.0
VERMONT: Rutland \3\.............. 67 20.4
VIRGINIA:
Danville...................... 68 13.3
Staunton...................... 108 35.0
WASHINGTON: Ephrata/Moses Lake.... 122 16.1
WEST VIRGINIA:
Beckley....................... 186 19.3
Clarksburg/Fairmont........... 107 8.8
Morgantown.................... 75 12.0
Princeton/Bluefield........... 145 21.6
WYOMING: Worland.................. 164 9.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The above list of communities is based on currently available data,
and is subject to change for a number of reasons. Subsidy rates are
subject to change as their two-year rate terms expire throughout the
year. In addition, air carriers submit passenger traffic data on a
quarterly basis. Changes in both subsidy rates and traffic will of
course change the subsidy-per-passenger calculation. Further, some
communities currently receiving subsidy-free service may require
subsidy in the future while some currently subsidized communities may
attain profitability and no longer require subsidy. Finally, Hub
designations are recalculated annually and published by the FAA in the
Aircraft Activities Statistics.
\2\ Based on CY 1993 due to service disruptions.
\3\ Enplanements based on less than a full year's passenger data
annualized.
Payments to Air Carriers
(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(Airport and Airway Trust Fund)
Rescission, fiscal year 1995............................ (-$4,000,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... (-38,600,000)
Recommended in the bill................................. (-23,600,000)
Bill compared with:
Rescission, fiscal year 1995........................ (-19,600,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... (15,000,000)
The bill includes a rescission of contract authority of
$23,600,000. This rescission removes contract authority which
is not available for obligation due to annual limits on
obligations. A similar rescission of $4,000,000 was made in
fiscal year 1995.
Payments to Air Carriers
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, fiscal year 1995............................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996.......................................
Recommended in the bill................................. -$6,786,971
Bill compared with:
Rescission, fiscal year 1995........................ -6,786,971
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -6,786,971
The bill includes a rescission of balances of general
funds from prior years. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978,
section 419, included a subsidy program to ensure scheduled air
service to specified communities. Prior to fiscal year 1992,
funding for this subsidy was provided from the general fund.
Starting in fiscal year 1992, this program has been funded from
the Airport and Airway trust fund. For the past several years,
balances have been carried forward in the general fund account.
These balances are no longer required as the program is now
funded from the trust fund account.
Rental Payments
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995......................... $144,419,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996 \1\ \2\............... 143,436,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 130,803,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... -13,616,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -14,633,000
\1\ Rental payments for the FHWA are separately budgeted but reimbursed
to this account.
\2\ Includes budget amendment to reduce this account by $2,000,000.
The bill provides $130,803,000 in a consolidated
appropriation for rental payments to the General Services
Administration (GSA). These funds are used to pay GSA for
headquarters and field space rental and related services. In
addition to these consolidated funds, the bill recommends that
$17,099,000 shall be provided to GSA from the Federal Highway
Administration's Limitation on general operating expenses. This
brings total funding to $147,902,000 excluding funding
transferred for Marad. The Committee has been concerned for
some time over the spiraling growth in these expenses, and has
limited to 8,580,000 square feet the amount of space that the
Department may lease from the GSA.
The Committee has included a general provision (Sec. 337)
that will permit the Secretary to transfer funds made available
for salaries and expenses to ``Rental payments'' to cover space
utility charges and other related expenses in excess of the
amounts provided in the bill.
Headquarters Facilities
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.........................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... $331,000,000
Recommended in the bill.................................................
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.....................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -331,000,000
The budget requests a change of administration policy to
budget new buildings with the affected agency rather than GSA.
The rationale for this change is to shift GSA into a policy and
oversight organization for Government-wide administrative
services and to hold the agencies responsible for determining
their facility requirements and priorities. The Committee has
rejected the request, noting that the proposal represents a
significant change in policy which requires the concurrence and
legislative action of the appropriate authorizing committees.
Minority Business Resource Center Program
Limitation on
Appropriation direct loans
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995...... $1,900,000 ($15,000,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996.... 1,900,000 (15,000,000)
Recommended in the bill.............. 1,900,000 (15,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.. ............... ................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996 ............... ................
The minority business resource center of the Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization provides
assistance in obtaining short-term working capital and bonding
for disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The
program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime
interest rates for transportation-related projects.
Prior to fiscal year 1993, loans under this program were
funded by the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization without a limitation. Reflecting the changes made
by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, beginning in fiscal
year 1993 a separate appropriation was proposed in the
President's budget only for the subsidy inherently assumed in
those loans and the cost to administer the loan program.
The recommendation fully funds the budget request, which
provides a limitation on direct loans of $15,000,000 and
subsidy and administrative costs totaling $1,900,000, the same
levels as last year.
Minority Business Outreach
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.........................................
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... $2,900,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 2,900,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... +2,900,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996...................................
This appropriation provides contractual support to assist
minority business firms, entrepreneurs, and venture groups in
securing contracts and subcontracts arising out of projects
that involve Federal spending. It also provides grants and
contract assistance that serves DOT-wide goals and not just OST
purposes. Unobligated balances funded program activities last
year. The Committee has provided $2,900,000, the same level as
included in the budget.
The Committee has deleted language requested in the budget
that would allow the funds provided for minority business
outreach activities to be used for business opportunities
related to any mode of transportation. Such activities are
unauthorized.
COAST GUARD
Summary of Fiscal Year 1996 Program
The Coast Guard, as it is known today, was established on
January 28, 1915, through the merger of the Revenue Cutter
Service and the Lifesaving Service. This was followed by
transfers to the Coast Guard of the United States Lighthouse
Service in 1939 and the Bureau of Marine Inspection and
Navigation in 1942. The Coast Guard has as its primary
responsibilities enforcing all applicable federal laws on the
high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States; promoting safety of life and property at sea; aiding
navigation; protecting the marine environment; and maintaining
a state of readiness to function as a specialized service of
the Navy in time of war.
The Committee recommends a total program level of
$3,660,556,000 for activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal year
1996. This is $82,341,000 (2.4 percent) less than the budget
estimate, and $3,230,000 more than the fiscal year 1995 program
level. The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1995
program levels, the fiscal year 1996 program requests, and the
Committee's recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year-- Bill compared
------------------------------------ Recommended in with fiscal
the bill year 1996
1995 enacted 1996 estimate estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses........................ \1\ $2,598,000,00
0 $2,618,316,000 $2,566,000,000 -$52,316,000
Acquisition, construction, and
improvements............................. 362,950,000 428,200,000 375,175,000 -53,025,000
Environmental compliance and restoration.. 23,500,000 25,000,000 21,000,000 -4,000,000
Alteration of bridges..................... ................. 2,000,000 16,000,000 +14,000,000
Retired pay............................... 562,585,000 582,022,000 582,022,000 ...............
Reserve training.......................... 64,981,000 64,859,000 61,859,000 -3,000,000
Research, development, test, and
evaluation............................... 20,310,000 22,500,000 18,500,000 -4,000,000
Boat safety............................... 25,000,0000 ............... 20,000,000 +20,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... 3,657,326,000 3,742,897,000 3,660,556,000 -82,341,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes $11,200,000 in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1995, $28,297,000 in the Military
Readiness Supplemental Act, 1995, reductions of $864,825 to comply with working capital fund, awards and
procurement reform provisions, and transfer of $792,828 for consolidated civil rights office.
Operating Expenses
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.......................\1\ $2,598,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... 2,618,316,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 2,566,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... -32,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -52,316,000
\1\ Excludes $11,200,000 in the Department of Defense Appropritions Act,
1995, $28,297,000 in the Military Readiness Supplemental Act, 1995,
reductions of $864,825 to comply with working capital fund, awards and
procurement reform provisions, and transfer of $792,828 for consolidated
civil rights office.
budget by mission category
The following data is based on the Coast Guard budget
submission and summarizes, by Coast Guard mission, the expected
resources to be provided for each major Coast Guard mission for
fiscal years 1994 through 1996. Because of the nature of the
service's accounting systems and unknown changes in operational
needs, these figures are estimates.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994 actual 1995 estimate 1996 estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Search and
rescue........ $371,863,000 $361,573,000 $362,128,000
Aid to
navigation.... 440,254,000 491,867,000 492,622,000
Marine safety.. 281,655,000 310,096,000 310,572,000
Marine
environmental
protection.... 229,442,000 221,180,000 221,520,000
Enforcement of
laws and
treaties...... 967,285,000 889,155,000 890,519,000
Ice operations. 81,628,000 85,467,000 85,598,000
Defense
readiness..... 79,177,000 103,694,000 103,853,000
Headquarters
administration 144,018,000 147,337,000 151,504,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total.... 2,595,322,000 2,610,369,000 2,618,316,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
financial management
Budget justifications.--For many years, the Committee has
encouraged the Coast Guard to develop budget and accounting
systems which provide more useful information to the Congress
in annual budget reviews, and which more accurately explain the
service's planned costs and expenditures. While some progress
has been made, the Committee was very disappointed this year to
discover that the detailed justification material for operating
expenses continues to be based on incremental changes to the
base amounts or programmatic initiatives, and not on the
overall budget request by program, project and activity (PPA).
In addition, errors in the breakdown by PPA indicate the
service spent most of its effort justifying changes to the
previous year's base funding, and not justifying the entire
budget. For example, the budget breakdown by PPA requests
$151,504,000 for headquarters administration in fiscal year
1996. However, in budget hearings, the Coast Guard stated these
figures were in error, and offered a new estimate of
$172,862,000. This calls into question other elements of the
request, since in this one case alone, $21,358,000 must be
reduced from other parts of the request. The Committee wishes
to emphasize to the Coast Guard that the fiscal year 1997
justifications are to be based upon program, project and
activity and not upon changes to base funding amounts, and full
justification is expected on that basis.
Reprogramming procedures.--The Committee believes, based on
testimony this year, that the Coast Guard has been improperly
interpreting the existing reprogramming guidelines for this
appropriation. Those guidelines state that Congressional
approval is required for funding shifts of ten percent or more
among PPAs. Congressional guidance further states that PPAs are
defined as any item for which a specific dollar level is cited
in appropriations Acts or the reports accompanying those Acts.
Although reports accompanying the fiscal year 1995 DOT
Appropriations Act specify dollar levels down to three and
sometimes four levels, the Coast Guard has interpreted PPA to
mean only the program (budget activity) level. This has had the
effect of allowing shifts of appropriated funds without
Congressional notification and approval, far in excess of what
is allowed under the existing guidelines. For example, the
fiscal year 1995 appropriation of $2,108,000 for communication
stations was raised internally by the Coast Guard to
$3,107,000. Activities Europe was reduced 27 percent, from
$5,631,000 to $4,098,000. Shifts of fiscal year 1994 funds were
as high as 64 percent, with no Congressional notification. The
Committee intends to provide the Coast Guard flexibility in
allocating its operating funds, but wishes to clarify the
requirement for Congressional review under the existing
guidelines.
Committee Recommendation
The Committee recommends a total of $2,566,000,000 for
operating activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal year 1996.
This is $52,316,000 less than the budget request, and
$32,000,000 below the fiscal year 1995 program level. The
following table compares the fiscal year 1995 enacted level,
the fiscal year 1996 estimate, and the recommended level by
program, project and activity:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program, Fiscal year--
project and -------------------------------------- 1996 recommended
activity 1995 enacted 1996 estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and
Allowances:
Military
pay and
benefits.. $1,225,490,000 $1,230,154,000 $1,209,853,000
Civilian
pay and
benefits.. 173,367,000 177,263,000 177,613,000
Permanent
change of
station... 59,644,000 60,233,000 60,233,000
Medical
care and
equipment. 124,487,000 124,185,000 117,885,000
Leased
housing... ................. ................. 14,900,000
Budget
activity-
wide
adjustment
s......... ................. ................. -9,850,000
Depot Level
Maintenance:
Aircraft... 138,124,000 139,041,000 139,041,000
Electronics 31,652,000 31,549,000 31,549,000
Shore
Facilities 93,963,000 95,645,000 95,645,000
Vessels.... 98,465,000 99,081,000 99,081,000
Operations and
Support:
Area
Operations
and
Support:
Cutters
:
Med
iu
m
en
du
ra
nc
e
(W
ME
C) 15,819,000 15,451,000 15,451,000
Hig
h
en
du
ra
nc
e
(W
HE
C) 10,807,000 11,070,000 11,070,000
Pol
ar
ic
eb
re
ak
er
s
(W
AG
B) 1,936,000 2,024,000 2,024,000
Area
Office
s..... 11,298,000 12,156,000 12,156,000
Mainten
ance
and
Logist
ics
Comman
ds.... 121,806,000 125,616,000 125,616,000
Communi
cation
s
Statio
ns.... 3,107,000 3,262,000 3,262,000
District
Operations
and
Support:
Distric
t
Office
s..... 58,059,000 56,641,000 51,041,000
Groups
and
Bases. 68,015,000 68,592,000 68,592,000
Combine
d
Group/
Air
Statio
ns.... 9,468,000 9,827,000 9,827,000
Air
Statio
ns.... 45,727,000 45,028,000 45,028,000
Marine
Safety
Office
s..... 7,645,000 9,785,000 9,785,000
LORAN
Statio
ns.... 6,254,000 6,491,000 6,491,000
Cutters
: WLBs
and
Smalle
r;
Mackin
aw.... 27,132,000 29,599,000 29,599,000
VTS
System
s..... 219,000 247,000 247,000
Ammunition
and Small
Arms...... 5,791,000 4,707,000 4,707,000
Recruiting and
Training
Support:
Recruiting. 5,861,000 5,467,000 5,467,000
Training
Centers
(Yorktown
&
Petaluma). 27,535,000 26,522,000 26,522,000
Coast Guard
Academy... 12,635,000 12,747,000 12,747,000
Professiona
l Training
&
Education. 25,833,000 26,207,000 25,207,000
Coast Guard
Wide
Centralized
Services:
Headquarter
s-Managed
Units:
Supply
Center
s..... 8,914,000 8,554,000 8,554,000
Finance
Center 4,682,000 4,776,000 4,776,000
Militar
y Pay
and
Person
nel
Center 1,115,000 1,137,000 1,137,000
Activit
ies
Europe 4,098,000 -1,372,000 -1,372,000
Coast
Guard
Yard.. 1,913,000 1,945,000 1,945,000
Strike
Teams. 2,531,000 2,678,000 2,678,000
Nationa
l
Pollut
ion
Funds
Center 1,207,000 1,231,000 1,231,000
COMDAC
Suppor
t
Facili
ty.... 2,024,000 2,054,000 2,054,000
Air
Statio
n
Washin
gton
D.C... 907,000 925,000 925,000
Operati
ons
System
s
Center 5,123,000 6,901,000 6,901,000
Telecom
munica
tions
System
s
Comman
d..... 2,801,000 2,919,000 2,919,000
Omega
Naviga
tion
System
s
Center 3,866,000 404,000 404,000
Intelli
gence
Coordi
nation
Center 258,000 263,000 263,000
Electro
nics
Engine
ering
Center 2,828,000 3,533,000 3,533,000
Coast Guard
Institute. 744,000 759,000 759,000
Researc
h and
Develo
pment
Center 429,000 436,000 436,000
Militar
y
Person
nel
Center 786,000 801,000 651,000
Civilia
n
Person
nel
Office
s..... ................. ................. 393,000
Headquarter
s/
Centralize
d Bill
Paying:
Headqua
rters. 122,372,000 121,497,000 119,497,000
Postal. 7,516,000 6,674,000 6,674,000
FTS.... 12,500,000 12,060,000 10,626,000
Federal
Employ
ment
Compen
sation 6,243,000 6,890,000 6,243,000
Unemplo
yment
Compen
sation 4,546,000 4,661,000 4,546,000
Account-Wide
Adjustments... ................. ................. -18,562,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total
appr
opri
atio
n... 2,607,542,000 2,618,316,000 2,566,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The recommended reduction from the budget estimate includes
the following adjustments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program,
project and Budget estimate Committee Change from
activity recommended request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and
Allowances:
Military
Pay and
Benefits:
Militar
y pay
raise
(2.2%) $20,070,000 $18,669,000 -$1,401,000
Militar
y
essent
iality
(conve
rsion
to
civili
an)... 0 -1,000,000 -1,000,000
General
detail 174,812,000 171,812,000 -3,000,000
Leased
housin
g
(trans
fer).. 14,900,0000 0 -14,900,000
Civilian
Pay and
Benefits:
Senior
execut
ive
servic
e
staffi
ng.... N/A 1,000,000 +1,000,000
Youth
opport
unity
staffi
ng.... 1,645,700 820,700 -825,000
Medical
Care and
Equipment:
Hold
costs
to
fiscal
year
1995
level. 134,100,000 127,800,000 -6,300,000
Leased
Housing
(Transfer) 0 14,900,000 +14,900,000
Budget
Activity-
Wide:
Acceler
ate
existi
ng
stream
lining
plan.. 0 -4,850,000 -4,850,000
Acceler
ate
FY97
restru
cturin
g plan 0 -5,000,000 -5,000,000
Operations and
Support:
District
offices... 56,641,000 51,041,000 -5,600,000
Recruiting and
Training:
Graduate
school
tuition... 2,300,000 1,300,000 -1,000,000
Coast Guard-
Wide
Centralized
Services and
Support:
Civilian
personnel
office
consolidat
ion....... -393,000 ................. +393,000
Military
personnel
center.... 801,000 651,000 -150,000
FTS 2000... 12,060,000 10,626,000 -1,434,000
Headquarter
s
administra
tion...... 172,862,000 170,862,000 -2,000,000
Workers'
compensati
on (hold
to FY95
level).... 11,551,000 10,789,000 -762,000
Studies and
analyses.. 2,800,000 1,800,000 -1,000,000
Account-Wide
Adjustments:
Recreationa
l
equipment. 296,000 150,000 -146,000
Non-pay
inflation. 23,368,000 17,526,000 -5,842,000
Non-
operationa
l travel.. 39,334,000 37,503,000 -1,831,000
MPPC
contractin
g out..... N/A -500,000 -500,000
Undistribut
ed........ 0 -10,243,000 -10,243,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and Allowances
The bill includes $1,570,634,000 for pay and allowances for
Coast Guard personnel, which is a $12,354,000 (less than one
percent) decrease below the level provided for fiscal year
1995.
Pay raise.--The bill includes funds for a 2.2 percent pay
raise for both military and civilian personnel of the Coast
Guard. The President's budget proposed a 2.4 percent military
pay raise and a 2.2 percent raise for civilian personnel. The
Committee believes civilians and military personnel should
receive the same general pay raise. By the end of this year's
appropriations cycle it would be the Committee's intent to
provide Coast Guard military members the same pay raise as
provided for Department of Defense military. Additional funds
are provided for cost of living adjustments for military
members living in high cost areas of the United States. No
funds are included for civilian locality pay.
Special pays.--The bill includes all funds requested for
special pays for military personnel. The following table,
provided by the Coast Guard, summarizes those costs for fiscal
year 1996:
Special pay Amount
Responsibility pay...................................... \1\ $0
Diving pay.............................................. 62,472
Hostile fire imminent danger pay........................ \2\ 900,000
Sea pay................................................. 14,025,000
Certain places pay...................................... 151,000
Aviation career incentive pay........................... 6,266,100
Hazardous duty incentive pay............................ 5,107,200
Special duty assignment pay............................. 1,875,456
Selective reenlistment bonuses.......................... \3\ 1,635,492
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................... $30,022,720
\1\ Responsibility pay eliminated in fiscal year 1995.
\2\ Higher estimate for fiscal year 1996 over fiscal year 1993 and
fiscal year 1994 is due to the expected continuation of Persian Gulf,
Haitian and Adriatic theaters of operations. This estimate is lower than
expected fiscal year 1995 obligations.
\3\ No new payments, only previous years' installments due.
Troops to teachers program.--The Committee includes
$404,000 for Coast Guard participation in the ``troops to
teachers'' program, an increase of 45 percent over the $278,000
provided for fiscal year 1995.
Military essentiality.--The recommendation includes a
reduction of $1,000,000 assuming the conversion of
administrative support positions from military to civilian. A
recent General Accounting Office study found that many military
positions in the Department of Defense did not meet the
``military essentiality'' criteria, and should be converted to
civilian positions at a cost savings of approximately $15,000
per position. Following up that study, the House-passed Defense
Authorization Bill for fiscal year 1996 requires DOD to convert
10,000 military positions to civilian. The Committee's review
of positions in certain offices and facilities this year leads
to the inescapable conclusion that similar savings are possible
in the Coast Guard. This is supported by testimony from the DOT
Inspector General, who stated ``the Coast Guard actually has
several areas where military personnel could effectively be
replaced by civilians''. The recommendation assumes the
conversion of approximately 65 positions.
General detail.--The Committee recommends a reduction in
this overhead account from $174,812,000 to $171,812,000 due to
budget constraints and lower general detail requirements
resulting from the downsized military workforce.
Continental U.S. cost of living adjustment (CONUS COLA).--
The bill includes $6,796,000 for a cost of living adjustment
for military members living in high cost areas of the
continental United States. This discretionary pay was first
authorized in the 1995 Defense Authorization Act. Fiscal year
1996 is the first year of the program.
Leased housing.--The Committee recommends transferring
funds for leased housing from ``Military pay and allowances''
to a new budget line. The Committee believes that payments to
private contractors for leased housing should not be combined
in the same budget line with salaries and direct payments to
individuals. Furthermore, the Committee's recommendation brings
Coast Guard budgeting practices more into line with the
Department of Defense, which excludes such costs from military
personnel accounts.
Senior executive service (SES) staffing.--During Committee
hearings this year, the Coast Guard testified that there are
only ten senior executive service (SES) positions in the entire
service, and none are above the SES-4 level. Given the frequent
turnover of military personnel, the Committee believes more
stability and continuity is needed among senior management
levels of the Coast Guard. Continuity and ``corporate
knowledge'' will become even more critical in the coming years,
as the service's downsizing and restructuring accelerates. For
this reason, the Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000
above the budget request for the Coast Guard to hire ten
additional SES civilian positions.
Student intern programs.--The recommendation reduces
staffing for the ``student temporary employment program'' and
the ``student career experience program'' by one half due to
budget constraints. The recommendation provides 56 staff years
and $820,700 for these programs.
Permanent change of station.--The bill provides $60,233,000
for permanent change of station moves. This compares to
$59,644,000 provided for fiscal year 1995.
Medical care costs.--For the past two years, the Coast
Guard has testified that cost containment initiatives are
underway to address the high rates of medical cost inflation.
The Committee is disappointed, therefore, to note that these
costs continue to rise, from $119,600,000 in fiscal year 1994
to $127,800,000 in fiscal year 1995 and an estimated
$134,100,000 in fiscal year 1996. This is especially startling
considering the workforce has been reduced significantly over
that time period. Other agencies have been experiencing greatly
reduced inflation rates. The Committee recommends a hard freeze
on medical care costs, providing funds at the same level as in
fiscal year 1995, and encourages the Coast Guard to realize
such savings through more effective cost containment measures.
Accelerate existing streamlining.--The Committee
recommendation assumes a three month staff year rate for fiscal
year 1996 position reductions, compared to a six month rate
assumed in the President's budget request. This results in a
reduction of $4,850,000 from the budget estimate.
Accelerate restructuring plan.--After eighteen months, the
Coast Guard has nearly completed two major analyses of its
field organization, headquarters, and training facilities.
While not yet formally released by the Department of
Transportation, those studies are expected to propose
significant budgetary savings through closure of unneeded
facilities, consolidation of similar activities, and a
restructure of training facilities. The Committee applauds the
Coast Guard for taking this important initiative, and for
working to ensure that downsizing is accomplished with the
least impact on the delivery of essential services to the
public. Because of the Coast Guard's extensive field structure
and large headquarters presence, the Committee believes that
significant efficiencies can be achieved. The Committee's
recommendation assumes a portion of those savings
(approximately fifteen percent) can be achieved during fiscal
year 1996 through more aggressive implementation, resulting in
a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request.
Depot Level Maintenance
The bill includes $365,316,000 for depot level maintenance,
which is $3,112,000 more than the level provided for fiscal
year 1995 and the same as the budget estimate. The Committee
believes that maintenance and spare parts for Coast Guard
assets should receive a high priority for funding.
Operations And Support
The bill includes $393,896,000 for operations and support,
which is $813,000 more than the level provided for fiscal year
1995. This budget activity funds operations of medium- and
high-endurance cutters, area offices, district offices, air
stations, maintenance and logistics commands, and other
operational units.
Vessel traffic service (VTS) privatization.--The Committee
received testimony this year indicating that after full
implementation of the VTS 2000 program, the Coast Guard's
annual costs to operate and maintain VTS systems would be
approximately $65,000,000. Today (budgeted for fiscal year
1996), those costs are only $19,862,000. Given the significant
reductions that will be needed over the next seven years to
eliminate the federal deficit, and the predominantly local
benefits which accrue from the VTS program, the Committee
believes that VTS systems are a prime candidate for system-wide
privatization. In fact, the privately-run VTS system in Long
Beach, California appears to meet requirements without federal
support, and conducts its operations more efficiently and at
less cost than those systems run today by the Coast Guard.
Consequently, the Committee encourages the Coast Guard to begin
a long-term effort to privatize the existing VTS systems in
fiscal year 1996, and reduces the 1996 budget request by
$1,000,000 (five percent) assuming some initial savings from
that effort.
District offices.--The President's budget requests
$56,641,000 to support 1,896 positions at the Coast Guard's ten
district offices. The Coast Guard has the Department of
Transportation's most extensive field organization, with
districts, area commands, groups, bases, stations, and
maintenance and logistics commands. While some of this is
clearly required for the service to carry out its functions in
the field, it would appear the Coast Guard could achieve
budgetary savings and give more decisionmaking authority to
those units actually performing the activity by reducing the
number of oversight and planning layers in their field
organization. At a minimum, two district headquarters could be
consolidated with the area commands, and the Committee is
convinced that other efficiencies are possible as well. The
Committee recommendation provides $51,000,000 for district
headquarters offices in fiscal year 1996.
recruiting and training
The bill includes $69,943,000 for recruiting and training
support, a reduction of $1,921,000 from the fiscal year 1995
enacted level. This budget activity funds recruiting and
training activities including support for the Coast Guard
Academy and Coast Guard training centers in Yorktown, Virginia;
Petaluma, California; and Cape May, New Jersey.
Graduate school tuition.--The Coast Guard's budget request
for fiscal year 1996 includes $2,300,000 to pay graduate school
tuition for its employees. This is in addition to the estimated
$19,800,000 in salaries and benefits paid to those employees
while in school. Almost half of the tuition costs are provided
to lieutenants. The Committee questions whether it is truly
necessary for so many officers at this junior a rank to receive
graduate training at that point in their careers, or whether
the position descriptions for lieutenants require a graduate
degree. While the Committee understands that some graduate
training is necessary for effective management, given budget
constraints, the Committee recommends $1,300,000 for tuition, a
reduction of $1,000,000 from the budget request.
coast guard-wide centralized services and support
The bill includes $184,773,000 for Coast Guard-wide
centralized services and support, a reduction of $12,630,000
from the fiscal year 1995 enacted level and a reduction of
$4,953,000 from the budget request.
Civilian personnel office consolidation.--The Committee
does not agree with the Coast Guard's proposal to close four of
its five civilian personnel offices around the country and
consolidate into a single office. The Committee believes this
proposal is too extreme, and will have a detrimental impact on
service to the civilian workforce. Therefore, the
recommendation restores these funds ($393,000). In order to
partially offset this restoration, the Committee recommends a
reduction of $150,000 for the Military Personnel Center, which
is able to handle this modest reduction due to its larger
funding base.
FTS 2000.--The Committee recommends $10,626,000 for FTS
2000 telecommunications costs, an increase of 5.6 percent over
the most recent estimate for fiscal year 1995.
Headquarters administration.--The bill includes
$170,862,000 for Coast Guard headquarters administrative costs,
an increase of $2,842,000 (1.7 percent) over fiscal year 1995
and a 1.1 percent reduction from the budget request. Currently,
there are 2,435 billets in headquarters. In allocating
reductions to the Coast Guard, the Committee has tried to
preserve funding for elements of the service which provide
essential direct service to the public such as air and boat
stations, large cutters and patrol boats, and spare parts.
These mission-oriented activities have been preserved as a high
priority to the maximum extent possible. To achieve this,
however, some efficiencies in headquarters and other overhead
units are required. While the Committee allows the Commandant
the discretion to allocate this reduction, the Committee
suggests that staffing in the following offices be reviewed:
Office: No. of positions
Commandant/Vice Commandant.......................... 26
Public affairs...................................... 37
International affairs............................... 26
Quality staff....................................... 7
Management effectiveness............................ 18
Legal/Administrative Law Judges..................... 116
Headquarters command center......................... 56
Marine safety information management................ 38
Auxiliary, boating, and consumer affairs............ 50
Diversity/total quality management.................. 12
Workers' compensation.--Despite departmental budget
guidance to freeze each agency's requests for workers'
compensation costs in fiscal year 1996, the Coast Guard budget
includes an increase of $762,000. The Committee recommends
deleting that increase. As the Committee has encouraged in past
years, greater attempts should be made to find positions for
those currently on workers' compensation but eligible to return
to work. This would result in efficiencies allowing the
reduction in workers' compensation without adverse effect.
Studies and analyses.--The Committee recommendation
includes $1,800,000 for studies and analyses, a reduction of
$1,000,000 due to budget constraints.
Account-Wide Adjustments
Recreational equipment.--The President's request included
$296,000 for balls, bats, golf clubs, fitness machines, camping
equipment, outdoor grills, and related equipment for the Coast
Guard's morale, welfare, and recreation program. Given the
severe budget constraints facing the country, the Committee
believes such items should be reduced to a lower level. The
Committee recommends $150,000 for these items.
Non-pay inflation.--OMB policy states that President's
budget requests will not necessarily include an allowance for
the full rate of anticipated inflation. In effect, agencies are
expected to be able to absorb at least a portion of non-pay
inflation (i.e., inflation for accounts other than pay) through
increased efficiency and use of advanced office technologies.
For fiscal year 1996, OMB allowed agencies a maximum of 2.0
percent non-pay inflation. In the department, this standard was
applied inconsistently: some agencies included the full 2
percent, while others were provided smaller allowances. The
Committee's recommendation allows a 1.5 percent increase for
non-pay inflation for all modes of the department. Since the
Coast Guard budgeted for a 2 percent increase, this results in
a reduction of $5,842,000 from the budget estimate.
Non-operational travel.--In the Coast Guard, non-
operational travel (i.e., for training, conferences, and
miscellaneous purposes) has increased 6.8 percent on a per
capita basis between fiscal year 1994 and the fiscal year 1996
budget request. This year in hearings, the DOT Inspector
General expressed concern over the high amount of
administrative travel being taken throughout the department.
The Committee agrees that such travel should be curtailed to
the maximum extent possible. The Committee's recommendation
allows a travel budget of $1,004 per staff year, a per capita
increase of 2.5 percent over the fiscal year 1994-1996 time
period. Operational travel, budgeted at $27,226,000, is not
affected by this recommendation.
Military pay and personnel center contracting out.--The
Committee recommendation assumes savings of $500,000 from
contracting out operations of the Military Pay and Personnel
Center in Topeka, Kansas, as suggested this year by the
Inspector General. This center is responsible for the
processing of pay checks, travel reimbursement checks, and
other aspects of personnel finance administration within the
Coast Guard. The Committee believes this is a prime candidate
for contracting out.
Restructuring implementation costs.--The Committee has
provided $3,000,000 for operating expenses related to the
impending release of Coast Guard restructuring studies. The
Committee believes much restructuring is needed, and applauds
the Commandant for undertaking a wide-ranging review. While
approved by the Coast Guard, these studies have still not been
approved by the Secretary of Transportation or the Office of
Management and Budget. Once the administration's proposal is
clear, the Committee will also consider reprogramming
proposals. The Committee does wish to provide the Coast Guard
flexibility to obtain additional funding for this initiative
should it receive administration and Congressional approval
during the fiscal year. In order to facilitate rapid
implementation and provide flexible funding, the Committee bill
includes language under ``Acquisition, construction, and
improvements'' allowing the Coast Guard to transfer up to
$50,000,000 in available funding during fiscal year 1996 from
lower priority acquisition projects to finance restructuring
activities.
Undistributed.--The recommendation includes an
undistributed reduction of $10,243,000 due to budget
constraints. The department is accorded the flexibility to
allocate the reduction.
bill language
Motor vehicle purchase.--The bill includes a limitation on
the purchase of motor vehicles to five. This year, the Coast
Guard testified they had no plans to purchase any motor
vehicles during fiscal year 1996. While the Committee
considered a zero limitation, the proposed limitation of five
provides them some flexibility, should current plans change.
Drug enforcement expenses.--The bill specifies that no less
than $314,200,000 may be obligated or expended on drug
enforcement programs during fiscal year 1996. This is the same
amount as the budget estimate, and a 7 percent increase over
the $293,600,000 provided for fiscal year 1995. This resumes a
practice, begun several years ago, of including minimum amounts
in the bill for this important mission. The Committee
recommends no specific reductions in anti-drug activities, and
does not wish to see the Coast Guard reprogram funds away from
the budgeted level for those activities.
general provision
The bill continues as a general provision (Sec. 316)
language that would prohibit funds to plan, finalize, or
implement regulations that would establish a vessel traffic
safety fairway less than five miles wide between the Santa
Barbara traffic separation scheme and the San Francisco traffic
separation scheme. On April 27, 1989, the Department published
a notice of proposed rulemaking that would narrow the
originally proposed five-mile-wide fairway to two one-mile-wide
fairways separated by a two-mile-wide area where offshore oil
rigs could be built if Lease Sale 119 goes forward. Under this
revised proposal, vessels would be routed in close proximity to
oil rigs because the two-mile-wide non-fairway corridor could
contain drilling rigs at the edge of the fairways. The
Committee is concerned that this rule, if implemented, could
increase the threat of offshore oil accidents off the
California coast. Accordingly, the bill continues the language
prohibiting the implementation of this regulation.
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995.........................\1\ $362,950,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996....................... 428,200,000
Recommended in the bill................................. 375,175,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1995..................... +12,225,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 1996................... -53,025,000
\1\ Reductions of $12,600 to comply with working capital fund, awards
and procurement reform provisions not reflected.
The bill includes $375,175,000 for the capital acquisition,
construction, and improvement programs of the Coast Guard for
vessels, aircraft, other equipment, shore facilities, and
related administrative expenses, of which $32,500,000 is to be
derived from the oil spill liability trust fund. Consistent
with past practice, the bill also includes language
distributing the total appropriation by budget activity and
providing separate obligation availabilities appropriate for
the type of activity being performed. The Committee continues
to believe that these obligation availabilities provide fiscal
discipline and reduces long-term unobligated balances. However,
the bill does include authority to transfer funds for possible
restructuring activities, as previously described under
``Operating expenses''.
Committee Recommendation
The following table compares the fiscal year 1995 enacted
level, the fiscal year 1996 estimate, and the recommended level
by program, project and activity:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-----------------------------------------------
Program name 1996
1995 enacted 1996 estimate recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels:
Survey and design--
cutters and boats.. $750,000 $500,000 $500,000
Seagoing buoy tender
(WLB) replacement.. 36,000,000 65,000,000 65,000,000
Coastal buoy tender
(WLM) replacement.. 56,000,000 93,000,000 93,000,000
47-foot motor
lifeboat (MLB)
replacement project 31,000,000 500,000 500,000
Buoy boat
replacement project
(BUSL)............. 10,000,000 8,500,000 ..............
Polar icebreaker
replacement follow-
on................. 7,900,000 4,300,000 4,300,000
82-foot WPB
capability
replacement........ 10,000,000 4,000,000 ..............
Norwegian crewing
concept development
(NORCREW).......... .............. 2,000,000 2,000,000
Self propelled barge
replacement........ 2,500,000 900,000 900,000
Surface search radar
replacement project .............. 3,500,000 3,500,000
210-foot medium
endurance cutter
MMA................ 25,000,000 14,500,000 14,500,000
378-foot shipboard
command & control.. 5,000,000 1,300,000 1,300,000
Configuration
management......... .............. 5,700,000 5,700,000
Stalwart class
conversion......... 3,750,000 .............. ..............
Cutter Yocona re-
engining project
(reprogramming).... 4,400,000 .............. ..............
Aircraft:
Traffic alert &
collision avoidance
system (TCAS) phase
IV................. 3,900,000 13,000,000 10,000,000
Global positioning
system installation
phase VI........... 2,300,000 1,900,000 1,900,000
HH-65 Helicopter
main transmission
gearbox upgrade
phase II........... 2,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000
HC-130 side looking
airborne radar
(SLAR) upgrade..... .............. 2,100,000 2,100,000
HU-25B aireye system
replacement........ 1,600,000 .............. ..............
HU-25C falcon jet
modification....... 2,000,000 .............. ..............
TALON helicopter tie-
down project
(reprogramming).... 2,509,000 .............. ..............
Air interdiction/AEW
project
(reprogramming).... 605,000 .............. ..............
Other Equipment:
Supply center
computer
replacement........ 6,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Fleet logistics
system............. .............. 3,000,000 3,000,000
Vessel traffic
service (VTS)
system 2000........ 2,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
VTS equipment
replacement........ 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Marine information
for safety and law
enforcement (MISLE) .............. 11,000,000 11,000,000
Conversion of
software
applications....... 2,750,000 11,100,000 6,100,000
Finance center
information system
replacement........ 1,000,000 2,600,000 2,600,000
Differential GPS
transmitter
replacement........ .............. 1,700,000 ..............
Differential GPS
implementation--sec
ond district....... .............. 2,400,000 ..............
Search and rescue
simulation model
(SARSIM)........... .............. 500,000 500,000
Communication
systems 2000....... .............. 11,000,000 6,000,000
WLB/WLM support
facility........... .............. 1,500,000 1,500,000
Vessel navigation
training simulator. .............. 1,500,000 1,500,000
Local notice to
mariners automation .............. 500,000 500,000
Global maritime
distress and safety
system............. 1,800,000 500,000 500,000
Resource information
system for health
services........... 3,000,000 .............. ..............
Oil spill response
equipment.......... 2,500,000 .............. ..............
Search and rescue
management
information system. 900,000 .............. ..............
Communication
station Honolulu
transmitters....... 1,900,000 .............. ..............
Replace AR&SC
computer (phase IV) 2,000,000 .............. ..............
VTS upgrade and
expansion projects. 1,600,000 .............. ..............
Oil spill training
simulator.......... 1,250,000 .............. ..............
Shore Facilities and
Aids to Navigation:
Survey and design--
shore projects..... 10.000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000
Minor AC&I shore
construction
projects........... 6,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Streamlining
initiatives........ .............. 5,000,000 5,000,000
Air station
consolidation...... .............. 11,000,000 11,000,000
Coast Guard Yard
ship handling
facility (phase II) .............. 15,100,000 ..............
Public family
quarters........... 12,000,000 22,700,000 20,275,000
Station Boothbay
Harbor, ME--
renovate/expand.... .............. 2,800,000 2,800,000
Base South Portland,
ME--construct
station operations
bldg............... .............. 2,600,000 2,600,000
Base San Juan, PR--
reconstruction
(phase II)......... .............. 3,150,000 3,150,000
Station Port Isabel,
TX--reconstruct/
expand waterfront
facilities......... .............. 2,650,000 2,650,000
Station Portage, MI--
relocate/replace
station facilities. .............. 4,200,000 4,200,000
Station Chetco
River, OR--
construct mooring/
waterfront......... .............. 2,000,000 2,000,000
Station Honolulu,
HI--replacement.... .............. 5,000,000 5,000,000
Coast Guard Academy--
Roland Hall
renovation......... .............. 5,100,000 5,100,000
Waterways ATON
projects........... .............. 5,500,000 5,500,000
Air Station Miami,
FL--upgrade (phase
II)................ 8,400,000 .............. ..............
Support Center New
York--construct ANT/
ET shops........... 3,250,000 .............. ..............
Support Center
Seattle, WA--
reconstruct pier 37 10,300,000 .............. ..............
Station
Provincetown, MA--
replace wave
barrier............ 1,300,000 .............. ..............
Base San Juan--
reconstruction
(phase I).......... 10,750,000 .............. ..............
Base Honolulu--
electrical system.. 1,950,000 .............. ..............
Atlantic Strike
Team--construct
maint/equip storage
facility........... 5,000,000 .............. ..............
Waterways short
range aids projects 6,500,000 .............. ..............
Overseas LORAN
closure............ 13,900,000 .............. ..............
Personnel and Related
Support:
Personnel and
related support.... 44,200,000 .............. ..............
Direct personnel
costs.............. .............. 48,200,000 42,500,000
Core acquisition
costs.............. .............. 700,000 500,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total
appropriation.... 362,950,000 428,200,000 370,175,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels
The Committee recommends $191,200,000 for vessels, an
increase of $3,300,000 above the amount provided for fiscal
year 1995. Approximately 80 percent of this amount
($158,000,000) is to continue production of the Coast Guard's
new seagoing and coastal buoy tenders, which the Committee
considers a high priority due to the age of the current buoy
tender fleet.
Stern loading buoy boat replacement project.--The Committee
recommends no funds for this project in fiscal year 1996, a
reduction of $8,500,000 from the budget request. Funds were
provided in fiscal year 1995 to begin production. However, the
program has experienced significant delays because of the Coast
Guard's decision to award the contract as a small business set-
aside to a boatyard with no previous production experience.
Accordin |
