Proper Construction of H.J. Res. 467

Three questions were raised concerning the proper construction of House of Representatives Joint Resolution 467 (H.J. Res. 467), enacted on January 2, 1980, to provide funds authorized by the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Act of 1979. The first question was whether H.J. Res. 467 satisfied the requirement of the Guarantee Act which limited the amount of loan guarantees the board might make available to that amount "provided in advance in appropriation acts." GAO determined that H.J. Res. 467 explicitly provided the necessary authority for the Federal Government to enter into guaranteed loan agreements in an amount not to exceed $1.5 billion for loan principal. The second question raised was whether the lengthy title of H.J. Res. 467 restricted the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Board's authority to make loan commitments and loan guarantees to fiscal year 1980 or whether the restriction applied only to the appropriation of funds for administrative expenses. Although the title of H.J. Res. 467 explicitly referred to "the fiscal year ending September 30, 1980," the operative language that provided authority for loan guarantees did so without reference to fiscal year limitation. Taken as a whole, the Guarantee Act did not place a fiscal year limitation on funds appropriated to cover guarantees and contemplated that the authority provided in an appropriation act to issue guarantees is expected to be coterminous with the authority of the Board to issue guarantees until December 31, 1983. Furthermore, reference to the legislative history of H.J. Res. 467 revealed that the House Appropriations Committee specifically deleted a limitation on the Board's authority to extend loan commitments and guarantees only during fiscal year 1980. In light of these factors, GAO determined that the language of the title of H.J. Res. 467 had application only to the appropriation of funds for administrative expenses of the Board. The final question was whether H.J. Res. 467 placed a ceiling of $1.5 billion on the sum of the loan principal outstanding at any one time or whether that figure represented a limit on the aggregate amount of principal and interest permissable. In view of the legislative history of H.J. Res. 467 and the intent of the Guarantee Act, GAO concluded that the $1.5 billion of contingent liability relates only to loan principal and that any contingent liability for loan interest shall be in addition thereto.