|
|
 |
|
[From the Senate Reports Online via GPO Access.
Check for accuracy before quoting or citing.]
Calendar No. 163
104th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 104-126
_______________________________________________________________________
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL,
1996
_______
August 4 (legislative day, July 10), 1995.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Hatfield, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2002]
The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the
bill (H.R. 2002) making appropriations for the Department of
Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, reports the same to
the Senate with amendments and recommends that the bill as
amended do pass.
Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 1996
Amount of bill passed by the House...................... $12,810,725,806
Amount of bill as reported to Senate.................... 12,613,811,567
Amount of budget estimates, 1996........................ 35,468,964,831
Fiscal year 1995 enacted................................ 14,214,401,000
C O N T E N T S
----------
SUMMARY OF MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
Page
Total obligational authority..................................... 4
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
Salaries and expenses............................................ 5
Office of Civil Rights........................................... 5
Transportation planning, research, and development............... 6
Office of Commercial Space Transportation........................ 6
Working capital fund............................................. 6
Payments to air carriers......................................... 7
Rental payments.................................................. 10
Headquarters facilities.......................................... 12
Minority Business Resource Center Program........................ 12
Minority business outreach....................................... 12
ICC sunset....................................................... 13
State infrastructure banks....................................... 13
Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program......... 14
U.S. Coast Guard
Operating expenses............................................... 23
Acquisition, construction, and improvements...................... 32
Environmental compliance and restoration......................... 40
Port safety development.......................................... 41
Alteration of bridges............................................ 41
Retired pay...................................................... 42
Reserve training................................................. 42
Research, development, test, and evaluation...................... 43
Boat safety...................................................... 43
Federal Aviation Administration
Operations....................................................... 44
Air Traffic Control Corporation.................................. 55
Facilities and equipment......................................... 58
Research, engineering, and development........................... 77
Grants-in-aid for airports....................................... 84
Aircraft Purchase Loan Guarantee Program......................... 89
Federal Highway Administration
Limitation on general operating expenses......................... 90
Administrative expenses.......................................... 91
Motor carrier safety operations.................................. 91
Highway-related safety grants.................................... 109
Federal-aid highways............................................. 110
Interstate substitute highways................................... 122
Right-of-way revolving fund...................................... 126
Motor carrier safety grants...................................... 127
Surface transportation projects.................................. 130
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Operations and research.......................................... 132
Highway traffic safety grants.................................... 145
Federal Railroad Administration
Office of the Administrator...................................... 150
Local Rail Freight Assistance Program............................ 151
Railroad safety.................................................. 152
Railroad research and development................................ 155
Northeast Corridor Improvement Program........................... 158
Railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing funds.......... 161
Next generation high-speed rail.................................. 162
Alaska railroad rehabilitation................................... 165
Pennsylvania Station redevelopment project....................... 165
Rhode Island rail development.................................... 166
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)....... 166
Federal Transit Administration
Administrative expenses.......................................... 171
Formula grants................................................... 171
University transportation centers................................ 173
Transit planning and research.................................... 173
Trust fund share of transit programs............................. 175
Discretionary grants............................................. 175
Mass transit capital fund........................................ 194
Interstate transfer grants--transit.............................. 194
Washington Metro................................................. 194
Violent crime reduction programs................................. 195
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
Operations and maintenance....................................... 196
Research and Special Programs Administration
Research and special programs.................................... 198
Pipeline safety.................................................. 204
Emergency preparedness grants.................................... 209
Office of Inspector General
Salaries and expenses............................................ 209
Bureau of Transportation Statistics.............................. 210
TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 211
National Transportation Safety Board:
Salaries and expenses........................................ 212
Emergency fund............................................... 213
Interstate Commerce Commission:
Salaries and expenses........................................ 213
Payments for directed rail service........................... 214
Panama Canal Commission: Panama Canal Revolving Fund............. 214
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority................... 215
TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS
General provisions............................................... 217
Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 220
Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 220
Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 221
Budgetary impact statement....................................... 227
Total Obligational Authority Provided--General Funds and Trust Funds
In addition to the appropriation of $12,613,811,567 in new
budget authority for fiscal year 1996, large amounts of
contract authority are provided by law, the obligation limits
for which are contained in the annual appropriations bill. The
principal items in this category are the trust funded programs
for Federal-aid highways, for mass transit, and for airport
development grants. For fiscal year 1996, estimated obligation
limitations total $21,320,363,536.
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 appropriations acts (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 and
discretionary grant allocations made through either bill or
report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made
pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for
facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration, 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.
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Salaries and Expenses
Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................ $57,625,000
Budget estimate, 1996................................... 57,459,000
House allowance......................................... 55,011,500
Committee recommendation................................ 56,500,000
\1\ Excludes amounts transferred for civil rights activities.
Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for establishment
of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation [OST]. The
Office of the Secretary is composed of the Secretary and the
Deputy Secretary immediate offices, the Office of the General
Counsel, and five assistant secretarial offices for
transportation policy, aviation and international affairs,
budget and programs, governmental affairs, and administration.
These secretarial offices have policy development and central
supervisory and coordinating functions related to the overall
planning and direction of the Department of Transportation,
including staff assistance and general management supervision
of the counterpart offices in the operating administrations of
the Department.
The Minority Business Resource Center, previously funded in
this account, is proposed to be funded under a separate account
in 1996.
The Committee recommends a total of $56,500,000 for the
salaries and expenses of the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation including $60,000 for reception and
representation expenses.
Office of Civil Rights
Appropriations, 1995.................................... ( <SUP>1 )
Budget estimate, 1996................................... $12,793,000
House allowance......................................... 6,554,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,083,000
\1\ Transfer authority for $5,376,000 included under salaries and
expenses.
The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the
Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity
matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for
the operating administrations, investigating claims that small
businesses were denied certification or improperly certified as
disadvantaged business enterprises, and overseeing the
Department's conduct of its civil rights responsibilities and
making final determinations on civil rights complaints. In
addition, the Civil Rights Office is responsible for enforcing
laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in federally
operated and federally assisted transportation programs. In
fiscal year 1995, the management of internal civil rights
activities was consolidated in OST with transfer authority
provided in the ``Salaries and expenses'' account. In fiscal
year 1996, a separate appropriation is requested which will
fund all civil rights activities in the Department including
handling of external matters, thereby completing the effort
initiated in 1995.
The Committee concurs with the administration's proposal
and has provided a total of $12,083,000 for the Office of Civil
Rights.
Transportation Planning, Research, and Development
Appropriations, 1995.................................... $8,293,000
Budget estimate, 1996................................... 15,710,000
House allowance......................................... 3,309,000
Committee recommendation
9,710,000
The Office of the Secretary performs those research
activities and studies which can more effectively or
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This
research effort supports the planning, research and development
activities, and systems development needed to assist the
Secretary in the formulation of national transportation
policies. The program is carried out primarily through
contracts with other Federal agencies, educational
institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private
firms. The Committee has fully funded the integrated personnel/
payroll system at $3,900,000 and the document management system
at $1,000,000, but has deferred funding the new automated
procurement system, -$6,000,000.
Office of Commercial Space Transportation
Operations and Research
Appropriations, 1995.................................... $6,060,000
Budget estimate, 1996................................... 6,541,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation
...........................
The Office of Commercial Space Transportation provides
regulatory, research and development, and studies needed to
carry out the Secretary's responsibilities as defined in
Executive Order 12465 to encourage, facilitate, and promote
commercial space launches by the United States private sector
and to license and regulate commercial launches, launch site
operations, and certain payloads under the Commercial Launch
Act (Public Law 98-575).
The Department's reorganization plans would shift this
activity to the FAA. The Committee has included funding for
this office within the Federal Aviation Administration's
``Operations'' account.
Working Capital Fund
Limitation, 1995........................................ ($93,000,000)
Limitation estimate, 1996............................... (104,364,000)
House allowance......................................... (102,231,000)
Committee recommendation
(104,364,000)
The working capital fund [WCF] provides for centralized
financing of certain common administrative services (for
example, publishing and graphics and computer services) in the
interest of economy and efficiency. The fund is reimbursed from
the appropriations of the operating agencies of the Department
at rates that recover all operating expenses in full.
A budget amendment proposes to eliminate all appropriations
language, consistent with other working capital fund accounts
in the Government. As part of its reorganization proposals, the
Department plans to create a service bureau financed by the
working capital fund to perform common services. The
administration also proposed the elimination of any
appropriation limitations on the WCF to facilitate the
responsive operation of the service bureau.
Payments to Air Carriers
(liquidation of contract authorization)
(airport and airway trust fund)
Appropriations, 1995.................................... ($33,423,000)
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance......................................... (15,000,000)
Committee recommendation
(26,738,536)
The Secretary of Transportation administers the section 419
Subsidy Program, which was created as part of the Airline
Deregulation Act of 1978. Subsidy under this program is paid to
airlines, primarily commuter carriers, to support the provision
of essential air service to points that would not be served but
for the subsidy. The budget proposed elimination of this
program in 1996.
Many points are located in remote rural areas: 81 of 100
communities served by the Essential Air Service Program are
more than 100 highway miles and 47 are more than 200 miles from
the nearest hub airport as defined by section 419. Thirty more
communities are located in Alaska, where, in all but two cases,
year-round road access does not exist. Without air service,
such communities would be further isolated from the Nation's
economic centers. Moreover, businesses are typically interested
in locating in areas that have convenient access to scheduled
air service. Loss of service would seriously hamper small
communities' ability to attract new business or even to retain
those they now have, resulting in further strain on local
economies and loss of jobs.
The Committee recommends a liquidation of contract
authorization of $26,738,536 for fiscal year 1996 payments to
air carriers which is the same as the limitation on
obligations.
limitation on obligations
The Committee recommends an obligation limitation of
$26,738,536, which is $26,738,536 above the administration's
request.
Under the Committee's recommended level, funding would not
be available to: (1) points that are located fewer than 75
highway miles from the nearest large-, medium-, or small-hub
airport; and (2) points that require a rate of subsidy per
passenger in excess of $200, when that point is less than 200
miles from a large or medium hub.
The amount recommended by the Committee would be for the
following points:
PROJECTED SUBSIDIZED ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE [EAS] FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
mileage to Average daily Annual subsidy
nearest hub enplanements rate projected Subsidy per
States/communities (small, at EAS point for fiscal passenger
medium, or (year ending year 1996
large) June 30, 1994)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona:
Kingman..................................... 103 10.7 $162,880 $24.34
Page........................................ 274 20.5 201,466 15.66
Prescott.................................... 103 41.1 162,880 6.34
Arkansas:
El Dorado/Camden............................ 108 10.9 850,472 124.89
Harrison.................................... 139 10.3 756,491 117.60
California: Crescent City....................... 233 13.0 298,868 36.68
Colorado:
Cortez...................................... 253 27.9 144,273 8.27
Lamar....................................... 162 4.1 172,139 67.32
Illinois: Mount Vernon.......................... 93 7.9 576,192 116.12
Iowa: Ottumwa................................... 92 6.3 309,704 79.07
Kansas:
Dodge City.................................. 156 13.1 280,874 34.15
Garden City................................. 209 21.9 280,874 20.49
Goodland.................................... 190 3.2 172,139 139.67
Great Bend.................................. 116 4.8 280,874 92.76
Hays........................................ 175 16.7 280,874 26.90
Liberal/Guymon.............................. 162 10.1 172,139 27.28
Topeka...................................... 76 31.8 47,788 2.40
Maine:
Bar Harbor.................................. 164 17.6 452,889 41.09
Rockland.................................... 79 11.2 452,889 64.60
Minnesota:
Fairmont.................................... 153 4.0 191,688 76.28
Fergus Falls................................ 185 10.9 227,340 33.21
Mankato..................................... 75 4.5 191,688 68.58
Missouri:
Cape Girardeau.............................. 133 18.8 254,525 21.58
Fort Leonard Wood........................... 130 12.2 293,184 38.52
Kirksville.................................. 158 8.4 366,503 69.39
Montana:
Glasgow..................................... 279 5.9 350,719 94.33
Glendive.................................... 223 2.9 608,761 339.14
Havre....................................... 251 4.4 507,660 185.14
Lewiston.................................... \1\ 400 3.6 507,660 224.73
Miles City.................................. \1\ 400 3.0 608,760 321.59
Sidney...................................... 273 7.7 608,761 125.73
Wolf Point.................................. 295 6.3 350,719 88.97
Nebraska:
Alliance.................................... 242 2.3 223,029 151.93
Chadron..................................... 301 2.3 223,029 152.66
Hastings.................................... 160 3.0 178,810 93.86
Kearney..................................... 186 11.2 507,672 72.38
McCook...................................... 259 3.4 328,862 155.86
North Platte................................ 282 5.2 144,292 44.05
Scottsbluff................................. 202 8.6 144,292 26.92
Nevada: Ely..................................... 236 5.7 727,082 203.61
New Mexico:
Alamogordo/Holloman AFB..................... 92 11.6 277,360 38.30
Clovis...................................... 106 14.6 310,860 34.01
Silver City/Hurley/Deming................... 163 10.4 408,814 62.62
New York:
Massena..................................... 149 20.1 205,665 16.32
Ogdensburg.................................. 127 10.5 205,665 31.27
North Dakota:
Devils Lake................................. 403 11.8 322,943 42.75
Dickinson................................... 313 7.5 163,295 34.57
Jamestown................................... 304 10.8 322,943 11.94
Oklahoma:
Enid........................................ 91 9.4 446,752 70.71
Ponca City.................................. 88 11.8 446,752 56.26
Pennsylvania: Oil City/Franklin................. 91 30.5 168,592 18.87
Puerto Rico: Ponce.............................. 80 31.2 325,247 16.63
South Dakota: Yankton........................... 96 10.1 417,220 67.50
Texas: Brownwood................................ 153 4.7 429,722 162.27
Utah:
Cedar City.................................. 173 18.7 503,354 43.11
Moab........................................ 241 6.1 484,552 127.51
Vernal...................................... 171 17.0 305,311 28.70
Virginia: Staunton.............................. 108 35.0 308,054 14.04
Washington: Ephrata/Moses Lake.................. 122 16.1 326,875 32.42
West Virginia:
Beckley..................................... 186 19.3 250,498 20.74
Clarksburg/Fairmont......................... 107 8.8 259,689 46.92
Morgantown.................................. 75 12.0 259,689 34.60
Princeton/Bluefield......................... 145 21.6 250,498 18.56
Wyoming: Worland................................ 164 9.1 167,583 29.38
---------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal of long-term non-Alaska rates.... .............. .............. 21,169,673 ..............
Other projected subsidy obligations:
Long-term Alaska rates...................... .............. .............. 1,806,143 ..............
Expected subsidy rate adjustments and
carrier selections in fiscal year 1996..... .............. .............. 2,262,720 ..............
Estimated fiscal year 1996 hold-in
compensation............................... .............. .............. 1,500,000 ..............
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total projected fiscal year 1996
obligations............................ .............. .............. 26,738,536 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distance from medium or large hub airport.
Payments to Air Carriers
(rescission on contract authorization)
(airport and airway trust fund)
Rescission, 1995........................................ ($4,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1996 \1\............................... (38,600,000)
House allowance......................................... (23,600,000)
Committee recommendation................................ (11,861,464)
\1\ Consistent with the budget proposal to eliminate this program in
1996, contract authority previously enacted is proposed to be rescinded.
The House has included bill language which would rescind
$23,600,000 of contract authority funding for the payments to
air carriers program, because the fully authorized level of
$38,600,000 in contract authority would not be available under
the House's proposed $15,000,000 limitation on obligations.
Under the Senate proposal only $11,861,464 of the contract
authority would be unused.
Payments to Air Carriers
(Rescission)
Rescission, 1995........................................................
Budget estimate, 1996................................... -$6,786,971
House allowance......................................... -6,786,971
Committee recommendation
-6,786,971
The amount proposed for rescission represents balances 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'' account.
Starting in fiscal year 1992, this program has been funded from
the ``Payments to air carriers trust fund'' account. 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
Appropriations, 1995.................................... $144,419,000
Budget estimate, 1996 \1\ \2\........................... 143,436,000
House allowance......................................... 130,803,000
Committee recommendation................................ 139,689,000
\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 to
offset an increase for aviation security.
Rental payments to the General Services Administration
[GSA] are included as a separate line-item appropriation in the
bill.
The Committee has provided an appropriation of $139,689,000
for rental payments in fiscal year 1996, plus $18,750,000 to be
paid by reimbursement from the highway trust fund. This is a
2.5-percent decrease from the 1995 enacted level.
GSA RENTAL PAYMENTS \1\
[Dollars and square feet in thousands]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1994enacted Fiscal year Fiscal year 1995enacted Fiscal year 1996request
Administration -------------------------- 1994 GSA ---------------------------------------------------
Funding Square feet billings Funding Square feet Funding Square feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Highway Administration............................... [$17,524] [987] [$16,503] [$18,044] [987] [$18,750] [991]
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration............... 4,511 154 4,407 4,716 155 4,483 155
Federal Railroad Administration.............................. 3,524 141 3,082 3,363 135 3,318 138
Federal Transit Administration............................... 3,295 108 3,184 3,332 109 3,317 108
Federal Aviation Administration.............................. 74,858 4,063 71,024 75,820 4,374 74,710 4,082
U.S. Coast Guard............................................. 44,746 2,430 40,602 42,281 2,347 41,028 2,308
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.................. 175 6 170 181 6 169 6
Research and Special Programs Administration................. 2,303 76 2,258 2,378 77 2,459 80
Office of the Inspector General.............................. 2,604 95 2,309 2,579 94 2,542 94
Office of Secretary of Transportation........................ 13,475 1,442 13,257 9,679 1,440 11,306 1,441
Bureau of Transportation Statistics.......................... 114 3 114 90 3 104 7
OST--rental payments to GSA.................................. [149,605] ........... [140,407] [144,419] ........... [143,436] ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................... 149,605 8,518 140,407 144,419 8,740 143,436 8,419
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rescissions.............................................. [1,781] ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Federal Highway Administration............................... 17,524 945 16,476 18,044 987 18,750 991
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Department of Transportation (excludes MarAd)... 165,348 9,463 156,883 162,463 9,727 162,186 9,410
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Enacted as a single account under the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. The budgets propose appropriations language which directs the
reimbursement of FHWA GSA rent from FHWA LGOE account to the consolidated account.
Headquarters Facilities
Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996................................... $331,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation
...........................
The administration has requested funding for the
acquisition or construction of a Department of Transportation
headquarters building. Leases for two headquarters buildings
will expire within the next 8 years--Nassif building in 2000
and Transpoint in 2003. Since purchase of headquarters space
will be more cost effective than leasing, this strategy
includes the acquisition of 1.1 million square feet of space
near the current location. Funding is requested in 1996 to
provide for orderly planning and acquisition of the space.
Funds are budgeted in DOT as a result of a change in
administrative policy to budget for space acquisition in the
affected agency rather than through GSA.
Minority Business Resource Center Program
Appropriations, 1995.................................... $1,900,000
Budget estimate, 1996................................... 1,900,000
House allowance......................................... 1,900,000
Committee recommendation
1,900,000
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
[OSDBU]/Minority Business Resource Center [MBRC].--The OSDBU/
MBRC provides assistance in obtaining short-term working
capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-
owned businesses [DBE/MBE/WBE's]. In fiscal year 1996, the
short-term loan program will focus on the lending of working
capital to DBE/MBE/WBE's for transportation-related projects in
order to strengthen their competitive and productive
capabilities.
Since fiscal year 1993, the loan program has been a
separate line item appropriation, which reflects the
President's budget proposal, which segregated such activities
in response to changes made by the Federal Credit Reform Act of
1990. The limitation on direct loans under the Minority
Business Resource Center is at the administration's requested
level of $15,000,000.
The Department is projecting that the authorized loan level
of $15,000,000 will be reached in fiscal years 1995 and 1996.
The program provides a valuable source of working capital for
minority businesses to manage their transportation-related
contracts.
Minority Business Outreach
Appropriations, 1995.................................... ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996................................... $2,900,000
House allowance......................................... 2,900,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,100,000
\1\ Previously funded under OST, salaries and expenses.
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 support to
historically black and Hispanic colleges. Separate funding is
requested by the administration since this program provides
grants and contract assistance that serves DOT-wide goals and
not just OST purposes.
ICC Sunset
Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996................................... $4,705,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation
4,705,000
A separate salaries and expenses request was included in
the budget for $4,705,000 representing functions that would
transfer to DOT upon sunset of the Interstate Commerce
Commission. The administration proposed legislation to sunset
the Interstate Commerce Commission with residual rail and motor
carrier functions transferring to the DOT. 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.
State Infrastructure Banks
Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996 \1\............................... $2,000,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 250,000,000
\1\ The administration included funding to capitalize State
infrastructure banks in the ``Unified Transportation Infrastructure
Investment Program'' account.
The Committee has included a general provision, section
349, to establish infrastructure banks. The bill language
allows States to deposit funds into the bank from non-Federal
or Federal sources, including apportioned highway funds, for
initial capital of the bank. In addition, the Committee has
appropriated $250,000,000 from the airport and airway trust
fund to cover expected aviation-related infrastructure
improvements.
The Committee considers the Alameda transportation corridor
in Los Angeles County, CA, as an example of a project that
would greatly benefit from the innovative financing option as
provided in this bill. The project will streamline rail and
highway transportation between the Ports of Los Angeles and
Long Beach, and intermodal connections in downtown Los Angeles.
The rail portion of the project will consolidate the operations
of three freight carriers into one higher speed corridor and
eliminate conflicts with highway crossings. Highways will also
be improved to provide better access from the ports to the
freeways. The increased transportation efficiency will provide
the added benefit of decreased air pollution.
The Senate recently designated the route as a high-priority
corridor on the National Highway System, enabling the Secretary
of Transportation to work cooperatively with the project
sponsors on using creative financing to advance the project,
including eligibility for a line of credit. Shipping revenues
from the completed project will enable the sponsors to repay
construction financing.
Unified Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program
Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996................................... $24,392,976,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation
...........................
The budget request submitted 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,
reflecting the administration's initiative to shift programs to
State and local decisionmaking.
While infrastructure spending is $2,300,000,000 below
comparable fiscal year 1995 funding, new and more flexible
funding mechanisms are proposed which should allow States and
localities to stretch and leverage reduced Federal dollars. The
new programs proposed include an $18,000,000,000 unified
allocation grant that will be available to States and
localities to spend on their transportation priorities. 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 line items in UTIIP. Also
included is $1,100,000,000 for prior commitments including full
funding 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
1995 -------------------------------
comparable Current law
\1\ UTIIP policy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and local
Unified grant........... \2\ 22,911,258 \2\ 23,941,663 18,000,000
State infrastructure
banks.................. .............. .............. 2,000,000
Transit operating
assistance............. 710,000 500,000 500,000
Prior commitment (LOI's,
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 initiatives 24,635,276 25,594,635 21,652,972
Direct Federal Programs
Discretionary grants
(new program).......... .............. \3\ 300,000 1,000,000
Federal lands........... 448,000 \4\ 348,432 441,775
Research and development
\5\.................... 239,079 217,237 219,027
Grants to Amtrak........ 772,000 750,000 750,000
Northeast corridor
improvement project.... 200,000 235,000 235,000
Pennsylvania 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 section 1003(c),
for example, Federal lands.
\2\ Includes portions of Federal-aid highways, grants-in-aid for
airports (except for existing LOI's), transit formula capital and
discretionary grants (except for FFGA's), and local rail freight
assistance (fiscal year 1995 only).
\3\ Congestion relief initiative.
\4\ Estimated obligations.
\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.
general provisions
Advisory committee cap.--The Committee has included bill
language which would limit the total amount to be spent for
advisory committees to $850,000. Twenty-eight committees
currently exist to provide advisory services to nine different
modal and administrative agencies of the Department of
Transportation. The amount recommended is the same as the
fiscal year 1995 level. The House has not included bill
language which caps advisory committee expenses.
The Committee believes that the Department's use of
advisory committees, when carried out judiciously, is a cost-
effective means of obtaining advice and information. Advisory
committees generally have the advantages of timeliness and
objectivity over the alternatives of internal task forces and
external contracting. These advantages are especially germane
when the issues being studied are subjective and controversial
and require conclusions to be drawn on the basis of qualitative
data. The Committee strongly encourages DOT to continue to draw
heavily on the expertise, guidance, and breadth of the
intelligent transportation systems community perspective of the
Intelligent Transportation Society of America and the avionics
expertise of the RTCA.
Department appointees.--The Committee has included bill
language, which is similar to that included in previous years,
which limits the total number of political and Presidential
appointees in the Department of Transportation. The
Department's appointee cap is set at 100.
Cooperative agreements.--The Committee continued a general
provision, included in the fiscal year 1995 appropriations
bill, which will grant the Secretary of Transportation specific
statutory authority to enter into grants, cooperative
agreements, and other transactions with any entity in execution
of the technology reinvestment project [TRP] authorized under
the Defense Conversion, Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance
Act of 1992 and related legislation.
Telecommuting public information program.--The Committee
has included a general provision which directs the Department
of Transportation to identify successful telecommuting programs
used by Government agencies and private companies and to
publicize information about such programs in order to broaden
public awareness of the benefits of telecommuting. The
Secretary would also be required to report to Congress on his
findings, conclusions, and recommendations with respect to
telecommuting within 1 year of enactment. It is in the national
interest to encourage telecommuting because it can enable
flexible family-friendly employment, reduce air pollution, and
conserve energy.
Bonus and award payments.--The Department of Transportation
has budgeted $26,627,927 for performance awards for all
employee levels. All of the bonus and award payments are
discretionary. The Committee has included language limiting the
allowable Department bonuses and awards to the amounts depicted
below.
In each of the accounts that contain personnel funds, the
reduction associated with the bonuses and awards is depicted as
an accountwide adjustment. The total amount recommended for
each agency versus the 1996 budget request is depicted below.
The Committee has included a general provision in the bill
which limits funds for employee bonuses and awards to
$25,875,075.
PERFORMANCE AWARDS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Agency Fiscal year 1996 budget Committee
1995 limitation estimate recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the
Secretary........... $662,036 $681,000 $662,036
Coast Guard.......... 1,728,626 1,720,000 1,720,000
Federal Aviation
Administration...... 20,957,888 21,678,000 20,957,888
Federal Highway
Administration...... 1,342,432 1,303,500 1,303,500
Bureau of
Transportation
Statistics.......... 13,981 22,427 18,000
National Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration...... 304,897 305,000 304,897
Federal Railroad
Administration...... 307,900 314,000 307,900
Federal Transit
Administration...... 220,857 221,000 220,857
St. Lawrence Seaway
Development
Corporation......... 49,217 49,000 49,000
Research and Special
Programs
Administration \1\.. 148,170 148,000 145,000
Office of Inspector
General............. 185,996 186,000 185,996
--------------------------------------------------
Total.......... 25,922,000 26,627,927 25,875,075
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes Volpe National Transportation Systems Center.
DOT REORGANIZATION
Both the administration and Congress have been engaged in a
fundamental reassessment of the means by which the Federal
Government fulfills its responsibilities to the American
people. The President initiated the ``National Performance
Review'' [NPR] soon after taking office, and it has already
produced substantial downsizing and performance gains at DOT.
Efforts to reduce annual deficits have also put increasing
pressure on the Department to find ways to do more with less.
It has become clear that the most fundamental barrier to
implementing broad-based, flexible, and well balanced
transportation policy and programs is the outmoded division of
authority among the different modes of transportation. DOT was
originally created as a holding company for existing agencies,
including the Federal Highway Administration, the Coast Guard,
and the Federal Aviation Administration. Over time, new
organizations have been created or grafted onto this structure,
so DOT now includes nine separate agencies, plus the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics. This brings with it tremendous
redundancy, particularly in administrative and headquarters
activities targeted by the NPR for substantial streamlining.
Further, it means a high degree of complexity and potential
confusion for DOT customers--in industry, State and local
government, and the public at large--who now must go to many
separate offices for different services and programs.
Organization change is also essential as ambitious goals are
implemented for downsizing of the Department.
The DOT proposal for consolidation, which was submitted to
Congress on April 4, 1995, involves three major areas. First,
all surface and maritime activities, other than Coast Guard and
the St. 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 bridge-related functions to the ITA. The SLSDC is already a
wholly owned Government corporation and would be made a free-
standing entity, eliminating an additional management layer.
The following table lists those accounts affected by the
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; and 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; and
Research, engineering, and development.
Accounts proposed to be included in the Coast Guard:
Operating expenses; Acquisition, construction, and
improvements; Environmental compliance and restoration; Retired
pay; Reserve training; and Research, development, test, and
evaluation.
Account proposed to be established as an independent agency:
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation: Operations and
maintenance.
IMPACTS OF BUDGET CUTS ON TRANSPORTATION
Under the budget resolution, Federal transportation
spending will decrease significantly, from an outlay level of
$39,300,000,000 in fiscal year 1995 to $32,000,000,000 in
fiscal year 2002, a cut of approximately 20 percent in nominal
dollars. Such a dramatic reduction clearly calls for a
fundamental review of transportation programs, and the roles of
Federal, State, and local governments and the private sector in
meeting transportation needs.
Absent changes in the current structure of transportation
programs, the cuts in the budget resolution will be
devastating. Existing programs were not designed to absorb such
cuts and the projected spending levels will not support current
programs and services. Both the Senate Budget Committee in its
report, and the House-Senate conference in its report, noted
this and called for major changes in the Department of
Transportation and its programs, including but not limited to
program downsizing, streamlining and consolidation, and air
traffic control privatization.
The top priority of our economic agenda is deficit
reduction, and transportation must play a role in that effort.
However, if this is carried out as nothing more than a budget-
cutting exercise, without changes in the way Government
provides services, the results on the Nation's mobility and
economy could be devastating. These reductions not only provide
an opportunity for revamping transportation programs, but also
demand it, to ensure that at the same time that we carry
through on our commitment to reduce the deficit, we also
maintain our commitment to a safe and efficient national
transportation system.
Reform of transportation programs should be made in the
context of overall governmental reform efforts underway in the
administration and the Congress. Principles such as downsizing,
streamlining, and the introduction of market forces can and
should be a part of any DOT reorganization. Such actions can
eliminate redundancies, such as the existence of 10 separate
personnel and budget offices throughout the Department. This
step would not only make the Department more efficient in its
use of taxpayer funds, but also maximize the investment in
infrastructure and services, rather than in a Federal
bureaucracy.
Investment in transportation infrastructure.--Recent
reports indicate that America's infrastructure deficit, the
incremental cost above and beyond existing expenditures of
bringing our highways and bridges into good repair, is more
than $300,000,000,000. At the same time, transportation demand
is growing. The impacts of this situation are startling. Over
70 percent of peak hour travel on urban interstates now occurs
under congested conditions. The Nation's passenger rail system
is starved for capital improvement. With American businesses
increasingly relying on an efficient, well-maintained
intermodal transportation network to serve just-in-time
delivery systems, disinvestment in transportation
infrastructure could have devastating impacts on our mobility
and on our economic well-being.
Under these circumstances, a variety of strategies are
necessary to stretch the Federal dollar and attract investment
from new sources, including the private sector. DOT has
successfully launched an innovative finance initiative designed
to increase private investment in transportation. As Federal
funding becomes more restricted, however, efforts must focus on
eliminating redtape, and focusing investments in as efficient a
way as possible. The administration has proposed greater
flexibility in transportation funding and project selection,
with a greater reliance on the planning process created under
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.
Particularly given the budgetary constraints facing
transportation, this approach merits serious consideration.
Air traffic control.--An area of particular concern is the
operation of the air traffic control system. This concern is
widespread, as evidenced by such proposals as the
administration's plan for a Government-owned corporation to
take over the system, to the budget resolution's call for a
privatized system, to various proposals to make the FAA an
independent agency.
The Committee has been frustrated with the inability of the
FAA, working under the traditional governmental structure and
rules, to keep its modernization program on track and with the
pattern of cost overruns and inefficiencies, that have plagued
the FAA. Even with the significant and positive changes
recently made, the prospects for a system that can keep pace
with the demands of a growing aviation industry are dim unless
fundamental changes are made in the structure and financing of
the air traffic control system.
The provision of air traffic control [ATC] services is a
unique function in government. Unlike traditional regulatory or
grant-making functions, ATC services are directly and actively
linked with the day-to-day operations of an entire industry. As
the industry grows, so must the ability to serve it through
ATC. Over the last decade, this Committee has worked to provide
adequate funding to help match services with demand. However,
the budget resolution seriously jeopardizes the Committee's
ability to provide support services that keep up with demand.
It is projected by the FAA that the demand for ATC services
will grow by 18 percent from fiscal year 1995 to fiscal year
2002. However, under the budget resolution, the resources
available to the FAA, in the form of outlays, would shrink by
approximately 19 percent in that same timeframe. Under this
scenario, the level of service that exists today simply cannot
be supported.
COMMITTEE RESPONSE TO BUDGET RESOLUTION
The majority of the changes necessary to address the out-
year budget problems comes under the jurisdiction of other
committees. To date, no significant transportation reform
legislation has been considered in the Senate. However, because
of the need to begin dealing with the budgetary realities, and
in an attempt to minimize adverse impacts on the Department's
programs and services, the Committee has taken several key
steps to provide new flexibility and to begin introducing the
necessary elements of governmental reform. These measures are
described below. The Committee looks forward to the
consideration of more comprehensive reforms to the Department
and its programs and services by the authorizing committees,
and will take those changes into account when preparing future
appropriations for the Department.
State and regional infrastructure banks.--The Committee has
included a general provision, section 349, to establish a new
funding mechanism for States' infrastructure. Eligibility for
State infrastructure banks [SIB] would be the same as under the
administration's proposed unified allocation. This provides for
a surface transportation program which includes all currently
eligible ISTEA activities as well as additional surface
transportation activities such as freight rail and port access.
It also includes all currently eligible aviation activities and
certain new air eligibility such as off-airport access roads.
The Committee believes that large intermodal projects and
projects with their own revenue streams make the best
candidates. Under the Committee's proposal, SIB's will be
initially capitalized at $250,000,000 from the airport trust
fund and funds deposited in the bank by States using
apportioned highway funds.
Funds would be apportioned among the States, in order to
provide State and local governments with enhanced ability to
tap private markets for infrastructure projects; to enter into
shared-financing partnerships with private transportation
entities; and to create new intergovernmental financing
partnerships among State and sub-State entities. SIB's would
have limited ongoing Federal financial oversight and would have
no federally imposed sub-State or population set-aside nor any
functional set-asides. State participation in SIB's would be
voluntary.
In addition to project loans, SIB's could also finance
various forms of credit enhancement, acquisition or lease of
rolling stock for the purpose of lease pooling, back-stop
financing for construction loans, pooling of debt issuances,
and refinancing of outstanding debt. SIB's could also receive
grants of leveraged funds or fund transferred to the SIB from a
State's other Federal infrastructure program funds.
According to AASHTO, about 17 States have current
legislation or proposed legislation which is directed toward
establishing SIB's or SIB-type institutions. The Committee
believes that all 50 States could participate in the SIB's in
one form or another.
FAA personnel and procurement reform.--Sections 350 and 351
of the Committee bill provide that funds provided for FAA
operations and capital improvements are exempt from various
Federal personnel and procurement requirements. This will
result in the more efficient modernization of the ATC system,
and in a more efficient and cost-effective deployment of the
air traffic control work force. This does not, however, do away
with the need for fundamental reform of the budget process with
regard to air traffic control. It is intended only as an
interim step toward a reformed air traffic control structure.
Aviation user fee structure.--The Committee directs the
Department to prepare a new aviation user fee structure for air
traffic control and other services that would more closely
align payments with costs imposed, and to submit a report on
such a new structure not later than December 1, 1995. This
would assist in preparing a more accurate determination of
system needs, and in the consideration of an alternative budget
treatment for air traffic control and other aviation funding.
Report on impacts of budget cuts.--The Committee directs
the Department to submit to the Committee, not later than
November 1, 1995, a report on the impacts on transportation of
the budget resolution if no significant changes in
transportation authorizations occur. This report shall include
discussion of services that would be discontinued, programs
that would be eliminated, and the reductions in investment
programs that would result from lower levels of spending
without the benefit of changes such as those assumed in the
budget resolution.
Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking [ANPRM].--The FAA is
directed to initiate, in not more than 90 days, an ANPRM on the
range of regulatory and operational changes, and their impacts,
necessitated by funding limitations that would result from a
lack of change in the FAA's structure and funding. Issues
addressed in the ANPRM should include: closure of level I or II
air traffic towers; closure of flight service stations; delays
in the issuance of aircraft, airmen, and other certificates;
the effect on delays in the aviation system and any measures
necessary to address increased delays; impacts on airport
capacity and safety if Federal assistance is terminated;
reductions in the number and frequency of safety and security
inspections; and the impact on the FAA's efforts to enhance the
international safety of Americans abroad. The Committee expects
the FAA to seek widespread participation in this process by the
public and the user community, including through public
meetings.
Asset sales.--The Coast Guard and FAA, like many other
agencies, are reorganizing and downsizing while providing
critical services to the public at less cost. Both the Senate
and House of Representatives, in their respective versions of
the concurrent resolution on the budget for 1996, indicated
clear support for seeking a change in the rules that currently
do not allow agencies to obtain budgetary credit for the sale
of governmental assets.
The Committee believes that the Coast Guard, the FAA, and
the Government as a whole, would benefit substantially if
allowed budgetary credit for property they expect to excess as
part of downsizing efforts. The President's fiscal year 1996
budget also proposed a change in the asset scoring rule to
allow the proceeds of sales to be scored as credits in the
budget.
The Committee strongly supports the lifting of the
prohibition on the scoring of asset sales for budget purposes
and the concurrent generation of receipts to reduce the Federal
budget deficit. Clearly, there is the potential for a very
positive benefit if the Coast Guard and the FAA are permitted
to receive credit for the value of excessed property.
Field office and other consolidations.--The Committee has
retained section 335 of the general provisions title proposed
by the House, which permanently cancels $25,000,000 from
budgetary resources provided to the Department of
Transportation. These savings are expected from the Secretary
reducing the existing field office structure and, to the extent
practicable, consolidating the Department's administrative
activities. In testimony presented to this Committee by the
General Accounting Office, it was stated that the Department
may realize significant savings by consolidating many of its
existing field offices into larger and less specialized
offices. The Committee expects that these savings will not
necessarily come through simple consolidation, but that the
Department will also seek to consolidate overhead activities
such as payroll, public affairs, grants administration, as well
as accounting and personnel functions.
U.S. COAST GUARD
Summary of Fiscal Year 1996 Program
The U.S. 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. In 1939, the U.S.
Lighthouse Service was transferred to the Coast Guard, followed
by the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation in 1942. The
Coast Guard has as its primary responsibilities the enforcement
of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; promotion of
safety of life and property at sea; assistance to navigation;
protection of the marine environment; and maintenance of a
state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the
Navy in time of war (14 U.S.C. 1, 2).
The Committee recommends a total program level of
$3,654,822,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal
year 1996. The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Program 1995 enacted Fiscal year Houseallowance Committee
\1\ 1996 estimate recommendations \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses......................... \3\ 2,635,839 2,618,316 2,565,607 2,586,000
Acquisition, construction, and improvements
\4\....................................... 362,937 428,200 375,175 366,800
Environmental compliance and restoration... 23,497 25,000 21,000 21,000
Port safety development.................... .............. .............. .............. 15,000
Alteration of bridges...................... .............. 2,000 16,000 2,000
Retired pay................................ 562,585 582,022 582,022 582,022
Reserve training........................... 64,977 64,859 61,859 62,000
Research, development, test, and evaluation 20,306 22,500 18,500 20,000
Boat safety................................ 25,000 .............. 20,000 ...................
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ 3,695,141 3,742,897 3,660,163 3,654,822
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes reductions pursuant to sections 330 and 331 of Public Law 103-331 and amounts transferred to OST,
salaries and expenses for civil rights activities.
\2\ Includes $300,000,000 provided by the Department of Defense for national defense missions.
\3\ Includes $11,200,000 in Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1995 and $28,297,000 in Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1995.
\4\ Excludes $6,378,000 reduction of unobligated balances for procurement and procurement-related expenses
canceled pursuant to section 323 of Public law 103-331.
Operating Expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Trust Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,
1995 \1\......... $2,585,839,347 $50,000,000 $2,635,839,347
Budget estimate,
1996............. 2,593,316,000 25,000,000 2,618,316,000
House allowance... 2,515,607,000 50,000,000 2,565,607,000
Committee
recommendation... 2,261,000,000 25,000,000 \2\ 2,586,000,00
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $11,200,000 by transfer from the Department of Defense and
$28,297,000 in Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1995.
\2\ Includes $300,000,000 by transfer from the Department of Defense.
The ``Operating expenses'' appropriation provides funds for
the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels,
aircraft, and shore units strategically located along the
coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in
selected areas overseas.
The program activities of this appropriation fall into the
following categories:
Search and rescue.--One of its earliest and most
traditional missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide
system of boats, aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination
centers on 24-hour alert.
Aids to navigation.--To help mariners determine their
location and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a
network of manned and unmanned aids to navigation along our
coasts and on our inland waterways, and operates radio stations
in the United States and abroad to serve the needs of the armed
services and marine and air commerce.
Marine safety.--The Coast Guard insures compliance with
Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in
the merchant marine industry and operates a recreational
boating safety program.
Marine environmental protection.--The primary objectives of
this program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution
and to assure the safety of U.S. ports and waterways.
Enforcement of laws and treaties.--The Coast Guard is the
principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal
laws on the navigable waters of the United States and the high
seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration,
and hijacking of vessels.
Ice operations.--In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard
icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities
and Department of Defense operations, survey uncharted waters,
and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also assists
commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
Defense readiness.--During peacetime the Coast Guard
maintains an effective state of military preparedness to
operate as a service in the Navy in time of war or national
emergency at the direction of the President. As such the Coast
Guard has primary responsibility for the security of ports,
waterways, and navigable waters up to 200 miles offshore.
Headquarters administration.--The headquarters
administration activity provides executive direction and
servicewide administrative support at the headquarters location
of the Coast Guard.
committee funding recommendation
The Committee recommendation for Coast Guard operating
expenses is $2,586,000,000, including $25,000,000 from the
oilspill liability trust fund and $300,000,000 from DOD for
national defense missions.
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
1995 Budgetrequest Houseallowance Committee
enacted recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and allowances:
Military pay and benefits....................... 1,226,672 1,230,154 1,209,853 1,212,254
Civilian pay and benefits....................... 173,367 177,263 177,613 176,438
Permanent change of station..................... 59,967 60,233 60,233 60,233
Medical care and equipment...................... 124,487 124,185 117,885 124,185
Leased housing.................................. ........... ............. 14,900 14,900
Activitywide adjustments........................ ........... ............. 9,850 -8,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total, pay and allowances..................... 1,584,495 1,591,835 1,570,634 1,580,010
===========================================================
Depot level maintenance:
Aircraft........................................ 148,741 139,041 139,041 139,041
Electronics..................................... 36,032 31,549 31,549 31,549
Shore facilities................................ 94,126 95,645 95,645 94,126
Vessels......................................... 101,165 99,081 99,081 99,081
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total, depot level maintenance................ 380,064 365,316 365,316 363,797
===========================================================
Operations and support:
Area operations and support:
Cutters:
Medium endurance (WMEC)................. 18,219 15,451 15,451 15,451
High endurance (WHEC)................... 10,807 11,070 11,070 10,807
Polar WAGB's............................ 1,936 2,024 2,024 2,024
Area offices................................ 11,333 12,156 12,156 11,333
Maintenance and logistics commands.......... 122,882 125,616 125,616 122,882
Communication stations...................... 3,107 3,262 3,262 3,107
District operations and support:
District offices............................ 61,426 56,641 51,041 56,641
Groups/bases................................ 68,015 68,592 68,592 68,015
Combined group/air station.................. 9,468 9,827 9,827 9,468
Air stations................................ 46,927 45,028 45,028 45,028
Marine safety offices....................... 7,645 9,785 9,785 8,500
Long-range electronic navaids (Loran)....... 6,254 6,491 6,491 6,254
Cutters-WLB's and smaller; Mackinaw......... 27,984 29,599 29,599 29,599
Vessel traffic service [VTS] systems........ 219 247 247 247
Ammunition and small arms....................... 5,791 4,707 4,707 4,707
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total, operations and support................. 393,083 400,496 394,896 394,063
===========================================================
Recruiting and training support:
Recruiting...................................... 5,861 5,467 5,467 5,467
Training centers (Yorktown and Petaluma)........ 27,535 26,522 26,522 26,522
Coast Guard Academy............................. 12,635 12,747 12,747 12,747
Professional training and education............. 25,833 26,207 25,207 26,207
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total, recruiting and training support........ 71,864 70,943 69,943 70,943
===========================================================
Coast Guard-wide centralized services and support:
Headquarters-managed units:
Supply centers.............................. 8,914 8,554 8,554 8,554
Finance center.............................. 4,682 4,776 4,776 4,776
Military pay and personnel center........... 1,115 1,137 1,137 1,137
Activities Europe........................... 5,552 -1,372 -1,372 -1,372
Coast Guard yard............................ 1,913 1,945 1,945 1,945
Strike teams................................ 2,531 2,678 2,678 2,678
National Pollution Funds Center............. 1,207 1,231 1,231 1,231
COMDAC support facility..................... 2,024 2,054 2,054 2,054
Air station Washington, DC.................. 907 925 925 925
Operations Systems Center................... 5,123 6,901 6,901 6,901
Telecommunications/information systems
command.................................... 2,801 2,919 2,919 2,900
Navigation Systems Center................... 3,866 404 404 404
Intelligence Coordination Center............ 258 263 263 263
Electronics Engineering Center.............. 2,828 3,533 3,533 3,533
Coast Guard Institute....................... 744 759 759 759
Research and Development Center............. 429 436 436 436
Military Personnel Center................... 786 801 651 801
Headquarters.................................... 120,918 120,125 119,497 119,800
Centralized bill paying:
Postal...................................... 7,516 6,674 6,674 6,674
FTS......................................... 12,500 12,060 10,626 11,500
Federal employment compensation............. 6,243 6,890 6,243 6,890
Unemployment compensation................... 4,546 4,661 4,546 4,546
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total, Coast Guard-wide centralized
services and support..................... 197,403 189,726 185,380 187,335
===========================================================
Total, accountwide adjustments............ ........... ............. 18,562 10,148
===========================================================
Total appropriation....................... 2,607,542 2,618,316 2,565,607 2,586,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Fiscal year 1995 total includes $11,200,000 provided in the DOD Appropriations Act for military pay raise
and $28,297,000 provided in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.
PAY AND ALLOWANCES
Military pay and benefits.--The Committee has concurred
with the House's recommendation which reduces the general
detail account, also known as the overhead account, from the
requested level of $174,812,000 to $171,812,000. In addition,
under the military pay and benefits line, the Committee has
concurred with the House's initiative to separate the leased
housing payments from the ``Military pay and benefits''
account, to create its own subaccount. The reductions
associated with these two moves is $17,900,000. The Committee
has restored the $1,401,000 which was cut by the House. This
would restore the military pay raise to the 2.4 percent which
was requested in the administration's request.
Though the Committee supports the military essentiality
initiative, which would where possible convert military
positions to civilian positions, it does not include a
reduction of $1,000,000, which the House estimates would be
saved if 65 positions were converted from military to civilian.
Civilian pay and benefits.--The Committee has provided
$176,438,000 for civilian pay and benefits. The Committee's
reduction of $825,000, which was also included by the House,
would reduce the youth opportunity staffing request. The
Committee does not agree with the House's position which
recommended an additional $1,000,000 above the budget request
for the Coast Guard to hire 10 additional Senior Executive
Service staffing positions. The Committee believes that, if the
Commandant of the Coast Guard thought it was the best use of
his resources to hire additional SES staff, he would so inform
the Committee and request it in the budget.
Medical care and equipment.--The Committee has provided the
full amount requested for medical care and equipment, which is
$6,300,000 above that provided by the House. The Committee
feels that the Coast Guard has done a good job to keep its
medical care and equipment line item under budget. In fact,
this account has seen a slight decrease from the amount of
resources required in fiscal year 1995.
Activitywide adjustments.--The Committee has reduced the
overall ``Pay and allowances'' account by $8,000,000, with the
admonition to the Coast Guard to accelerate its existing
streamlining and restructuring plans where possible without
jeopardizing safety-related operations. The House had included
a reduction of $4,850,000 associated with accelerating the
existing streamlining plan, and $5,000,000 associated with the
acceleration of its 1997 restructuring plan.
DEPOT LEVEL MAINTENANCE
Shore facilities.--The Committee has made only one small
adjustment to the overall depot level maintenance request,
which was $365,316,000. That adjustment was to hold the depot
level maintenance for shore facilities request to the fiscal
year 1995 level. In each of the other depot level budgets, the
fiscal year 1996 request was below the amount of funding
required in 1995; and the Committee has, in those items,
provided the full amount requested.
OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT
Area operations and support
Cutters.--The Committee has provided the full amount
requested for the medium endurance [WMEC] and polar [WAGB]
cutters. The Committee has held the funding for the high
endurance [WHEC] cutters to the fiscal year 1995 level.
Area offices.--The Committee has held the funding level for
area offices to the 1995 enacted level, which results in a
reduction of $23,000 from the fiscal year 1996 request.
Maintenance and logistics commands.--The Committee has held
the maintenance and logistics commands funding level to
$122,882,000, which was the fiscal year 1995 resource level.
This results in a reduction of $734,000 from the request. The
Committee has also taken the same position for communications
stations, and held it to the fiscal year 1995 level of
$3,107,000, a slight reduction of $55,000 from the request.
District operations and support/district offices
The Committee has restored funding for the district
offices, and does not agree with the specific cut of $5,600,000
directed by the House. The Committee has provided the full
amount requested, which was $56,641,000. The Committee agrees
with the House's observation that the Coast Guard does have an
extensive field organization, including districts, area
commands, groups, bases, stations, and maintenance and
logistics command centers. However, the Committee feels
strongly that, if consolidations and streamlining are to take
place, the Coast Guard itself may be in the best position to
judge which offices and district operations may be reduced.
Others.--For other district operations and support
activities, the Committee has essentially provided either the
budget request, which in many cases was below the fiscal year
1995 funding level, or rolled the funding level back to the
1995 level.
RECRUITING AND TRAINING SUPPORT
The recruiting and training support category has several
subsets, including recruiting, training centers (Yorktown and
Petaluma), the Coast Guard Academy, and professional training
and education. The Committee has provided the full amount
requested, which was $70,943,000, and notes that the Coast
Guard has again requested a fiscal year 1996 funding level
which was below the amount provided in 1995. The Committee has
restored the $1,000,000 cut which the House took out of
graduate school tuition payments. The Committee believes that
the Coast Guard has done a good job in trying to hold costs
down whenever and wherever possible, and though its budget for
professional training and education is sizable, at $26,207,000,
a targeted cut is not necessary at this time.
CENTRALIZED SERVICES AND SUPPORT
The centralized services and support line item includes a
number of individual activities. The Committee has provided
$187,335,000 overall for centralized services and support, a
reduction of $2,391,000 from the requested level (-1.3
percent). The reductions in this activity include a slight
reduction of $19,000 from the telecommunications and
information systems command request; a reduction of $160,000
from the FTS 2000 telecommunications request; and a $325,000
reduction from the headquarters administration line item (a
three-tenths-of-1 percent cut).
Even though the House's staffing positions list is only a
suggestion, the Committee believes that the Commandant should
have full discretion in the number of positions/billets
assigned to each of the offices within headquarters.
ACCOUNTWIDE ADJUSTMENTS
Because of budget constraints, the Committee found it
necessary to impose an accountwide adjustment for Coast Guard
operations. The Committee agrees with the specific
recommendations of the House, which includes the following:
Recreational equipment reduction........................ -$146,000
Nonpay inflation adjustment............................. -5,842,000
Nonoperational travel reduction
-1,831,000
And, the Committee has an undistributed accountwide
adjustment of $329,000. The Committee does not support the
House's observation that the military pay and personnel center
could save $500,000 by contracting out operations. This was
based on testimony early in the year by the Inspector General's
Office, for which the Committee can find no basis, and,
therefore, does not support the House's initiative in this
area.
In assessing the accountwide adjustment, the Committee
directs the Coast Guard to look carefully at whether cost
savings could be achieved on vehicles loaned or leased from the
General Services Administration. The inspector general's audit
of this activity disclosed that 45 percent of the Coast Guard's
leased vehicles did not meet GSA's minimum mileage use
requirements during fiscal year 1993; and that the required
vehicle retention justifications were not maintained or were
not adequate to support the retention of 66 percent of the 279
leased vehicles sampled during the audit; and, required usage
records were not maintained for 59 percent of the 279 vehicles
reviewed. The inspector general estimated that, if the Coast
Guard eliminated GSA-leased vehicles averaging 500 miles or
less monthly at those units with more than one vehicle
assigned, approximately $1,000,000 would be saved each year.
The Committee directs the Coast Guard to review this situation,
and suggests it as a good candidate as the agency makes its
accountwide adjustments.
HOUSE-INITIATED BILL PROVISIONS
Motor vehicle purchase.--The Committee concurs with the
House's inclusion of bill language which includes a limitation
on the purchase of motor vehicles to five, even though the
Coast Guard testified that there were no current plans to
purchase any motor vehicles during fiscal year 1996. This
provision is included to allow the Coast Guard flexibility if
the need arises.
Drug enforcement.--The Committee has stricken the House's
bill language that specifies that no less than $314,200,000 may
be obligated or expended on drug enforcement programs during
fiscal year 1996. The Committee notes that this is the amount
which was included by the Coast Guard in its budget for drug
enforcement activities. However, as important a mission as drug
enforcement is, the Coast Guard conducts many important
missions, and the Committee feels that a minimum restriction as
included by the House could hamper the Coast Guard responding
to emergencies and other needs as they arise. Given the Coast
Guard's increased responsibilities and activities in many
areas, including migrant interdiction, marine safety, marine
environmental protection, and search and rescue operations, the
Committee, without prejudice, has struck the House language.
The Committee feels the Coast Guard has done its best to
estimate the total amount that would be spent on drug law
enforcement, and will expend the resources necessary for this
very important activity.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE READINESS
The Committee on Appropriations Department of Defense bill
includes $300,000,000 for Coast Guard support. These funds are
provided by DOD to enable the Secretary of the Navy to provide
support for the national defense mission of the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard plays a key role in support of military
missions under the U.S. Atlantic and Southern Commands in
support of drug interdiction missions, refugee and immigration
support, and enforcement and joint military training. The
Committee believes, as does the Defense Subcommittee, that
these costs should and could be addressed through Defense
appropriations. That subcommittee has recommended, and
authorized the Secretary of the Navy to provide, up to
$300,000,000 in fuel, spare parts, munitions, repair services,
and other support activities necessary to maintain the
readiness of the Coast Guard so that it may best participate in
national defense missions. The services the Secretary of the
Navy will make available to the Coast Guard include ship and
aviation fuel, spare parts, munitions, ship stores, commissary
goods, ship and aircraft repair services, ship and aircraft
parts, and other assistance as necessary to ensure the national
defense capabilities and readiness of the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard is a cost-effective force which is
multimissioned. Its ships, aircraft, shore units, and people
have four primary roles: maritime safety, maritime law
enforcement, marine environmental protection, and national
defense. These roles are complementary and contribute to the
Coast Guard's unique niche within the national security
community. The value of the Coast Guard forces and their
mission experience was clearly evident by their active
participation in Operations Desert Shield/Storm in Iraq, and
more recently, in operations restore/uphold democracy in Haiti.
The Coast Guard is one of the five Armed Forces, and is a full
partner on the joint national security team. To be a credible
partner, the Coast Guard must maintain a high state of
operational readiness. Many parts of the Coast Guard's budget
contain funding requests that, if cut, would severely impair
the Coast Guard's operational readiness and, therefore, its
ability to meet national security commitments.
OTHER
Small boat station/search and rescue.--Besides conducting
direct public service such as search and rescue, fisheries law
enforcement, and boating while intoxicated enforcement, Coast
Guard small boat stations, boats and personnel also perform a
preventive role in their operating areas, similar to the cop on
the beat. Coast Guard presence is a constant public reminder
that encourages safe boating and deters potential violations of
law in the maritime arena. These very real, though intangible,
benefits were not included in the Coast Guard's analysis of
small boat units. The Committee believes that these intangible
benefits, when considered with the direct benefits defined by
the Coast Guard analysis, outweigh the management efficiencies
and budget savings that will result from closing small boat
units. The Committee has, therefore, included a general
provision, section 358, which disallows the closure of any
multimission small boat stations or subunits. Under the
Committee's language, the Commandant may implement management
efficiencies within the overall small boat system, which may
include modifying the operational posture of units.
Marine safety resources.--As part of its budget request for
fiscal year 1996, the Coast Guard proposed to eliminate 21
billets from the marine safety program for a savings of
$685,000. The Committee believes, however, that, given the
extraordinary unmet needs in the marine safety program, the
time is not yet right to downsize the number of trained marine
safety personnel.
The recently-initiated port State control initiative has
placed several additional burdens on most marine safety offices
and their marine inspectors. This initiative calls for such
inspectors to participate in the targeted boardings of all
high-priority vessels. Yet, too often, the limited number of
inspectors and their extensive responsibilities has undermined
their ability to participate in all such boardings. The recent
addition of Panama to the list of substandard flag States
targeted for additional boardings will only exacerbate this
problem. Given these growing challenges, the Committee has
restored $685,000 and 21 billets to the Coast Guard's operating
base. The Committee does not, however, expect these funds to be
used to restore the same 21 billets slated by the Coast Guard
for termination. Rather, the Committee directs that these
billets be strategically deployed in a manner determined by the
Commandant in order to strengthen the port State control
initiative and address other marine safety priorities. The
Committee requests that the Commandant submit a report to the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees by March 1, 1996,
providing a detailed accounting how each of the restored
billets and resources will be used and assigned.
Identification of substandard classification societies.--
The port State control initiative, as mandated by the
Committee, requires the Coast Guard to target its safety
boardings on vessels belonging to substandard owners and
vessels associated with substandard flag States and substandard
classification societies. In April 1994, the Commandant
testified that, while lists of substandard owners and flag
States had already been developed, a list of substandard
classification societies could not be developed until October
1994. As an interim step, the Coast Guard testified that it
would target only those classification societies that were not
in compliance with the guidelines called for under IMO
Resolution A.739(18).
The Committee is greatly disappointed to learn that a new
list of substandard classification societies, rather than being
available in October 1994, may not be available until the late
winter of 1996. The Committee's disappointment is fueled, in
part, by its concern that certain classification societies of
questionable quality are currently enjoying the presumption of
having adequate safety controls solely because they have been
determined to be in compliance with the IMO guidelines.
Recent experience with the Coast Guard's boarding
activities reveals that substandard ships are still,
periodically, being classed by even the most reputable
classification societies. However, within the universe of those
societies that have been determined to be in compliance with
the IMO resolution, certain societies have experienced a
disproportionately and unacceptably high number and frequency
of safety interventions. As such, the Committee requests the
Commandant to redouble his efforts to develop a new list of
substandard classification societies. The Committee further
requests that, upon completion of this list, he submit a report
to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees detailing the
methodology he used in developing this list. This report, which
should be provided no later than April 1, 1996, should include
appendices providing all available and relevant safety data
used to evaluate the adequacy of all major classification
societies.
Vessel traffic systems [VTS].--The Committee concurs with
the House's direction that the Coast Guard should more fully
examine the implementation costs associated with the vessel
traffic service VTS 2000 program. Based on General Accounting
Office reports, the costs of operating the vessel traffic
system would approach approximately $65,000,000 a year, versus
the current cost of almost $20,000,000. In addition, it will
take significant capital resources to install the equipment in
the currently envisioned VTS 2000 program.
In light of the GAO's earlier report on VTS 2000 costs of
$310,000,000 to establish and $65,000,000 to operate, the
Committee emphatically directs the Coast Guard to review its
plans for VTS, including the institution of user fees whereby
users would pay the bill for the service provided. Given the
budget situation, the Committee cannot support taking on new
responsibilities where services are provided free to the users.
The Committee believes it would be wise to study how this
system could be developed through a public sector/private
sector partnership. As each port is different, privatization
may not be the proper model for all the ports in the Coast
Guard's plans. However, given the success of the Los Angeles-
Long Beach system, which is funded on fees based on size of
ships, and is staffed by both civilians and Coast Guard
personnel, it appears that this is an excellent model to study
and possibly apply to the rest of the VTS 2000 ports.
Marine Fire and Safety Association.--The Committee remains
supportive of efforts by the Marine Fire and Safety Association
[MFSA] to provide specialized fire fighting training and
maintain an oilspill response contingency plan for the Columbia
River. The Committee encourages the Secretary to provide
funding for MFSA consistent with the authorization.
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Trust Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995.... $330,437,400 $32,500,000 $362,937,400
Budget estimate, 1996... 395,700,000 32,500,000 428,200,000
House allowance......... 342,675,000 32,500,000 375,175,000
Committee recommendation \1\ 370,400,00
0 32,500,000 \1\ 402,900,00
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $36,100,000 in reprogrammed resources.
This appropriation provides for the major acquisition,
construction, and improvement of vessels, aircraft, shore
units, and aids to navigation operated and maintained by the
Coast Guard. Currently, the Coast Guard has in operation
approximately 250 cutters, ranging in size from 65-foot tugs to
399-foot polar icebreakers, more than 2,000 boats, and an
inventory of more than 200 helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.
The Coast Guard also operates approximately 600 stations,
support and supply centers, communications facilities, and
other shore units. The Coast Guard provides over 48,000
navigational aids--buoys, fixed aids, lighthouses, and radio
navigational stations.
committee recommendation
The following table summarizes the Committee's programmatic
recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Fiscal year House program Committee
1995 enacted 1996 estimate levelallowance recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels..................................... $187,900,000 $203,700,000 $191,200,000 \1\ $192,000,00
0
Aircraft.................................... 11,800,000 19,500,000 16,500,000 14,500,000
Other equipment............................. 29,700,000 56,300,000 42,200,000 47,600,000
Shore facilities and aids to navigation..... 89,350,000 99,800,000 82,275,000 \2\ 102,300,000
Personnel and related support............... 44,187,400 48,900,000 43,000,000 46,500,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 362,937,400 428,200,000 375,175,000 \3\ 402,900,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $14,000,000 in reprogrammed resources.
\2\ Includes $22,100,000 in reprogrammed resources.
\3\ Includes $36,100,000 in reprogrammed resources.
vessels
The Committee recommends $192,000,000 for vessel
acquisition and improvement, of which $14,000,000 is made
available through prior-year reprogrammings. The projected
allocation of these funds is shown in the table below:
VESSELS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Committee
1996 estimate Houseallowance recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acquire vessels and
equipment:
Seagoing buoy tender
[WLB] replacement.. 65,000 65,000 65,000
Coastal buoy tender
[WLM] replacement.. 93,000 93,000 93,000
47-foot motor
lifeboat [MLB]
replacement project 500 500 500
82-foot WPB
capability
replacement........ 4,000 .............. \1\ 2,000
Follow-on for polar
icebreaker
replacement........ 4,300 4,300 \1\ 4,300
Buoy boat
replacement project 8,500 .............. 8,500
Survey and design--
cutters and boats.. 500 500 500
Norwegian crew
search/rescue boat. 2,000 2,000 \1\ 2,000
Self-propelled barge
replacement........ 900 900 \1\ 900
Surface search radar
replacement project 3,500 3,500 \1\ 3,500
Repair, renovate, or
improve existing
vessels and small
boats:
210-foot medium-
endurance cutter
[WMEC], major
maintenance
availability [MMA]. 14,500 14,500 10,500
378-foot shipboard
command and control 1,300 1,300 \1\ 1,300
Configuration
management......... 5,700 5,700 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Total (new program
level)........... 203,700 191,200 \2\ 192,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Funded through reprogrammings.
\2\ Includes $14,000,000 in reprogrammed resources.
Point class patrol boat replacement project.--The Committee
has provided $2,000,000 in reprogrammed resources for the Point
class patrol boat replacement project. The amount provided is
$2,000,000 less than the President's request. This project has
been delayed due to the requirement to recompete the contract
for the lead ship. At this point, it appears likely that the
program will carry forward the entire fiscal year 1995
appropriation into either the first or second quarter of fiscal
year 1996. The Committee has reduced the amount provided for
project management costs in fiscal year 1996 to account for
this delay.
Surface search radar replacement project.--The Committee
has provided reprogrammed resources to fully fund the
President's request for the surface search radar replacement
project. However, the Committee is disturbed to learn that the
scope of the program may be undergoing substantial change that
could increase cost risk. The Committee understands that the
financial participation of the Navy in this procurement is now
seriously in doubt. This information is especially disturbing
since the Committee received a report from the Commandant dated
July 14 that cited this project as a joint Navy-Coast Guard
procurement and makes no mention of the risk associated with
the loss of Navy participation. The Committee would appreciate
an informal communication from the Commandant prior to
conference committee deliberations on this bill which discusses
in detail the outlook for Navy participation in this project,
as well as any likely changes in program cost that will result
from the loss of Navy participation in this program.
Medium-endurance cutter major maintenance availability
[MMA].--The Committee has provided $10,500,000 of the
$14,500,000 requested for the major maintenance availability
program for the Coast Guard's fleet of 210-foot medium-
endurance cutters. This vessel rehabilitation program is
conducted at the Coast Guard yard at Curtis Bay, MD. The
Committee finds that, by stretching out the duration of this
program, the Coast Guard can better maintain employment levels
at the Coast Guard yard and potentially avoid the cost of
severance payments to Federal employees at the yard. The
Committee recognizes fully its responsibility to finance the
remaining costs associated with this program in future years.
Tactical data information system [TACDIS].--The Committee
has fully funded the President's request for the installation
of this shipboard command and control system on the Coast
Guard's fleet of high-endurance cutters [WHEC's]. While this
procurement has had a very troubled history, the critical value
of this equipment as a command and control tool during AMIO
operations around Haiti and Cuba cannot be questioned. The
amount provided will be the last increment of funding necessary
to complete this program.
Configuration management.--The Committee has not provided
the $5,700,000 requested for the configuration management
program. The Committee believes that funds provided for this
program in prior years will be sufficient to finance an
adequate number of cutter configuration reviews in fiscal year
1996.
Reprogrammings.--The Committee has utilized reprogrammed
resources to fully fund the President's request for the polar
icebreaker replacement follow-on costs. In combination with the
reprogrammings cited above, a total of $14,100,000 in
reprogrammed resources will be made available from this
subaccount to better enable the Committee to finance the Coast
Guard's critical vessel needs in fiscal year 1996. These funds
will be made available from unobligated balances in the
seagoing buoy tender [WLB] replacement project and the coastal
buoy tender [WLM] replacement project.
In the last 9 months, the Coast Guard's estimate of
unobligated balances to be carried forward into fiscal year
1996 from these two programs has grown from zero to almost
$20,000,000. These balances were principally budgeted for
contract change orders and economic price adjustments. Rather
than being an indication of program difficulties, the fact that
these balances have not been required indicates that the Coast
Guard's acquisition strategy based on performance-based
specifications has, to date, kept program costs under control.
Both the Coast Guard and the contractor are to be commended for
their initial performance in keeping both the WLB and WLM
programs on schedule and within budget. The Committee
recognizes that some amount of these balances may be necessary
as the Coast Guard takes delivery of its first WLM and WLB
hulls in the coming months. As such, the Committee grants the
Commandant the flexibility to move unobligated balances between
these two programs as they are needed in fiscal year 1996. The
Committee expects to be kept informed as to how this
flexibility is utilized through the Commandant's quarterly
acquisition reports.
aircraft
For aircraft procurement, the Committee recommends
$14,500,000. Funds for aircraft acquisitions are distributed as
follows:
AIRCRAFT
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Committee
1996 estimate Houseallowance recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traffic alert and
collision avoidance
system [TCAS]--phase IV 13,000 10,000 8,000
Global positioning
system installation--
phase VI............... 1,900 1,900 1,900
HH-65 helicopter--
transmission gearbox
upgrade................ 2,500 2,500 2,500
HC-130 sidelooking
airborne radar [SLAR]
upgrade................ 2,100 2,100 2,100
-----------------------------------------------
Total............. 19,500 16,500 14,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traffic alert and collision avoidance system [TCAS].--The
Committee has provided $8,000,000 for the traffic alert and
collision avoidance system [TCAS], $5,000,000 less than the
President's request. With the successful installation of this
important safety feature in the Coast Guard's fleet of fixed-
wing aircraft, this program now proceeds to the much greater
challenge of integrating this feature into the Coast Guard's
helicopter fleet. To date, there have been no production
installations of TCAS in helicopters. The Coast Guard has not
yet awarded its helicopter integration contract and the
Committee believes that there is likely to be substantial
technical and schedule risk associated with this integration
effort. As such, the Committee has reduced the President's
funding request and will carefully monitor the progress of this
integration effort in the coming months.
Sale of surplus Coast Guard aircraft.--The Committee has
concurred in bill language requested by the administration
allowing funds received from the sale of the Coast Guard's VC-
11A and HU-25 aircraft to be credited to this subaccount. The
Committee commends the Coast Guard for its recent sale of the
VC-11A aircraft and expects to be informed shortly as to how
the receipts of the sale will be utilized. Moreover, the
Committee encourages the Commandant to market aggressively his
fleet of redundant HU-25 Falcon aircraft so that he can better
meet the costs of modernizing the Coast Guard's aviation
infrastructure.
other equipment
The Committee recommends $47,600,000. The following table
displays the project allocation:
OTHER EQUIPMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year Committee
1996 estimate Houseallowance recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fleet logistics system.. 3,000 3,000 ..............
Marine information for
safety and law
enforcement [MISLE].... 11,000 11,000 11,000
Global maritime distress/
safety system--phase
III.................... 500 500 500
Differential global
positioning system
[DGPS] transmitter
replacement............ 1,700 .............. 1,700
Vessel traffic services
[VTS] 2000............. 5,000 5,000 2,000
Differential global
positioning system
[DGPS] in 2d District.. 2,400 .............. 2,400
Search and rescue
simulation model
[SARSIM]............... 500 500 500
Supply center computer
replacement [SCCR]..... 1,000 1,000 1,000
Vessel navigation
training simulator..... 1,500 1,500 1,500
Conversion of software
applications........... 11,100 6,100 9,000
Vessel traffic services
equipment replacement
projects............... |
