[Senate Report 111-43]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 102
111th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 111-43
======================================================================
FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2010
_______
July 9, 2009.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Durbin, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 1432]
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1432)
making appropriations for financial services and general
government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and
for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends
that the bill do pass.
Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2010
Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $46,479,193,000
Amount of 2009 appropriations\1\........................ 51,470,576,000
Amount of 2010 budget estimate.......................... 46,439,230,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2009 appropriations................................. -4,991,383,000
2010 budget estimate................................ +39,963,000
\1\Includes $6,858,000,000 in emergency appropriations appropriated in
Public Law 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,
and $30,936,000 in emergency appropriations appropriated in Public Law
111-32, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009.
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Overview and Summary of Bill..................................... 5
Title I: Department of the Treasury:
Departmental Offices......................................... 9
Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs. 14
Office of the Inspector General.......................... 14
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration........ 15
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network......................... 17
Treasury Forfeiture Fund..................................... 18
Financial Management Service................................. 19
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau..................... 20
United States Mint........................................... 20
Bureau of the Public Debt.................................... 21
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund............ 21
Bureau of Engraving and Printing............................. 23
Internal Revenue Service..................................... 23
Taxpayer Services........................................ 26
Enforcement.............................................. 29
Operations Support....................................... 31
Business Systems Modernization........................... 32
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration............... 33
Administrative Provisions--Internal Revenue Service.......... 33
Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury........ 34
Title II: Executive Office of the President and Funds
Appropriated to the President:
Compensation of the President................................ 36
The White House.............................................. 36
Executive Residence at the White House....................... 37
White House Repair and Restoration........................... 37
Council of Economic Advisers................................. 38
Office of Policy Development................................. 38
National Security Council.................................... 38
Office of Administration..................................... 39
Office of Management and Budget.............................. 40
Office of National Drug Control Policy....................... 41
Funds Appropriated to the President:
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas.................... 42
Other Federal Drug Control Programs...................... 43
Unanticipated Needs.......................................... 46
Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation............ 46
Presidential Transition Administrative Support............... 47
Special Assistance to the President.......................... 47
Official Residence of the Vice President..................... 48
Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President
and Funds Appropriated to the President.................... 48
Title III: The Judiciary:
Supreme Court of the United States........................... 49
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit....... 50
United States Court of International Trade................... 51
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial
Services................................................... 51
Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund............................. 52
Defender Services............................................ 52
Fees of Jurors and Commissioners............................. 53
Court Security............................................... 53
Administrative Office of the United States Courts............ 54
Federal Judicial Center...................................... 54
Judicial Retirement Funds.................................... 55
United States Sentencing Commission.......................... 55
Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary..................... 55
Title IV--District of Columbia:
Federal Funds:
Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support............. 57
Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs
in the District of Columbia............................ 58
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts....... 59
Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts......... 60
Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia........ 61
Federal Payment to the Public Defender Service for the
District of Columbia................................... 62
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and
Sewer Authority........................................ 62
Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating
Council................................................ 63
Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions................. 64
Federal Payment to the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer of the District of Columbia.................... 64
Federal Payment for School Improvement................... 65
Federal Payment to Jump Start Public School Reform....... 69
Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility..... 70
Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard.............. 71
Federal Payment for Permanent Supportive Housing......... 71
Federal Payment for Reconnecting Disconnected Youth...... 72
Federal Payment for Central Library and Branch Locations. 72
Federal Payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor of
the District of Columbia............................... 73
District of Columbia Local Operating Budget.................. 74
Title V--Independent Agencies:
Administrative Conference of the United States............... 75
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation................... 75
Commodity Futures Trading Commission......................... 76
Consumer Product Safety Commission........................... 78
Election Assistance Commission............................... 79
Federal Communications Commission............................ 80
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector
General.................................................... 82
Federal Election Commission.................................. 83
Federal Labor Relations Authority............................ 83
Federal Trade Commission..................................... 84
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.......................... 86
General Services Administration.............................. 86
Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation........................ 99
Merit Systems Protection Board............................... 100
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National
Environmental Policy Foundation............................ 100
National Archives and Records Administration................. 101
National Credit Union Administration......................... 106
Office of Government Ethics.................................. 107
Office of Personnel Management............................... 108
Office of Special Counsel.................................... 113
Postal Regulatory Commission................................. 114
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.................. 115
Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board........... 115
Securities and Exchange Commission........................... 116
Selective Service System..................................... 118
Small Business Administration................................ 119
United States Postal Service................................. 128
Office of Inspector General.................................. 131
United States Tax Court...................................... 132
Title VI--General Provisions--This Act........................... 134
Title VII--General Provisions--Government-Wide................... 136
Title VIII--General Provisions--District of Columbia............. 140
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the Sen-
ate............................................................ 142
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 143
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 144
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 146
Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items............ 146
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority.................... 153
OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL
Fiscal year 2010 marks the third year for the Financial
Services and General Government appropriations bill. The bill
provides funding for the Department of the Treasury, including
the Internal Revenue Service; the Executive Office of the
President; the Judiciary; the District of Columbia; and more
than two dozen independent Federal agencies.
The Committee recommends $46,479,193,000 in discretionary
and mandatory appropriations. This represents a decrease of
$4,991,383,000 over the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, and an
increase of $39,963,000 over the budget request. Of the total,
$24,400,000,000 is provided in discretionary appropriations,
$13,463,000 above the budget request of $24,386,537,000.
Mandatory appropriations total $22,079,193,000.
The Committee-recommended bill is consistent with the
allocation for the Financial Services and General Government
appropriations bill. The Committee has made difficult but
necessary decisions to craft a bill that is within strict
fiscal limitations.
PROJECT FUNDING
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Items in Senate
bill at Congressionally
Agency President's directed spending
request in Senate bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Treasury........ ................. $3,150,000
District of Columbia.............. ................. 1,000,000
General Services Administration... $680,913,000 222,900,000
National Archives and Records 17,500,000 .................
Administration...................
Office of National Drug Control 2,250,000 .................
Policy...........................
Small Business Administration..... ................. 27,726,750
-------------------------------------
Total....................... 700,663,000 254,776,750
-------------------------------------
Combined Total Project
Funding in bill............ 955,439,750
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Small Business Administration account includes
congressionally directed spending totaling $27,726,750 for 103
projects. The President did not request any specific projects.
The Committee includes one congressionally directed spending
item for the District of Columbia and one for the Department of
the Treasury. Within the funds provided for the General
Services Administration, the President requested $680,913,000,
of which $511,137,000 is for construction of designated Federal
buildings and $169,776,000 is for repair of designated Federal
buildings. The Committee includes $222,900,000 for three
Federal building construction projects not included in the
President's request but requested by the judiciary. Within the
National Archives and Records Administration, the President
requested $17,500,000 for repair of the FDR Presidential
Library. The Committee includes funding for two drug programs
within the Office of National Drug Control Policy that were
requested by the President.
PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
During fiscal year 2010, for the purposes of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and
activity'' [PPA] shall mean any item for which a dollar amount
is contained in appropriations acts (including joint
resolutions providing continuing 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.
REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES
The Committee includes a provision (sec. 608) establishing
the authority of agencies to reprogram funds and the limitation
on that authority. The provision specifically requires the
advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: (1)
creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, project, or
activity [PPA]; (3) increases funds or personnel for any PPA
for which funds have been denied or restricted by the Congress;
(4) proposes to redirect funds that were directed in such
reports for a specific activity to a different purpose; (5)
augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent,
whichever is less; (6) reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or
10 percent, whichever is less; or (7) creates, reorganizes, or
restructures offices different from the congressional budget
justifications or the table at the end of the Committee report,
whichever is more detailed.
The Committee retains the requirement that each agency
submit an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this
act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming
and transfer authorities provided in this act. Specifically,
each agency should provide a table for each appropriation with
columns displaying the budget request; adjustments made by
Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the
fiscal year enacted level. The table shall delineate the
appropriation both by object class and by PPA. The report must
also identify items of special congressional interest.
The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit
reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a
thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a
detailed justification of increases and reductions and the
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget
request for the following fiscal year. Except in emergency
situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later
than June 30.
The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs
and activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The
Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should
be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or
a situation that could not have been anticipated when
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year.
Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency
submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees
on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses from
the House and the Senate, it is the responsibility of the
Department to reconcile the House and the Senate differences
before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to
consider the request to reprogram funds unapproved.
RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES
Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its
inquiries and requests for information and assistance through
the budget offices of the various departments, agencies,
offices, and commissions. The Committee has often pointed to
the natural affinity and relationship between the budget
offices and the Committee which makes such a relationship
workable. The Committee reiterates its longstanding position
that while the Committee reserves the right to call upon any
office or officer in the departments, agencies, and
commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and
these entities must be through the budget offices. To help
ensure the Committee's ability to perform its responsibilities,
the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and
timely access to the budget offices and expects to be able to
receive forthright and complete responses from those offices
and their employees.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS
Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the
agency, but instead are the primary tool used by the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource
requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is
aware that the format and presentation of budget materials is
largely left to the agency within presentation objectives set
forth by OMB. In fact, OMB Circular A-11, part 6 specifically
states that the ``agency should consult with your congressional
committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your plans
to modify the format of agency budget documents.'' The
Committee expects all the budget justifications to adhere to
this directive and provide the data needed to make appropriate
and meaningful funding decisions.
The Committee directs that justifications submitted with
the fiscal year 2011 budget requests by agencies funded under
this act must contain the customary level of detailed data and
explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests
at the level of detail contained in the funding table included
at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall
provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives,
proposed changes in the agency's financial plan from prior year
enactment, and detailed data on all programs and comprehensive
information on any office or agency restructurings. At a
minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification
for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and
materials that compare programs, projects, and activities that
are proposed for fiscal year 2011 to the fiscal year 2010
enacted level.
The Committee is aware that the analytical materials
required for review by the Committee are unique to each agency
in this act. Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency
will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its
budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year
2011 budget request.
TITLE I
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices
salaries and expenses
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $278,870,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 302,388,000
Committee recommendation................................ 305,712,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Departmental Offices consist of the Office of the
Secretary and Deputy Secretary, the Office of International
Affairs, the Office of Domestic Finance, the Office of
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, the Office of Tax Policy,
the Office of Economic Policy, the Office of the General
Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of
Public Affairs, the Office of the Treasurer, and the Office of
Management. The Secretary of the Treasury has the primary role
in formulating and managing the domestic and international tax
and financial policies of the Federal Government. The
Secretary's responsibilities funded by the Salaries and
Expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing
United States domestic and international economic and tax
policy; formulating fiscal policy; governing the fiscal
operations of the Government; executing the Nation's financial
sanction policies; disrupting and dismantling terrorist
financial infrastructure; protecting the United States and
international financial system from terrorist financing, money
laundering, and other financial crimes; managing the public
debt; managing international development policy; representing
the United States on international monetary, trade and
investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury
overseas operations; and directing the administrative
operations of the Department of the Treasury. The majority of
the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides resources for
policy formulation and implementation in the areas of domestic
and international finance, terrorist financing and financial
crimes, tax, economic, trade, financial operations and general
fiscal policy. This appropriation also provides resources to
support the Secretary, policy components, and departmental
administrative policies in financial and personnel management,
procurement operations, and information systems and
telecommunications.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $305,712,000 for the Salaries and
Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices account of
the Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 2010. This
amount is $3,324,000 above the budget request and $26,842,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. Within the funds
provided under this account, the Committee has provided
$3,000,000 for information technology modernization; $200,000
for official reception and representation expenses; $258,000
for unforeseen emergencies; and $6,787,000 for the Treasury-
wide financial statement audits and other Treasury office and
bureau audits.
The following table compares the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level to the fiscal year 2010 budget estimate and the
Committee's recommendation for each office:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2010 budget Committee
2009 enacted estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive direction (including General counsel)................. 21,619 22,383 22,383
Economic policies and programs.................................. 45,910 44,749 47,249
Financial policies and programs................................. 36,039 47,580 48,580
Terrorism and financial intelligence............................ 62,098 64,611 64,611
Treasury-wide management and programs........................... 21,600 22,779 22,779
Administration.................................................. 91,604 100,286 100,110
-----------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental offices............................... 278,870 302,388 305,712
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends the following increases to the
budget request:
National Academy of Sciences Study (Economic Policies and
Programs): +$1,000,000.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000
for the Department to transfer to the National Academy of
Sciences for a study on the long-term economic effects of the
aging population in the United States. This demographic shift
will impact the Nation's economic and financial state,
affecting individuals, Government programs, such as Social
Security and Medicare, and many economic and business sectors,
including private mechanisms supporting retirees. The study
will provide a basis for identifying potential policy
recommendations for addressing the impacts of this demographic
change.
National Academy of Sciences Study (Economic Policies and
Programs): +$1,500,000.--The Committee recommends $1,500,000
for the Department to transfer to the National Academy of
Sciences for a carbon audit of the Tax Code, as authorized by
section 117 of the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008
(Public Law 110-343). The carbon audit shall consist of a
comprehensive review of the Internal Revenue Code to identify
the tax provisions with the largest effects on carbon and other
greenhouse emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those
effects.
Office of Financial Education (Financial Policies and
Programs): +$1,000,000.--The Committee recommends an increase
of $1,000,000 above the budget request for the Office of
Financial Education. The Office of Financial Education
administers the National Financial Literacy Challenge and
develops strategies to combat predatory lending. The Office of
Financial Education also coordinates the efforts of the
Financial Literacy and Education Commission, a group chaired by
the Secretary of the Treasury and composed of representatives
from 20 Federal departments, agencies, and commissions. The
Commission works to improve financial literacy and education
for people throughout the United States. The recommended
increase shall be utilized to enhance financial education
efforts, including to support the revision of the national
strategy on financial literacy and the development of
measurable goals and objectives for the Financial Literacy and
Education Commission.
The Committee has approved the following significant
program increases in accordance with the budget request:
Domestic Finance Staffing (Financial Policies and
Programs): +$8,731,000/+26 FTE.--In order to meet current and
future economic challenges, Treasury must maintain a vast
expertise in complex finance and government fields. This
funding increase is recommended to support additional staff in
the Office of Domestic Finance. New staff shall be assigned to
teams supporting economic research and modeling related to
housing finance, small business and consumer issues, and
capital markets.
Tax Policy Staffing (Financial Policies and Programs):
+$4,863,000/+15 FTE.--To ensure Treasury possesses capabilities
to support rigorous analysis and implementation of revenue
policy, the Committee recommends funding for 15 additional tax
specialists in Treasury's Office of Tax Policy. These new tax
specialists shall apply tax expertise in each of the following
key areas: (1) the financial crisis; (2) the financial stimulus
plan; (3) climate change; and (4) healthcare reform.
Afghanistan Threat Finance Cell and International Dues
(Terrorism and Financial Intelligence): +$790,000/+1 FTE.--
Resources are recommended to support designated Treasury staff
for the Afghanistan Threat Finance Cell and annual dues to
international anti-money laundering organizations.
Management Staffing (Treasury-wide Management and Programs,
Administration): +$3,000,000/+13 FTE.--As the Department takes
on broader and more complex financial and fiscal issues,
policymakers and advisors will require more support for their
work to meet these needs. This recommended funding increase
shall support new staff in the areas of human capital,
information technology, and procurement policy.
Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network [TFIN]
(Administration): +$1,200,000/+0 FTE.--Recommended funding will
provide ongoing Operations and Maintenance (O&M) support for
the TFIN system, including program management, O&M managed
services provider contractor support, telecommunications and
circuit costs, hardware and software maintenance, and
technology refresh.
The Committee makes the following findings:
Management of the Financial Crisis.--In response to the
financial crisis, Treasury's role in the management of the
Federal Government's financial policies has expanded
tremendously. In September 2008, Treasury exercised new
authority under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008
(Public Law 110-289), taking responsibility on behalf of
taxpayers for billions of dollars previously managed by the
Government-sponsored housing entities Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. In October 2008, Congress authorized the Emergency
Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-343, known
commonly as the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP),
providing Treasury with the authority to utilize
$700,000,000,000 in taxpayer funds to implement a systemic,
comprehensive plan to stabilize financial markets. Treasury
continues to develop policies, strategies, and recommendations
to overhaul the current financial system in order to prevent
future financial and economic crises.
The Committee appreciates the Department's efforts to
stabilize the economy during such uncertain economic and
financial conditions. The Committee notes that the Treasury
Office of Inspector General has identified the management of
the Treasury's new authorities related to distressed financial
markets as a major management challenge facing the Department.
Under these programs, the Department has an unprecedented role
in managing billions in taxpayer dollars. The Committee directs
the Department to ensure that these programs are administered
soundly and efficiently in order to minimize risks to the
taxpayer. The Committee also directs management to maintain
focus on the Treasury's other critical missions--including
terrorism and financial intelligence and assistance to
community development financial institutions--in addition to
management of new policies and programs related to stabilizing
the economy.
The Committee is concerned with certain aspects of the
Department's implementation of the TARP program. Since the
program was authorized, TARP has evolved into 12 separate
programs aimed at addressing different stress points in the
market and at rebuilding a basic lending capability for
domestic markets. The complexity of this program has created a
communications challenge. In March 2009, the Government
Accountability Office [GAO] reported that TARP is very poorly
understood by Congress and the public. The Committee directs
the Department to develop a more effective strategy for
communicating with Congress, the public, and other stakeholders
in accordance with GAO recommendations. The Committee also
directs the Department to pursue more detailed reporting from
financial entities receiving TARP funds in order to ensure
maximum transparency of the program.
Foreclosure Crisis.--The Committee continues to be
concerned that the Department's strategies to reduce mortgage
foreclosures and keep American families in their homes rely
exclusively on voluntary actions of mortgage servicers. The
Committee urges the Department to expand its efforts to address
the foreclosure crisis beyond the scope of current voluntary
programs and to keep the Committee promptly and regularly
apprised of such efforts. The Committee directs the Department
to provide a monthly report to the Committee on Appropriations
on the number and value of foreclosures prevented to date under
Treasury programs, including the number of foreclosures
prevented by servicer and by the foreclosure mitigation
strategy employed (principal reduction, principal forbearance,
interest rate reduction, interest rate freeze, term extension,
penalties reduction, overdue amount capitalization, short sale,
deed-in-lieu, and other strategies).
Economic Sanctions and Divestments.--The Committee
recommendation includes $64,611,000 for Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence programs. With these funds, the Department will
continue to issue and enforce economic and trade sanctions
consistent with national security and foreign policy goals.
These sanctions are a key tool for asserting U.S. policy toward
countries and entities under sanction. The Committee directs
the Department to fully implement all sanctions and divestment
measures, particularly those applicable to North Korea, Burma,
Iran, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. The Committee directs the Department
to promptly notify the Committee of any resource constraints
that adversely impact the implementation of any sanctions
program.
Management of Capital Investments and Information
Security.--The Treasury Office of Inspector General continues
to cite the Department's management of capital investments and
information security as top management challenges. Treasury is
currently planning and managing several capital investments,
including the transition to a new telecommunications contract;
the implementation of enhanced information security
requirements; repair and renovation of the Treasury Annex; and
a modernization of systems supporting the implementation of the
Bank Secrecy Act. The Committee recognizes efforts the
Department has made to emphasize capital investment management
Department-wide. The Committee directs the Department to
continue improving the management of capital investments,
specifically focusing on integrating all of the Department's
bureaus into improvement efforts and institutionalizing
improvements so that taxpayers will benefit from better
management of future capital projects. The Committee directs
the Office of the Chief Information Officer to ensure that
adequate resources are devoted both to projects in the capital
phase and to proper maintenance and modernization of existing
systems.
Illegal Garnishments of Federal Benefits.--The Committee is
concerned that payments of Federal benefits, including social
security income, veterans' benefits, and supplemental security
income, are at risk for illegal garnishment by third-party
collectors. While paper checks are protected, most benefits
today are electronically deposited into bank accounts and are
at risk of being frozen and garnished. Section 207 of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 407) prohibits this practice and
the Department is currently in the process of developing rules
and guidance to end this practice for direct deposits of
Federal benefits. The Committee directs the Department to
provide a written report to the Committee on Appropriations
within 15 days of enactment on the progress of creating
guidelines to protect these wages.
Agricultural Sales to Cuba.--The Committee is aware that
the Department of the Treasury is continuing to require the
sellers of agricultural goods and products to Cuba to receive
cash payments in advance of shipping the goods rather than in
advance of delivering the goods. This policy impedes U.S. sales
since it increases the cost of doing business. The Committee
has added a provision to the bill that stipulates that during
fiscal year 2010 the term ``payment of cash in advance'' shall
be interpreted as payment before the transfer of title to, and
control of, the exported items to the Cuban purchaser. The
Committee urges the Department of the Treasury to use its
rulemaking authority to permanently amend the Cuban Assets
Control Regulations and remove impediments to United States
agricultural sales to Cuba.
DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $26,975,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 9,544,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,544,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
established this account, which is authorized to be used by or
on behalf of Treasury bureaus at the Secretary's discretion to
modernize business processes and increase efficiency through
technology investments, as well as other activities that
involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's interface
with other Government agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,544,000 for
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs
[DSCIP]. This amount is equal to the budget request and
$17,431,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
The following table compares the Committee recommendation
with the budget request and the fiscal year 2009 enacted
levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
DSCIP Initiative Fiscal year 2010 budget Committee
2009 enacted estimate recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Government Initiatives........................................ $2,057,000 .............. ..............
Enterprise Content Management................................... 6,000,000 .............. ..............
Treasury Secure Data Network.................................... 4,400,000 .............. ..............
Cyber Security--Information Security............................ 3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000
Annex Repair and Renovation..................................... 11,518,000 4,544,000 4,544,000
Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network........................... .............. 2,000,000 2,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 26,975,000 9,544,000 9,544,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $26,125,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 26,700,000
Committee recommendation................................ 29,700,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General
[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office
of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989.
The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and
investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency,
and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in
departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the
Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of problems
and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs
and operations. The audit function provides program audit,
contract audit, and financial statement audit services.
Contract audits provide professional advice to agency
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters
relative to negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and
settlement of contracts. Program audits review and audit all
facets of agency operations. Financial statement audits assess
whether financial statements fairly present the agency's
financial condition and results of operations, the adequacy of
accounting controls, and compliance with laws and regulations.
These audits contribute significantly to improved financial
management by helping Treasury managers identify improvements
needed in their accounting and internal control systems. The
evaluations function reviews program performance and issues
critical to the mission of the Department. The investigative
function provides for the detection and investigation of
improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel,
and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $29,700,000
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General.
This amount is an increase of $3,000,000 over the budget
request and $3,575,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level. Additional funds are provided to support the increased
workload resulting from required reviews of certain bank
failures.
TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $153,083,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 149,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 152,000,000
\1\Includes $7,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
[TIGTA] was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act
of 1998 (Public Law 105-206). TIGTA was created to provide
independent audit and investigative services necessary to
improve the quality and credibility of oversight of the
Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. Funding was first appropriated
for this account in the fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58).
TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to
assess the operations and programs of the IRS and related
entities, the IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief
Counsel to (1) promote the economic, efficient and effective
administration of the Nation's tax laws and to detect and deter
fraud and abuse in IRS programs and operations; and (2)
recommend actions to resolve fraud and other serious problems,
abuses, and deficiencies in these programs and operations, and
keep the Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of
these issues and the progress made in resolving them. TIGTA
reviews existing and proposed legislation and regulations
relating to the programs and operations of the IRS and related
entities and makes recommendations concerning the impact of
such legislation and regulations on the economy and efficiency
in the administration of programs and operations of the IRS and
related entities. The audit function provides program audit,
limited contract audit, and financial audit services. Program
audits review and audit all facets of the IRS and related
entities in an effort to improve IRS systems and operations,
while ensuring fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers.
Contract audits focus on invoices/vouchers submitted to the IRS
to determine whether charges are valid and to identify
erroneous and improper payments. The investigative function
provides for the detection and investigation of improper and
illegal activities involving IRS programs and operations and
protects the IRS and related entities against external attempts
to corrupt or threaten the administration of the tax laws.
January 2009 marked the 10-year anniversary of TIGTA's
stand-up as an independent organization. Over the past decade,
TIGTA has issued more than 1,600 final audit reports and made
more than 4,000 recommendations to improve tax administration,
on 3,500 of which the IRS has taken action; identified more
than $25,000,000,000 in funds that could have been put to
better use and $192,000,000 in questioned costs; processed more
than 91,684 complaints; and opened 44,373 investigations,
successfully closing more than 99 percent of such cases.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $152,000,000
for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This
amount is a decrease of $1,083,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level which included $7,000,000 in emergency funds
under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Public Law
111-5) and an increase of $3,000,000 above the budget request.
The Committee appreciates the challenge TIGTA faces in adapting
its oversight activities to address increasingly complex and
high-risk issues associated with IRS operations, including
detection and investigation of fraud and electronic crime,
review of procurement activities, and safeguarding of taxpayer
privacy. In recognition of the resource demands, the Committee
provides an additional $3,000,000 above the budget request to
support TIGTA's work.
The Committee commends TIGTA for its ongoing review of the
IRS's business systems modernization program and other
information technology projects. The Committee also
acknowledges the critical importance of the priorities TIGTA
has identified for fiscal year 2010, including adapting to the
IRS's continuously evolving operations and mitigating
intensified risks associated with modernization, security,
addressing the tax gap, and human capital challenges facing the
IRS. In addition, TIGTA plays a pivotal role in responding to
threats and attacks against IRS employees, property, and
sensitive information. The Committee shares TIGTA's ongoing
concern that the IRS is developing and launching its modernized
systems without adequately contemplating the security
implications. The Committee urges continued TIGTA oversight of
tax gap issues, including data reliability, tax law
enforcement, and taxpayer assistance, to ensure that the IRS
enhances voluntary compliance by balancing taxpayer services
and enforcement without jeopardizing taxpayer rights.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $91,465,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 102,760,000
Committee recommendation................................ 104,260,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau
within the Treasury Department's Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence, is the largest overt collector of
financial intelligence in the United States. FinCEN's mission
is to safeguard the financial system from the abuses of
financial crime, including terrorist financing, money
laundering, and other illicit activity. FinCEN accomplishes its
mission by administering the Bank Secrecy Act, a collection of
statutes that form the Nation's anti-money laundering/counter-
terrorist financing regulatory regime. As the delegated
administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible
for the development and implementation of regulations, rules,
and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN also
oversees the work of eight Federal agencies that have been
delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the
financial industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act's
requirements. FinCEN is responsible for collecting,
maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by
financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act through a
Government-wide access service. FinCEN is the United States'
Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] and a founding member of the
Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. As the United
States' FIU, FinCEN routinely shares information and cooperates
with other FIUs around the world to address the global problems
of terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit
activity.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $104,260,000 for the Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. This amount is $12,795,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,500,000 above
the budget request.
The Committee recommends the following program increases
for fiscal year 2010:
Information Technology Modernization: +$10,000,000/+1
FTE.--The Committee recommends an increase of $10,000,000 above
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level to support FinCEN's efforts
to modernize the technical environment for implementation of
the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA] in accordance with the budget
request. The modernization will re-engineer the BSA data
architecture, update antiquated infrastructure required to
support data capture and dissemination, implement innovative
web services and enhanced electronic filing, and provide
enhanced analytical tools.
The Committee is pleased that FinCEN has requested funding
to begin a comprehensive modernization of the main information
technology infrastructure supporting BSA implementation. This
system is used by banks, Federal law enforcement, state and
local law enforcement, and other Federal intelligence agencies
to report, gather, and analyze data to identify money
laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and
vulnerabilities in the financial industry. The current
infrastructure is outdated and limits the capabilities of these
users, which ultimately limits the capability of the Treasury
and its partners to pursue money laundering, terrorist
financing, and tax evasion.
The Committee notes that FinCEN's most recent attempt to
modernize BSA infrastructure, BSA Direct Retrieval and Sharing,
ultimately failed, costing the taxpayers over $14,000,000. The
Committee is pleased with the steps FinCEN has taken to
strengthen its acquisition and project management competencies
and directs the agency to continue to pursue employee education
and training efforts in this area, including training on proper
budget execution practices. The Committee also directs FinCEN
to place a top priority on contractor oversight and on
involving its wide variety of stakeholders in the development
of the modernized system. FinCEN is directed to submit a
semiannual report to the Committee on Appropriations
summarizing the agency's progress regarding the modernization
effort, including milestones planned and achieved, progress on
cost and schedule, management of contractor oversight,
strategies to involve stakeholders, and acquisition management
efforts.
The Committee also directs FinCEN to focus efforts on
improving the completeness and reliability of BSA data in
accordance with recommendations by the Treasury Inspector
General and the Government Accountability Office. The Committee
notes that while a new BSA infrastructure will improve the
capabilities of processing and analyzing BSA data, the
accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of the data itself will
ultimately determine the effectiveness of the system and
related processes.
Strengthen Global Anti-money Laundering Efforts:
+$1,500,000.--The Committee recommends an increase of
$1,500,000 above the budget request for FinCEN to improve
collaboration with other Financial Intelligence Units around
the world regarding international anti-money laundering and
terrorist financing and for FinCEN to help other Financial
Intelligence Units around the world to build and strengthen
investigative and analytical capabilities. The Committee notes
that while system and data improvements will enhance the
capabilities of domestic efforts, communicating and
collaborating effectively with global partners is also a
critical component of combating terrorist financing and money
laundering both domestically and abroad.
Treasury Forfeiture Fund
(RESCISSION)
The Committee recommends a rescission of $50,000,000 of
unobligated balances in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.
Financial Management Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $239,785,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 244,132,000
Committee recommendation................................ 244,132,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
In 1940, the Department of the Treasury established the
Fiscal Service, which consisted of the Bureau of Accounts, the
Bureau of the Public Debt, and the Office of the Treasurer. A
1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service created the Bureau of
Government Financial Operations, which was formed from a merger
of the Bureau of Accounts and most functions of the Office of
the Treasurer. In 1984, the Bureau of Government Financial
Operations was renamed the Financial Management Service [FMS].
FMS implements payment policy and procedures for Federal
agencies, issues and distributes payments, promotes the use of
electronics in the payment process, and assists agencies in
converting payments from paper checks to electronic funds
transfer [EFT]. FMS provides debt collection operational
services to client agencies, implements collections policy,
regulations, standards, and procedures for the Federal
Government, and assists agencies in converting collections from
paper to electronic media.
FMS provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing
services to the Federal Government and the Government's agents
who participate in the payments and collections process by
generating a series of daily, monthly, quarterly, and annual
Government-wide reports. FMS also works directly with agencies
to help reconcile reporting differences.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $244,132,000 for salaries and
expenses for FMS. This amount is the same as the budget request
and $4,347,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
Hundreds of Federal agencies accept credit and debit cards
as payment for goods and services provided by the Federal
Government. FMS provides a centralized card acquiring service
for the majority of these agencies. The Committee is concerned
that the Federal Government may be paying excessive interchange
and other fees on these transactions and that rules issued by
the card networks may work against the best interests of the
taxpayer. GAO reported that credit card interchange fees and
merchant discount fees cost the Federal Government over
$400,000,000 in fiscal year 2007 (GAO-08-558). GAO found that
Federal entities have often been unable to effectively
negotiate changes in the rates and fees they are charged. The
Committee directs FMS to report to the Committee on
Appropriations within 180 days of enactment on the potential
cost savings and other benefits to the Federal Government if
FMS were able to effectively negotiate (1) changes in the rates
and fees assessed by card networks and (2) modifications to the
rules and regulations of the card networks which restrict the
Federal Government's ability to determine the types of card
payments it accepts and the methods by which its transactions
are processed.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $99,065,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 105,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 103,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the
Treasury and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting
the public.
TTB enforces certain Federal laws and regulations relating
to alcohol and tobacco. TTB works directly and in cooperation
with others to maintain a sound revenue management and
collection system that continues to reduce the regulatory
burden, improve service, collect the revenue due, and prevent
tax evasion and other criminal conduct. TTB is also responsible
for preventing consumer deception, ensuring that regulated
products comply with Federal commodity, safety, and
distribution requirements, and providing customer service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for TTB for fiscal
year 2009. This amount is a decrease of $2,000,000 to the
budget request and an increase of $3,935,000 over the fiscal
year 2009 enacted level. The Committee does not recommend
assessing fees on producers, distributors, and retailers of
alcohol in order to offset TTB's operating costs, as proposed
in the budget. The recommended funding level for TTB is
decreased by the cost assumed in the budget for implementing
the proposed collections.
United States Mint
UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic
and investment products, and provides for security and asset
protection. Public Law 104-52 established the U.S. Mint Public
Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous
Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund,
and the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits
annual audited business-type financial statements to the
Secretary of the Treasury and to Congress in support of the
operations of the revolving fund.
The operations of the Mint are divided into two major
activities: Manufacturing and sales (including circulating
coinage and numismatic and investment products); and
protection. The Mint is credited with receipts from its
circulating coinage operations, equal to the full cost of
producing and distributing coins that are put into circulation,
including depreciation of the Mint's plant and equipment on the
basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay for the
costs of the Mint's operations, which include the costs of
production and distribution. The difference between the face
value of the coins and these costs is a profit, which is
deposited as seigniorage to the general fund. In fiscal year
2008, the Mint transferred $750,000,000 to the general fund.
Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint's capital acquisitions
is recorded as budget authority in the year that funds are
obligated for this purpose and as receipts over the life of the
asset.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a spending level of $26,700,000
for circulating coinage and protective service capital
investments for the Mint. This amount is a decrease of
$15,450,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is
equal to the budget request.
Bureau of the Public Debt
ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $177,352,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 182,244,000
Committee recommendation................................ 182,244,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the
appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The
Public Debt Service took general charge of debt operations
including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement,
which had been conducted by several independent divisions
within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the
Reorganization Act of 1939, the President created the Bureau of
the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal
Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30,
1940 (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings Bonds Division, a
separate organization, was made part of the Bureau.
This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all
public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S.
savings-type securities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $182,244,000 for the Bureau of the
Public Debt for fiscal year 2010. This amount is an increase of
$4,892,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is
equal to the budget request.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $207,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 243,600,000
Committee recommendation................................ 246,750,000
\1\Includes $100,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes
investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments,
deposits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing
community development financial institutions [CDFIs] through
the CDFI program. CDFIs include community development banks,
credit unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, and
microloan funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in
lending and investment for affordable housing, small business,
and community development within underserved communities. The
CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program,
which provides a financial incentive to insured depository
institutions to undertake community development financing
activities. The CDFI Fund also administers the New Markets Tax
Credit Program, a program that provides an incentive to
investors in the form of a tax credit, which is expected to
stimulate private community and economic development
activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $166,750,000 for the CDFI Fund,
which is $40,250,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level,
which included funding provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), and $3,150,000
above the budget request.
The Committee recommends a set-aside of $12,000,000 for
grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs
to benefit Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native
Hawaiian communities in the coordination of development
strategies, increased access to equity investments, and loans
for development activities.
Of funding recommended for the CDFI Fund, $3,150,000 is
provided for a pilot program to be conducted in Hawaii for
financial education and pre-home ownership counseling as
authorized in section 1132(d) of division A of the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-289). The
National Low Income Housing Coalition ranked Hawaii as the most
expensive State for housing. As credit has become more
difficult to obtain, working families in Hawaii need assistance
to better prepare for purchasing a home. Services in the pilot
program will include credit counseling, assisting with savings
planning, and educating potential home buyers about mortgage
products and available programs supporting home ownership.
The Committee understands that many CDFIs are experiencing
difficulty obtaining non-Federal funding due to the economic
downturn. The Committee recommends continuing the temporary
waiver of matching fund requirements for CDFI programs so that
CDFIs can continue to invest in and assist underserved
communities during the economic crisis. The Committee intends
to reinstate matching fund requirements when capital markets
return to normal function.
In addition to funding recommended for the CDFI Fund,
$80,000,000 is recommended for the Capital Magnet Fund as
requested in the budget. Funding was not provided for the
Capital Magnet Fund in fiscal year 2009. The Capital Magnet
Fund is authorized in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of
2008 (Public Law 110-289). Under that act, the Government-
sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are required to
contribute funding to the Capital Magnet Fund in order to
support affordable housing projects. In November 2008, the
Federal Housing Finance Agency directed Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac to suspend their contributions until further notice,
temporarily leaving the Capital Magnet Fund without a funding
stream. The recommendation of $80,000,000 temporarily funds the
Capital Magnet Fund in lieu of contributions from Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac and provides for a temporary change in the
leverage expectations for grants made under the program during
fiscal year 2010. The Committee intends the funding to provide
start-up capital for the Capital Magnet Fund and fully expects
that the Capital Magnet Fund will operate without additional
appropriations in the future when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
resume the required contributions.
Bureau of Engraving and Printing
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the
sole manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years.
The origin of the BEP is traced to an act of Congress passed on
February 25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of
the Treasury to issue a new currency--United States notes.
While this law was the cornerstone authority for the operations
of the engraving and printing division of the Treasury for many
years, it was not until an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100,
that the Congress first referred to this division as the
``Bureau of Engraving and Printing.'' The Bureau's status as a
distinct bureau within the Department of the Treasury was
solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 30 Stat.
18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the
immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of
the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in
31 U.S.C. 303.
The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve
notes and other security documents issued by the Federal
Government.
The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means
of a revolving fund established in accordance with the
provisions of Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181),
which requires the BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies
for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed.
The BEP is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital
equipment and provide for working capital needs.
No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities
of the BEP.
Internal Revenue Service
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] administers the Nation's
tax laws and collects the revenue that funds over 96 percent of
the Federal Government's operations and public services. The
IRS's mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by
helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and
by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The
IRS focuses its enforcement programs toward increasing
voluntary tax compliance by deterring taxpayers inclined to
evade their tax obligations while vigorously pursuing those who
violate the law. Each year, IRS employees deal directly with
more American taxpayers than any other institution, public or
private.
During fiscal year 2008, the IRS collected more than
$2,300,000,000,000 in revenue, net of refunds, and processed
more than 250 million tax returns. More than 101.5 million
returns, including 58 percent of individual returns were filed
electronically. Also, in fiscal year 2008, the IRS customer
assistance call centers answered 40.4 million assistor
telephone calls and 52 million automated calls. There were
nearly 7 million contacts at the 401 taxpayer assistance
centers, and over 347 million visits to the IRS website, an
increase of 61 percent over fiscal year 2007. In addition to
serving taxpayers during the regular filing season, the IRS
delivered $94,300,000,000 in economic stimulus payments to
116.2 million taxpayers. An important focus for the IRS in
recent years has been to undertake a major modernization of its
systems, including expanding its Internet services, and
business operations to better serve taxpayers and enforce the
law.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $12,152,445,000 for the Internal
Revenue Service for fiscal year 2010. This is an increase of
$549,847,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$26,445,000 above the budget request. The Committee supports
the requested additional funding, and expects the IRS to devote
these resources to reducing the tax gap by investing in a
strong compliance program and initiatives to address
international tax evasion, as well as needed upgrades to IRS
information technology systems to streamline tax
administration, protect taxpayer information, and replace aging
infrastructure.
Tax Gap.--The vast majority of Americans pay their fair
share of taxes, yet there is still a ``tax gap.'' The tax gap
is the difference between what taxpayers are supposed to pay
and what they actually do pay. In its update of the results of
a 3-year study, the IRS found that for tax year 2001, about 84
percent of owed taxes were paid voluntarily and timely.
However, a significant number of taxpayers do not comply with
the Tax Code resulting in an estimated gross tax gap of
$345,000,000,000. The IRS estimates that after enforcement and
other late payments are factored into the gross tax gap, the
net tax gap is about $290,000,000,000. The most current
estimate of the tax gap remains largely unchanged from the
IRS's initial update conducted in 2006, and has remained
relatively stable for the past three decades based on previous
IRS studies. The accuracy of the tax gap, however, is uncertain
given the use of outdated and incomplete information and
questionable methodology. Some experts, including the GAO and
TIGTA, believe that the tax gap may actually be higher than
estimated by the IRS. The Committee strongly believes that the
IRS can and must reduce the tax gap if the IRS is given
additional resources and is able to improve its operational
capabilities (most notably through the Business Systems
Modernization program).
To reduce the tax gap, experts recommend a number of
approaches. These include: improving information reporting,
improving taxpayer services, increasing research on
noncompliance, improving the partnership between the IRS and
the tax administration community, and leveraging technology to
improve IRS's systems. The Committee supports all of these
approaches in combination.
The Committee acknowledges the Department of the Treasury
and the IRS's August 2007 publication, ``Reducing the Tax Gap:
A Report on Improving Voluntary Compliance.'' The Committee
shares the concern that the steps outlined in that report are
preliminary, and that absent a better understanding of the
current sources of noncompliance, efforts to improve compliance
may be hampered, misdirected, and difficult to measure. To gain
meaningful insights into taxpayer behavior, the Committee
strongly supports the work of the National Research Program.
Operating Plan and Notification.--In addition to the normal
operating plan requirements detailed in the introduction in
this report, the Committee directs the IRS to include details
on any planned reorganization, job reductions or increases to
offices or activities within the agency, and modifications to
any service or enforcement activity. The Committee also directs
the IRS to obtain and include comments of the IRS Oversight
Board as part of its operating plan submission to the
Committee. Further, the IRS should promptly notify the
Committee and the IRS Oversight Board of any substantial
changes to these plans.
The Committee remains concerned about any efforts to reduce
specific taxpayer services, including face-to-face services.
Therefore, the Committee directs that if the IRS proposes
reductions in taxpayer services, such reductions must be
consistent with the budget justification, operating plan, and
Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint, and the IRS must demonstrate
that such reductions will not result in a decline in voluntary
compliance. Where such reductions involve a reduction in face-
to-face service, the IRS must demonstrate that the proposed
reductions do not adversely impact compliance by taxpayers who
are dependent on such services, by showing, through such means
as a successful pilot program, survey, or other empirical
study, that there is an effective and viable service
alternative available.
IRS Staffing Plans.--The Committee continues to support
adequate staffing levels for effective tax administration and
supports the staffing plans for the IRS facilities in the
communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, West Virginia.
Therefore, the Committee urges the IRS, within the constraints
of the fiscal year 2010 funding levels, to make no staffing
reductions at the Martinsburg National Computing Center and the
programmed level at the Finance Center in Beckley, West
Virginia. Further, the Committee directs the IRS to provide an
annual report to the Committee on its efforts to protect and
increase staffing levels at the Martinsburg and Beckley IRS
facilities.
Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.--Given the remote
distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the
difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in
receiving needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line,
it is imperative that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in
each of these States is fully staffed and capable of resolving
taxpayer problems of the most complex nature. The Committee
directs the IRS to continue to staff each Taxpayer Advocate
Service Center in each of these States with a Collection
Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical Advisor in
addition to the current complement of office staff.
TAXPAYER SERVICES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $2,293,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,269,830,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,275,830,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Taxpayer Services appropriation provides for taxpayer
services, including forms and publications; processing tax
returns and related documents; filing and account services;
taxpayer advocacy services; and assisting taxpayers to
understand their tax obligations, correctly file their returns,
and pay taxes due in a timely manner.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $2,275,830,000 for Taxpayer
Services, which is $17,170,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level, and $6,000,000 above the budget request. The
Committee notes that Congress provided direct funding to the
Secretary of the Treasury for IRS implementation of the tax
provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(Public Law 111-5) and that those funds are not reflected in
the ``Taxpayer Services'' account. Bill language is included
providing not less than $6,100,000 for the tax counseling for
the elderly program, not less than $9,500,000 for low-income
taxpayer clinic grants, not less than $12,000,000, to be
available for 2 years, for a community volunteer income tax
assistance matching grant program for tax return preparation
assistance and $205,954,000 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service.
The Committee strongly believes that ``Service +
Enforcement = Compliance'' and that, as outlined in the IRS
Strategic Plan 2009-2013, the IRS must improve service to make
voluntary compliance easier.
Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.--In response to the
Committee's directive in the fiscal year 2006 Treasury
Appropriations Act, the IRS, in consultation with the IRS
Oversight Board and the National Taxpayer Advocate, developed a
``Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint'' to institute a 5-year
strategic plan for taxpayer services. The Committee expects the
IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and the National Taxpayer
Advocate to work collaboratively to make the Taxpayer
Assistance Blueprint an integral and guiding component of
delivering services. The Committee supports ongoing efforts to
conduct research on taxpayer needs and taxpayer service
performance.
The Committee directs the IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and
the National Taxpayer Advocate to submit to Congress annual
updates to the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint identifying any
changes to its strategic plan for taxpayer service, including
the results of any new research and relevant findings, and any
open issues requiring additional research.
E-Filing.--The Committee is heartened by the IRS's improved
performance in increasing the number of tax filers who submit
their returns electronically and without additional cost.
Electronic filing benefits taxpayers and promotes effective tax
administration because it decreases processing errors,
expedites processing and payment of refunds, and allows the IRS
to efficiently maintain up-to-date records. A total of 89.6
million individual tax returns were filed electronically during
the 2008 filing season, representing more than 63 percent of
all returns. The Committee directs the IRS, in consultation
with stakeholders, including the National Taxpayer Advocate, to
implement a strategy to achieve an 80 percent e-file goal. This
plan should address alternate electronic filing strategies,
including Telefile and 2-D bar coding and methods of e-filing
directly with the IRS for free as well as any impediments or
circumstances that affect taxpayers inclinations toward
electronic filing.
The Committee believes that the IRS will deliver better
taxpayer service, achieve improved compliance, and reduce the
tax gap if taxpayer behavior is better understood and applied
research is integrated into the development of taxpayer service
and enforcement initiatives. Toward that end, the Committee
supports the work of the National Taxpayer Advocate and the IRS
Office of Research to examine factors that influence taxpayer
compliance behavior, including how and the extent to which
various factors influence such behavior, and how the
establishment of a cognitive learning and applied research
laboratory might facilitate continued evaluation.
EITC.--The Committee is concerned that many low-income
taxpayers and their families are having their Earned Income Tax
Credit [EITC] benefits unnecessarily diminished through high-
cost, short-term products such as refund anticipation loans
[RALs]. The Committee directs the IRS, in consultation with the
National Taxpayer Advocate, to educate consumers about the
costs associated with these products and expand access to
alternative methods of obtaining timely tax refunds.
Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.--The Volunteer
Income Tax Assistance [VITA] program is an important aspect of
IRS efforts to provide income tax preparation assistance
programs for low-income taxpayers. The Committee provides that,
within funds provided, $12,000,000 shall be available for 2
years for exclusive use as part of continuing a matching grant
program established and administered by the IRS, in
consultation with the Taxpayer Advocate Service, for not for
profit organizations which provide volunteer income tax return
preparation services for lower income individual taxpayers.
This program shall provide direct funds to enable VITA
programs to extend services to underserved populations and
hardest-to-reach areas, both urban and nonurban, as well as to
increase the capacity to file returns electronically, heighten
quality control, enhance training of volunteers, and
significantly improve the accuracy rate of returns prepared by
VITA sites. The Committee reinforces its expectation that the
IRS should employ an equitable selection methodology which
takes into account geographic diversity, and include an
evaluation component to measure the overall effectiveness of
the program and the results achieved.
The IRS is not permitted to treat any in-kind contributions
from the IRS as counting toward the $12,000,000 appropriation
nor shall the IRS reduce any current contributions toward tax
return preparation services.
In addition, the Committee notes that 1 in 5 adults living
in the United States have a disability, and that over 22
million families nationwide have a member with a disability.
Only 21 percent of taxpayers with disabilities have annual
incomes over $40,000, and working-age adults with disabilities
are 3 times more likely than their nondisabled peers to live at
or below the poverty line. Prior research has identified
persons with disabilities as a major underserved market segment
for receiving support from national low-income tax assistance
programs, asset building coalitions, and the private sector
financial services.
The Committee understands that only a small number of the
grants awarded thus far within the VITA Community Matching
Grant Assistance program have focused on reaching taxpayers
with disabilities as the primary target subpopulation. The
Committee strongly urges the IRS to make every effort to expand
the quantity and funding level of VITA grants focused on
serving persons with disabilities proportional to the growing
disability population requiring tax assistance.
The Committee understands that entities that are currently
increasing their outreach efforts to better serve the needs of
the disability population have experienced difficulty in
applying for Federal grant assistance due to a lack of
resources at the local level needed to complete the
application. The Committee urges the IRS to allow national
coalitions responsible for the coordination of local community
partnerships focused specifically on the expanded provision of
tax services for individuals with disabilities to compete in
future VITA community matching grant processes.
Charitable Exempt Organizations.--The Committee is
encouraged by recent IRS actions to invest greater resources in
activities that educate charitable exempt organizations about
their obligations under the Tax Code, helping to increase
voluntary compliance and strengthen charities' ability to
improve lives and communities. The Committee anticipates that
the IRS will utilize the increased resources in this
appropriation to continue to expand outreach to and education
of charitable organizations, particularly in light of
significant changes to tax-exempt laws in the Pension
Protection Act and other statutes.
IRS Free File Program.--The Free File Program allows
taxpayers meeting certain income requirements to electronically
prepare and file their income tax returns free of charge. The
IRS administers the Program as a partnership with the Free File
Alliance, a consortium of tax software companies. The Committee
has had long-standing concern that eligible taxpayers are not
taking full advantage of this program. The Committee expects
the IRS to place a high priority on improving marketing and
administration of the program as outlined by TIGTA. The IRS
should promote public awareness of the availability of this
program among those who can most benefit from its free
services, particularly lower income, disadvantaged, the working
poor and other underserved populations.
ENFORCEMENT
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $5,117,267,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 5,504,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,504,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Enforcement appropriation provides for the examination
of tax returns, both domestic and international; the
administrative and judicial settlement of taxpayer appeals of
examination findings; technical rulings; monitoring employee
pension plans; determining qualifications of organizations
seeking tax-exempt status; examining tax returns of exempt
organizations; enforcing statutes relating to detection and
investigation of criminal violations of the internal revenue
laws; identifying underreporting of tax obligations; securing
unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends the budget request level of
$5,504,000,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2010.
This amount is $386,733,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and the same as the budget request. Bill language is
included to transfer not less than $59,206,000 to the
Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement [ICDE] program and to
transfer up to $10,000,000 from the Enforcement account to the
Operations Support account to support the ICDE program.
The Committee fully supports the IRS's proposed use of the
funding increase to promote compliance with U.S. international
tax provisions and to address the tax gap attributable to
international transactions. The Committee is cognizant of the
trends in the international tax arena, specifically that (1)
the number of multinational enterprises increased by twentyfold
from 3,000 in 1990 to well over 63,000 in 2007, (2) the number
of filings containing international features has increased by
87 percent in the brief span of 2002 to 2007, (3) technology
has eased the ability of small- to mid-sized businesses to
complete globally, and (4) low-tax and no-tax jurisdiction
countries are home to 58 percent of the foreign profits of U.S.
multinational corporations.
It is against that backdrop that the IRS will, with the
increased resources supporting 784 additional FTE, be equipped
to launch a robust package of 6 enforcement initiatives. These
include improving identification and coverage of international
issues and increased issue specialization to address complex
international transactions; increasing coverage of smaller
international businesses and individuals; increasing reporting
compliance of domestic taxpayers with offshore activity by
doubling the number of criminal investigation attaches in
foreign ports of duty; furthering national law enforcement and
counterterrorism objectives; expanding IRS's international
presence in the tax-exempt and government sectors, including
discovery and investigation of offshore tax shelters used by
pension plans; and increasing compliance efforts, through more
rigorous automated matching and reconciliation of documents
regarding foreign person's U.S.-sourced income.
The IRS has projected a substantial return on investment to
be realized over the next 3 years from these initiatives. The
Committee shares the concerns outlined by the Government
Accountability Office [GAO] that the IRS needs to be prepared
to monitor, document, and report on the extent to which the
projected revenue forecasts actually yield the intended
results. The Committee strongly believes that evaluating what
occurs as a result of these targeted investments would be a
helpful indicator of success and useful in making future
spending decisions and resource allocation plans. The Committee
directs the IRS to provide the Committees on Appropriations
with detailed information about the actual costs, revenues, and
return on investment after the first and successive years of
the implementation of the new enforcement initiatives.
National Research Program.--As noted previously, the
Committee strongly supports the work of the National Research
Program [NRP] to increase understanding of the tax gap. While
the IRS's NRP has done a commendable job in updating the tax
gap estimates, significant challenges remain in obtaining
complete and timely data and in developing reliable methods for
interpreting the data. The IRS and others have expressed
concerns with the certainty of the overall tax gap estimate in
part because some aspects of the estimate rely on data from the
1970s and 1980s and in other areas, no estimates are available.
The Committee agrees with GAO, TIGTA, the National Taxpayer
Advocate, and the IRS Oversight Board, which have all
recommended greater and more frequent data collection and
studies of the tax gap including the portion of the tax gap
attibutable to international transactions.
Leveraging Preparer Community.--The Committee believes that
an understanding of the causes of inadvertent noncompliance and
the role of preparers in facilitating both inadvertent and
intentional noncompliance will improve tax administration and
help guide IRS's allocation of resources. The Committee is
encouraged by the IRS's focused efforts to study and identify
how to better leverage the tax preparer community to increase
taxpayer compliance. With over 80 percent of taxpayers using
either a tax return preparer or third-party software to
complete their returns, it is paramount that the IRS ensure
that the professionals who assist taxpayers adhere to uniform
and high ethical standards of conduct.
Misclassification of Contractors.--The Committee continues
to be highly concerned with the misclassification of workers as
independent contractors, who file using IRS Form 1099. Many of
these workers should be correctly classified as employees and
should file using W-2 forms. This misclassification leads to
the underreporting and underpayment of employment and payroll
taxes by employers and individuals, which accounts for a
substantial portion of the gross tax gap. Therefore, the
Committee strongly urges the IRS to provide increased tax
enforcement in industries where misclassification of employees
is widespread.
Global Tax Administration Issues.--The bill includes
$126,500 as a 1-year payment to support the IRS's role as host
in the United States for the annual meeting of the Leeds Castle
Group during 2010. In 2006, the IRS and the tax administrations
of nine other countries agreed to the establishment of the so-
called ``Leeds Castle Group''. Under this arrangement, the
commissioners of the revenue bodies of Australia, Canada,
China, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, the United
Kingdom, and the United States agreed to meet regularly to
consider and discuss issues of global and national tax
administration in their respective countries, particularly
mutual compliance challenges.
OPERATIONS SUPPORT
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $3,867,011,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 4,082,984,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,082,984,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall
planning and direction of the IRS including shared service
support related to facilities services, rent payments,
printing, postage, and security; other support functions that
are considered overhead but essential to the successful
operation of IRS programs including resources for headquarters
management activities, including IRS-wide support for strategic
planning, communications and liaison, finance, human resources,
EEO and diversity; research and statistics of income; and
necessary expenses for information systems and
telecommunication support, including developmental information
systems and operational information systems.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $4,082,984,000 for Operations
Support for fiscal year 2010. This amount is $215,973,000 above
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request. Bill language is included allowing up to $75,000,000
of these funds to remain available until September 30, 2011,
for information technology support and not to exceed $1,000,000
to remain available until September 30, 2012, for research; not
less than $2,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Oversight Board;
and $25,000 for official reception and representation expenses.
Information Technology [IT] Management and Oversight.--The
IRS has made significant strides in improving the management
and oversight of its business systems modernization [BSM]
program. The IRS needs to vigilantly address major systemic
problems with its non-BSM portfolio of information technology
projects. TIGTA has identified problems in several areas of IT
management and oversight including, but not limited to, such
areas as classification of investment projects, oversight and
governance structure, risk management, contingency planning,
and contractor performance and accountability.
The Committee expects the IRS to monitor its entire non-BSM
IT portfolio (regardless of tier classification) and make any
changes as necessary to ensure that each project has (1) been
properly classified for investment decision and management
purposes, (2) the appropriate governance structure in place
(such as an executive steering committee), (3) a risk
management plan, (4) a contingency plan in case of breakdowns
or failures in scheduled deliverables, (5) adequate provisions
in the contracts to ensure penalties and repayment to the
agency if performance is not met, (6) adequate contractor
staffing and management in place to fulfill the contract terms
and deliverables, and (7) been certified by the head of the
relevant IRS business unit that the project is deemed necessary
for its operations and meets its requirements.
BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $229,914,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 253,674,000
Committee recommendation................................ 274,119,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Business Systems Modernization account provides
resources for revamping business practices and acquiring new
technology. The IRS has undertaken a multi-year, multi-billion
dollar effort to migrate from its antiquated legacy system to
bring the IRS tax administration system to a level of public
and private sector best practices. The IRS is using a formal
methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, and evaluate its
portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This
methodology is designed to enforce a documented, repeatable,
and measurable process for managing investments throughout
their life cycle. The process is reviewed by the Government
Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of the
submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan
approval process prior to the use of appropriated funds
continues for fiscal year 2010.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $274,119,000 for Business Systems
Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2010. This amount is
$44,205,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$20,445,000 above the budget request. The Committee continues
to believe that BSM is the IRS's highest management and
administrative priority. As one of the Federal Government's
largest, most visible, and sensitive modernization efforts,
managing the risks inherent in BSM will require vigilant
management attention for several years. To the IRS's credit,
the program has made steady progress over the past few years.
The replacement of the aging, vintage 1969 individual master
file with the new customer account data engine [CADE] will
permit daily, rather than weekly, updating of individual tax
accounts. With CADE as its centerpiece, systems modernization
by the IRS promotes enhanced customer service, more expeditious
refund processing, and better administration of the tax system.
The Committee believes that the amount requested in the
budget for the BSM account is inadequate. The Committee
recommends an additional $20,445,000 to augment the IRS's
continued investment in developing the CADE, the database that
will ultimately be the central repository of tax account
information for all individual taxpayers. The Committee notes
that the IRS recently shifted its strategy for CADE, to focus
on completion of the core taxpayer account database. This
approach will allow the IRS to accelerate data conversion to
the new database while also addressing security, financial
material weaknesses, and long-term architectural planning
concerns. It is expected that once completed, the core database
will improve the overall functionality of existing
modernization systems, as well as improve overall customer
service to taxpayers.
The Committee shares the concern of the IRS Oversight Board
about the particularly acute needs of the CADE project, which
go far beyond what was requested in fiscal year 2010 and will
certainly grow in fiscal year 2011. The Committee believes it
is essential to accelerate the pace of progress and allow the
IRS to achieve key milestones in the immediate future fiscal
years. The Committee strongly urges that future funding
requests take into account the critical need to make progress
on deployment of a daily Individual Master File capability and
the CADE relational database.
HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $95,406,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 15,512,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,512,000
\1\Includes $80,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation provides operating funds to administer
the advance payment feature of a refundable trade adjustment
assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist
dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The
tax credit program was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public
Law 107-210) and became effective in August 2003.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommendation provides $15,512,000 for the
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration in fiscal year 2010.
This amount is $79,894,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and the same as the budget request. Under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5),
$80,000,000 was provided to HITCA to implement the health
insurance tax credit under the TAA Health Coverage Improvement
Act of 2009.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
The Committee has included six administrative provisions
carried in prior appropriations acts as follows:
Section 101 continues a provision allowing the IRS to
transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation made available to
the Agency in fiscal year 2010 to any other IRS account, with
the exception of the Enforcement account, which is limited to 3
percent. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee's
reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report.
Section 102 continues a provision maintaining a training
program in taxpayers' rights and cross-cultural relations.
Section 103 continues a provision requiring the IRS to
institute and enforce policies and procedures, which will
safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information.
Section 104 continues a provision directing that funds
shall be available for improved facilities and increased
staffing to support a 1-800 help line service for taxpayers.
Section 105 continues, but modifies, a provision
designating not less than $7,100,000,000 for enhanced tax
enforcement to address the Federal tax gap and an additional
$890,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Service for enhanced tax
enforcement activities. This provision is consistent with
section 401(c)(2)(B) of the concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2010 (S. Con. Res. 13; House Report 111-089).
Section 106 continues a provision that prohibits the use of
funds in this act to enter into, renew, extend, administer,
implement, enforce, provide oversight of, or make any payment
related to any qualified tax collection contract.
Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury
The Committee includes 11 administrative provisions carried
over from prior appropriations acts. The administrative
provisions are as follows:
Section 107 authorizes certain basic services within the
Treasury Department in fiscal year 2010, including purchase of
uniforms; maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of
insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign
countries; and contracts with the Department of State for
health and medical services to employees and their dependents
serving in foreign countries.
Section 108 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Financial
Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau,
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the
Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances.
Section 109 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration under certain circumstances.
Section 110 requires that the purchase of law enforcement
vehicles be consistent with departmental vehicle management
principles.
Section 111 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and
the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1
Federal Reserve Note.
Section 112 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to
transfer funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management
Service, to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the
costs of debt collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to
the Salaries and Expenses account from debt collections
received in the Debt Collection Fund.
Section 113 extends for 1 year the authority to conduct a
personnel management demonstration project.
Section 114 requires prior approval for the construction
and operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
Section 115 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint
and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval
of the committees of jurisdiction.
Section 116 authorizes the Department's intelligence
activities.
Section 117 permits the Bureau of Engraving and printing to
use $5,000 from the Industrial Revolving Fund for reception and
representation expenses.
TITLE II
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE
PRESIDENT
Compensation of the President
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $450,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 450,000
Committee recommendation................................ 450,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account provides for the compensation of the
President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3
U.S.C. 102.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for
compensation of the President, including an expense allowance
of $50,000. This is the same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and the same as the budget estimate. The expense account
is for official use as authorized by title 3, United States
Code and is not considered taxable to the President. The bill
specifies that any unused amount shall revert to the Treasury
consistent with 31 U.S.C. 1552.
The White House
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $53,899,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 59,319,000
Committee recommendation................................ 59,319,000
\1\Amount does not include funding of the Office of Policy Development
which was funded as a separate appropriation in fiscal year 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The ``Salaries and Expenses'' account of The White House
(previously titled ``The White House Office'') provides staff
assistance and administrative services for the direct support
of the President. The office also serves as the President's
representative before the media. In accordance with 3 U.S.C.
105, the office also supports and assists the activities of the
spouse of the President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $59,319,000
for The White House, Salaries and Expenses. The recommendation
is $5,420,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
is equal to the budget request.
The budget requests that funding for the Office of Policy
Development be included in funds appropriated under this
heading. The Office of Policy Development supports the National
Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council in carrying
out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President
in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of
economic and domestic policy. The Office of Policy Development
also provides support for other domestic policy development and
implementation activities as directed by the President. The
Committee agrees with the proposed consolidation and includes
funding for the Office of Policy Development within the amounts
recommended under this heading.
Of the total funding, the Committee recommends $1,400,000
for the Office of National AIDS Policy. The Committee directs
the administration to coordinate a Government-wide effort to
develop and implement a domestic AIDS strategy, including the
development of targets for improved prevention and treatment
outcomes.
The Committee expects officials employed in whole or in
part by the Executive Office of the President, and designated
by the President to coordinate policy agendas across executive
departments and agencies, to keep Congress fully and currently
informed of such activities.
Executive Residence at the White House
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $13,363,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 13,838,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,838,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
These funds provide for the care, maintenance, repair,
alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning,
heating, and lighting of the White House and the official and
ceremonial functions of the President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,838,000
for the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee
recommendation is $475,000 more than the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and is equal to the budget request. The
accompanying bill also continues certain restrictions on
reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence.
White House Repair and Restoration
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,600,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account funds the repair, alteration, and improvement
of the Executive Residence at the White House. A separate
account was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and
track expenditures for the capital improvement projects at the
Executive Residence at the White House.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000 for
White House Repair and Restoration, equal to the budget request
and $900,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
Council of Economic Advisers
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $4,118,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 4,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,200,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national
economy and its various segments, advises the President on
economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth
and stability, appraises economic programs and policies of the
Federal Government, and assists in the preparation of the
annual Economic Report of the President to Congress.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,200,000 for
salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This
amount is equal to the budget request and is $82,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
Office of Policy Development
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $3,550,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
The budget requests that funding for the Office of Policy
Development be included in funds appropriated for The White
House, Salaries and Expenses. The Committee agrees with the
proposed consolidation and recommends funding for the Office of
Policy Development within funds recommended for The White
House, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal year 2010.
National Security Council
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$11,965,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 12,231,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,231,000
\1\Includes $2,936,000 provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2009 (Public Law 111-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The National Security Council advises the President in
integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies related to
national security.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,231,000
for the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council.
This amount is equal to the budget request and $266,000 more
than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included amounts
provided in the Supplemental Appropriations act, 2009 (Public
Law 111-32).
Office of Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $101,333,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 115,280,000
Committee recommendation................................ 115,280,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Administration's mission is to provide high-
quality, cost-effective administrative services to the
Executive Office of the President. These services, defined by
Executive Order 12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel,
library and records services, information management systems
support, and general office services.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $115,280,000
for the Office of Administration for fiscal year 2010, an
increase of $13,947,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and equal to the budget request.
The Committee has included space rental costs for the
Office of Management and Budget [OMB] and the Office of
National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP] in this account as the
budget requests.
The Committee's recommendation includes $16,768,000 to
stabilize and modernize the information technology
infrastructure within the Executive Office of the President.
The Committee notes that the funding provided for this purpose
for fiscal year 2010 is an increase of $4,863,000 over the
fiscal year 2009 enacted funding. This increase supports a
major initiative that will refresh the aging information
technology infrastructure, strengthen disaster recovery
capabilities, and expand the capabilities of the Executive
Office of the President to electronically communicate with
citizens and provide information to the public. The Committee
supports the Office of Administration's plans to use funds
first to stabilize and secure the existing infrastructure.
The Committee directs the Office of Administration to place
a top priority on the implementation of comprehensive policies
and procedures for the preservation of all records, including
electronic records such as e-mails, videos, and social
networking communication, consistent with the requirements of
the Presidential Records Act, the Federal Records Act, and
other pertinent laws. The Office of Administration shall work
closely with the National Archives and Records Administration
[NARA] to ensure the full and complete maintenance and
formatting of electronic records that will eventually be turned
over to NARA. The Committee looks forward to receiving the
previously requested report on this matter. The Committee
expects the Office of Administration to keep the Committee
fully apprised of funding needs related to record preservation.
Office of Management and Budget
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $87,972,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 92,687,000
Committee recommendation................................ 92,687,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the
President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and
other executive responsibilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $92,687,000
for the Office of Management and Budget which is an increase of
$4,715,000 above than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
equal to the budget request.
The Committee notes that additional funding over the budget
request for fiscal year 2009 was provided to maintain and
modernize the Federal Government's core budgeting system, which
is nearly 20 years old. The Committee is disappointed that
additional funds were not requested for fiscal year 2010 to
modernize this system. The Committee reminds OMB that this
system is used Government-wide by all Federal agencies in
documenting and estimating budget activities, ensuring data
integrity with other financial and accounting systems, and
developing the President's budget proposals. A comprehensive
modernization will improve the integrity of budgetary data,
enhance the capabilities of budgetary staff, and provide a more
dynamic decisionmaking tool for OMB and the President. The
Committee urges OMB to focus efforts on planning and
implementing a modernization of this system using funds
provided for fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
The Committee notes that section 723 of the bill provides
the authority for each Executive department and agency to
transfer funds to, or reimburse a dedicated budget account
supporting, the activities of certain Government-wide councils.
These councils include: the President's Management Council, for
overall management improvement initiatives; the Chief Financial
Officers Council, for financial management initiatives; the
Chief Information Officers Council, for information technology
initiatives; the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, for
human capital initiatives; the Chief Acquisition Officers
Council, for procurement initiatives; and the Performance
Improvement Council, for performance improvement initiatives.
The Committee notes that OMB approves such transfers and
reimbursements and also directs the administration of these
funds. The Committee directs OMB to include a budgetary
justification for each council in the annual budget request for
the Executive Office of the President beginning in fiscal year
2011.
Office of National Drug Control Policy
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $27,200,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 27,575,000
Committee recommendation................................ 28,575,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP],
established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and
reauthorized by Public Law 109-469, is charged with developing
policies, objectives, and priorities for the National Drug
Control Program. In addition, ONDCP administers the Counterdrug
Technology Assessment Center, the High Intensity Drug
Trafficking Areas program, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media
Campaign, the Drug-Free Communities Program, and several other
related initiatives.
This account provides funding for personnel compensation,
travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for
general policy research to support the formulation of the
National Drug Control Strategy.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,575,000
for ONDCP's salaries and expenses. This amount is $1,375,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,000,000 above
the budget request. The increased funding level is provided to
allow ONDCP to reach an actual staffing level of 118 full-time
equivalents.
The Committee has been very concerned in recent years with
the organizational structure of ONDCP and with staffing
decisions made by the leadership of this office in the previous
administration. Staffing levels have declined from fiscal year
2000 to fiscal year 2008 by approximately 14 percent. The
Committee has noted a lack of racial and ethnic diversity as
well as a relatively low percentage of female representation as
a percentage of the total workforce. Finally, the Committee has
previously expressed displeasure with the role that political
appointees have played in managing ONDCP.
The Committee remains highly concerned that despite
repeated Committee directives and prohibitions in recent years,
ONDCP has failed to reverse a decision to reorganize 3 of its
12 components, as described in a December 1, 2006 letter to the
Committee. Among other things, this reorganization realigned or
reassigned staff from the Office of Planning and Budget,
renamed that office the Office of Performance and Budget, and
established a new Performance Branch. The Committee is dismayed
at the lack of progress on this issue and directs that the new
leadership reinstate the organizational structure in place
prior to the reorganization announced in the letter. ONDCP is
directed to provide written notice of actions taken to
implement this directive not later than 45 days after
enactment.
As a result of these concerns, in the fiscal year 2008
Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 110-161), Congress
directed the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA]
to conduct an independent study and analysis of ONDCP's
organization and management. After conducting a comprehensive
assessment of ONDCP's management, structure, and human capital,
NAPA issued its report in November 2008 and included five
recommendations. Among other things, the report recommended
that ONDCP streamline its organizational structure, rebalance
its workforce, and implement effective human capital practices.
The Committee agrees that ONDCP's implementation of each of
the five recommendations will help ONDCP increase
organizational and mission effectiveness. ONDCP should keep the
Committee apprised as it implements the recommendations and
action items contained in the NAPA report.
COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center [CTAC] was
established by the Counter-Narcotics Technology Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-510) and reauthorized in 1998 (Public Law 105-
277) to serve as the central counterdrug technology research
and development organization for the United States Government.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for
the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center. This amount is
$2,000,000 below the fiscal year enacted level, and the same as
the budget request. The Committee is hopeful that new
leadership will reinvigorate the CTAC program, allowing this
once valuable program to again flourish.
Funds Appropriated to the President
FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS
HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $234,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 220,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 234,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program
was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law
100-690) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's
reauthorization (Public Law 109-469) to provide assistance to
Federal, State, and local law enforcement entities operating in
those areas most adversely affected by drug trafficking.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $234,000,000
for the HIDTA program, the same as the fiscal year 2009 level
and $14,000,000 above the budget request. With the increased
funding, the Committee expects ONDCP to provide a program
adjustment for HIDTAs that qualify under performance
measurement criteria taking into account local conditions and
resources. In allocating funding provided above the level of
the budget request, priority should be given to ensuring that
HIDTAs receive adequate funding before allocating such funding
to discretionary programs. The Committee directs that funding
shall be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the
fiscal year 2009 level or $3,000,000, whichever is greater.
The Committee continues to be concerned about the
widespread use of methamphetamine. Hawaii has one of the
highest rates in the Nation for methamphetamine abuse, per
capita. In addition, Hawaii has experienced an increase in
crystal methamphetamine availability, while the Nation as a
whole has generally experienced a downward trend. Hawaii
received its HIDTA designation in 1999, yet its allocation of
funding is among the lowest in the Nation. Given the need to
effectively address this growing problem, the Committee
strongly recommends that ONDCP consider an increase in the
allocation to the Hawaii HIDTA. ONDCP is directed to consult
with the HIDTAs in advance of deciding programmatic spending
allocations for discretionary (supplemental) funding.
The Committee recommendation specifies that up to
$2,700,000 may be used for auditing services and associated
activities, and up to $500,000 shall be used to ensure the
continued operation and maintenance of the Performance
Management System.
The Committee directs that the HIDTA funds be transferred
to the appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously and
includes provisions in the bill to help prevent delay.
The Committee recognizes the National HIDTA Assistance
Center for providing programmatic support to the HIDTA program
to include training, financial management/audit review, and
other essential services.
The Committee retains a provision allowing unexpended funds
obligated prior to 2 years ago for programs addressing the
treatment or prevention of drug use to be used for other
approved HIDTA activities.
The HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing
support for ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control
operations normally funded out of the operating budgets of each
agency. ONDCP is directed to withhold all HIDTA funds from a
State until such time as a State or locality has met its
financial obligation.
OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $174,700,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 174,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 174,750,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690), and
the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act
(Public Law 109-469) established this account to be
administered by the Director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy. The funds appropriated to the program support
high-priority drug control programs and may be transferred to
drug control agencies.
This account includes the following programs: National
Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, Drug-Free Communities Support
Program, National Drug Court Institute, U.S. Anti-Doping
Agency, World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] membership dues,
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws, and Performance
Measures Development.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $174,750,000
for Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $50,000 above
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $750,000 above the
budget request. Within this amount, the Committee provides the
following funding levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign................ $70,000,000
Drug-Free Communities Support Program.................. 90,750,000
National Community Anti-Drug Coalition training.... (2,000,000)
National Drug Court Institute.......................... 1,000,000
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency................................ 9,600,000
World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA]........................ 1,900,000
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws............ 1,250,000
Performance Measures Development....................... 250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.--The Committee has
recommended consistent monetary support for the National Youth
Anti-Drug Media Campaign since it was initially funded by
Congress in fiscal year 1998. The Committee is concerned that
methamphetamine use is having a disproportional impact on our
rural communities, rendering the addiction an epidemic in the
lives of so many Americans from the Nation's farmlands,
reservations, and small towns. Most of these communities,
because they are located outside of urban areas, lack the
comprehensive support services needed to effectively address
the addiction and its devastating grip on so many families. The
Committee provides $70,000,000 for the Media Campaign, of which
at least $8,000,000 shall be for methamphetamine prevention
ads. The Committee directs that no more than 10 percent of the
funding provided for the Media Campaign be used for
administrative costs. ONDCP is encouraged to work with State
and local governments to increase visibility of the Media
Campaign. In order to combat methamphetamine abuse within
scarce resources, the Committee encourages ONDCP to focus
methamphetamine prevention advertising on geographic areas with
the highest level of drug problem within a State. ONDCP is
encouraged to use research-based advertising campaigns and to
collaborate with statewide or regional methamphetamine
prevention programs when possible.
Drug-Free Communities Support Program.--ONDCP directs the
Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in partnership
with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration. DFCSP provides dollar for dollar matching
grants of up to $125,000 to local coalitions that mobilize
their communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit
drug, and inhalant abuse. Such grants support coalitions of
youth; parents; media; law enforcement; school officials;
faith-based organizations; fraternal organizations; State,
local, and tribal government agencies; healthcare
professionals; and other community representatives. The DFCSP
enables these coalitions to strengthen their coordination and
prevention efforts, encourage citizen participation in
substance abuse reduction efforts, and disseminate information
about effective programs. The Committee provides $90,750,000
for the continuation of the DFCSP.
The Committee includes a provision in the bill directing
ONDCP to provide $2,000,000 of DFCSP funds for training and
related purposes as authorized by section 4 of Public Law 107-
82, as amended by Public Law 109-469.
National Drug Court Institute.--The National Drug Court
Institute facilitates the growth of the drug court movement by
promoting and disseminating education, research, and
scholarship concerning drug court programs and providing a
comprehensive drug court training series for practitioners.
Drug courts provide an effective means to fight drug-related
crime through the cooperative efforts of State and local law
enforcement, the judicial system, and the public health
treatment network. The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the
National Drug Court Institute.
United States Anti-Doping Agency.--The United States Anti-
Doping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for
Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for
managing the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic,
Pan Am and Paralympic athletes. As a nonprofit corporation
under the leadership of an independent Board of Directors,
USADA has the authority to set forth guiding principles in
anti-doping policy and to enforce any doping violations. In
addition to managing collection and testing procedures, USADA
is also responsible for enhancing research efforts and
promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules
governing the use of performance enhancing substances, as well
as the ethics of doping and its harmful health effects.
The Committee provides $9,600,000 for USADA, which is
$200,000 less than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the
same as the budget request.
World Anti-Doping Agency.--ONDCP represents the United
States in the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA], which promotes
and coordinates international activities against doping in all
forms of sports. The Committee provides $1,900,000 for
membership dues to the WADA.
National Alliance For Model State Drug Laws.--The National
Alliance for Model State Drug Laws [NAMSDL] is a national
organization that drafts, researches, and analyzes model drug
and alcohol laws and related State statutes, provides access to
a national network of drug and alcohol experts, and facilitates
working relationships among State and community leaders and
drug and alcohol professionals. In doing so, NAMSDL encourages
States to adopt and implement laws, policies, and regulations
to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related
consequences. The Committee provides $1,250,000 to NAMSDL and
directs ONDCP to provide the entire amount directly to NAMSDL
within 30 days after enactment of this act.
National Drug Control Performance Measures Development.--
Performance Measures funding is used to conduct evaluation
research for assessing the effectiveness of the National Drug
Control Strategy. The Committee provides $250,000 for this
program and directs ONDCP to outline and submit to the
Committee a detailed plan for projects that assess the
effectiveness of the strategy in achieving its goals and
objectives, and develop and improve needed data sources,
including specific funding levels, no later than 120 days after
enactment of this act.
Unanticipated Needs
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated
exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or
defense.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,000,000, which is equal to the
amount appropriated in fiscal year 2009 and the same as the
budget request.
Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $175,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 40,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation
(Partnership Fund) is a new program recommended by the
President for fiscal year 2010. The Committee understands that
the Partnership Fund will support pilot programs designed to
reduce errors and improve efficiency and service of Federal
programs administered by States. The Partnership Fund pilot
programs will focus on coordinating State-administered Federal
programs both within States and between State and Federal
officials and on technology solutions that may serve as best
practices in the future. The Director of the Office of
Management and Budget [OMB] will chair an interagency council
consisting of representatives of appropriate Federal agencies,
States, and other stakeholders. The council will analyze and
select pilot programs for funding, develop strategies and goals
for the overall program as well as for each pilot program, and
develop methodologies for assessing the performance of the
overall program and the pilot programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Partnership
Fund. The Partnership Fund is a new program and was not funded
in fiscal year 2009.
Although the recommended funding is $135,000,000 below the
budget request, the Committee believes that the recommended
amount represents sufficient resources to initiate the
Partnership Fund in fiscal year 2010. The Committee expects to
make future funding recommendations based on the progress and
performance of the Partnership Fund in fiscal year 2010 and
beyond.
The Committee is pleased with the proposed initiative to
improve the operations of State-administered Federal programs.
Efficiencies can be gained by better coordinating Federal
programs, and technology may play a significant role in such
improvements.
The Committee notes that OMB does not administer or execute
Federal programs. While the Committee expects OMB to play a
coordinating role in designing pilot programs, developing
performance measures, and allocating funds, the Committee
expects that the interagency council will be the exclusive
decisionmaking body for such activities. As Chair of the
Interagency Council, the Committee directs the Director of OMB
to seek consensus and input to the maximum extent possible from
council members and participating Federal and State agencies.
The Committee directs the interagency council, in
consultation with OMB, to submit a progress report to the
Committee on Appropriations, not later than March 30, 2010 and
semiannually until the program is concluded, including detailed
information on the goals and objectives of the Partnership Fund
and of each pilot project; performance measures for the
Partnership Fund and each pilot project; and an evaluation of
the performance of the overall Partnership Fund and each pilot
project to date. The report shall also include an operating
plan detailing funding allocations for each pilot project and
planned future funding allocations.
Presidential Transition Administrative Support
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
This account supports the Office of Administration for
expenses associated with the transition to the next
Presidential administration. The Committee does not provide
funding for this account for fiscal year 2010 because there
will not be a Presidential transition in that year.
Special Assistance to the President
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $4,496,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 4,604,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,604,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to
enable the Vice President to provide assistance to the
President in connection with the performance of executive
duties and responsibilities. The Vice President also has a
staff funded by the Senate to assist him in the performance of
his legislative duties. These funds also support the official
activities of the spouse of the Vice President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,604,000 for
special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as
the budget request and $108,000 above the fiscal year 2009
enacted level.
Official Residence of the Vice President
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $323,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 330,000
Committee recommendation................................ 330,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account supports the care and operation of the Vice
President's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory.
These funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining
facilities, and services required to perform and discharge the
Vice President's official duties, functions, and obligations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $330,000 for
the official residence of the Vice President. This amount is
the same as the budget request and $7,000 above the fiscal year
2009 enacted level.
Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President and Funds
Appropriated to the President
Section 201 continues a provision that provides flexibility
in the use of funds in accounts under the Executive Office of
the President.
Section 202 requires a detailed financial plan by the
Director of the ONDCP prior to the obligation of funds in
fiscal year 2010.
Section 203 allows for the transfer of up to 2 percent
among programs within ONDCP.
Section 204 establishes reprogramming requirements for
ONDCP.
TITLE III
THE JUDICIARY
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Established under Article III of the Constitution, the
judicial branch of Government is a separate but equal branch.
The Federal judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United
States Courts of Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts,
Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims, and
several other entities and programs. The organization of the
judiciary, the district and circuit boundaries, the places of
holding court, and the number of Federal judges are legislated
by the Congress and signed into law by the President.
The Committee's recommended funding levels support the
Federal judiciary's role of providing equal justice under the
law and include sufficient funds to support this critical
mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of
judges and support staff and the operation and security of our
Nation's courts.
The judicial branch is reminded that it, too, is subject to
the same funding constraints facing the executive and
legislative branches and continues to urge the Federal
judiciary to devote its resources primarily to the retention of
staff. Further, the judiciary is encouraged to contain
controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other
expenses.
Supreme Court of the United States
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $69,777,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 74,740,000
Committee recommendation................................ 74,081,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices
appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United
States, one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United
States. The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the
Federal court system.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,081,000
for the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs of
operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building
and grounds. The recommendation is $4,304,000 above the fiscal
year 2009 funding level and slightly below the request.
CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $18,447,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 14,568,000
Committee recommendation................................ 14,525,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Care of the Building and Grounds, for expenditure by the
Architect of the Capitol, provides for the structural and
mechanical care of the United States Supreme Court Building and
Grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical,
electrical, and electronic equipment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,525,000
for personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court
building and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of
the Capitol. The recommendation is $3,922,000 below the fiscal
year 2009 funding level and approximately the same as the
budget request. The Committee directs the Court to report to
the Committee no later than 90 days after enactment of this act
on its construction and modernization plans and to update the
Committee as the Court becomes aware of any changes in schedule
or budgetary needs.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $30,384,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 36,981,000
Committee recommendation................................ 32,300,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
was established on October 1, 1982 under Article III of the
Constitution. The court was formed by the merger of the United
States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate
division of the United States Court of Claims. The court
consists of 12 judges who are appointed by the President, with
the advice and consent of the Senate. Judges are appointed to
the court under Article III of the Constitution of the United
States.
The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a
variety of subject matter, including international trade,
Government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from
the United States Government, Federal personnel, and veterans'
benefits. Appeals to the court come from all Federal district
courts, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United
States Court of International Trade, and the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals. The court also takes appeals of
certain administrative agencies' decisions, including the Merit
Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract Appeals, the
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the Trademark
Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United States
International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of the
United States Congress, and the Government Accountability
Office Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewable by the
court.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,300,000.
The recommendation is $1,916,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level, and $4,681,000 below the budget request but
consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate of fiscal year 2010
requirements.
United States Court of International Trade
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $19,605,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 21,517,000
Committee recommendation................................ 21,374,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Court of International Trade, located in
New York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court
has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions
brought against the United States, its agencies and officers,
and certain civil actions brought by the United States, arising
out of import transactions and the administration and
enforcement of the Federal customs and international trade
laws.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,374,000.
The recommendation is $1,769,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate
of fiscal year 2010 requirements.
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $4,811,369,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 5,162,252,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,076,845,000
\1\Includes $10,000,000 provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2009 (Public Law 111-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide
total funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and
Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of
judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating
costs of appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts, the Court
of Federal Claims, and probation and pretrial services offices.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$5,076,845,000. The recommendation is $265,476,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 funding level and $85,407,000 below the budget
request.
Use of Lease-Construction Projects.--Historically, the
judiciary, in conjunction with the General Services
Administration, has utilized two execution strategies for
meeting its courthouse space needs--Federal construction and
lease-construction. The Committee does not believe that every
need for judicial space must be met through additional Federal
construction and that lease-construction can be an appropriate
alternative under certain circumstances. The Committee directs
the General Services Administration and the judiciary to
develop and submit a joint report on this issue to the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than 120 days after enactment of this
act. The report should identify the circumstances under which
it would be appropriate to acquire court facilities using a
lease-construction strategy.
Yuma, Arizona Courthouse.--In the case of the proposed
lease-construction project for courthouse space in Yuma,
Arizona, the Committee supports the lease-construction
strategy.
VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $4,253,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 5,428,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,428,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of
1986 (Public Law 99-660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program is a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a
perceived crisis in vaccine tort liability claims that
threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines
nationwide. The statute's primary intention is the creation of
a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism that ensures a no-fault
compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by
certain covered vaccines. This program protects the
availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a
substantial number of claims from the tort arena.
Not only did this act create a special fund to pay
judgments awarded under the act, but it also created the Office
of Special Masters within the United States Court of Federal
Claims to hear vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates that up
to eight special masters may be appointed for this purpose. The
special masters expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary
for vaccine injury cases from a special fund set up under the
Vaccine Act.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,428,000.
The recommendation is $1,175,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and consistent with the budget request.
DEFENDER SERVICES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $849,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 982,646,000
Committee recommendation................................ 975,504,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel
guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18
U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who
cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense
services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint
counsel from Federal public and community defender
organizations or from a panel of private attorneys established
by the court. The Defender Services program helps to maintain
public confidence in the Nation's commitment to equal justice
under the law and ensures the successful operation of the
constitutionally based adversary system of justice by which
Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed rights are
enforced.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $975,504,000.
The recommendation is $126,104,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and $7,142,000 below the budget request.
Panel Attorney Pay Rates.--The Committee's recommended
funding level supports an increase in the non-capital panel
attorney rate per hour from $110 to $115 in fiscal year 2010.
FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $62,206,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 63,401,000
Committee recommendation................................ 62,275,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances
of grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and
land commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily
upon the volume and the length of jury trials demanded by
parties to both civil and criminal actions and the number of
grand juries being convened by the courts at the request of the
United States Attorneys.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,275,000.
The recommendation is $69,000 more than the fiscal year 2009
funding level and $1,126,000 less than the budget request.
COURT SECURITY
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $428,858,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 463,642,000
Committee recommendation................................ 457,353,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983
and funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of
protective guard services, and the procurement, installation,
and maintenance of security systems and equipment for United
States courthouses and other facilities housing Federal court
operations, including building access control, inspection of
mail and packages, directed security patrols, perimeter
security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other
similar activities as authorized by section 1010 of the
Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public Law 100-
702).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $457,353,000.
The recommendation is $28,495,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and $6,289,000 below the budget request.
The Committee recommends funding for new U.S. Marshals
Service positions as well as requested reimbursements to the
Marshals Service.
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $79,049,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 83,963,000
Committee recommendation................................ 83,075,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts
was created in 1939 by an act of Congress. It serves the
Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to
provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous
services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and
staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States
and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies
as well as applicable Federal statutes and regulations. The AO
is the focal point for communication and coordination within
the Federal judiciary and with Congress, the executive branch,
and the public on behalf of the judiciary.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $83,075,000.
This recommendation is $4,026,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and $888,000 below the budget request.
Federal Judicial Center
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $25,725,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 27,486,000
Committee recommendation................................ 27,328,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC,
improves the management of Federal judicial dockets and court
administration through education for judges and staff, and
research, evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts
and the Judicial Conference. The Center's responsibilities
include educating judges and other judicial branch personnel
about legal developments and efficient litigation management
and court administration. Additionally, the Center also
analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures
and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of the methods of
best practice.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,328,000.
The recommendation is $1,603,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and $158,000 below the budget request.
The Committee has included funding requested for both
education, research, and technology, as well as education and
training enhancements. The Committee directs the Federal
Judicial Center to keep the Committee apprised of staff brought
on board throughout fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
Judicial Retirement Funds
PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $76,140,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 82,374,000
Committee recommendation................................ 82,374,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The funds in this account cover the estimated future
benefit payments to be made to retired bankruptcy judges and
magistrate judges, claims court judges, and spouses and
dependent children of deceased judicial officers.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $82,374,000
for payments to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund and the
Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation is
$6,234,000 above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and
consistent with the budget request.
United States Sentencing Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $16,225,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 17,056,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,837,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Sentencing Commission establishes,
reviews, and revises sentencing guidelines, policies, and
practices for the Federal criminal justice system. The
Commission is also required to monitor the operation of the
guidelines and to identify and report necessary changes to the
Congress.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,837,000.
The recommendation is $612,000 above the fiscal year 2009
funding level and consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate
of fiscal year 2010 requirements.
Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary
The Committee recommends the following administrative
provisions for the judiciary.
Section 301 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the
employment of experts and consultative services.
Section 302 allows the judiciary, subject to the
Committee's reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5
percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the
amount that may be transferred into any one appropriation.
Section 303 limits official reception and representation
expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United
States to no more than $11,000.
Section 304 requires the Administrative Office to submit an
annual financial plan for the judiciary within 90 days of
enactment of this act.
Section 305 grants the judicial branch the same tenant
alteration authorities as the executive branch.
Section 306 provides continued authority for a court
security pilot program.
Section 307 allows for a salary adjustment for Justices and
judges.
TITLE IV
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Federal Payments
FEDERAL FUNDS
A total of $727,365,000 in Federal funds are estimated to
be available to the District of Columbia government, the
District of Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court
Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and other D.C.
entities. This is $14,995,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and $11,760,000 below the budget request. A total
of $2,575,447,000 in Federal funds will be received by the
District government from the various Federal grant programs,
including Federal reimbursements from such programs as Medicaid
and Medicare.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $35,100,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 35,100,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,100,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Resident Tuition Support program was created by the
District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (Public Law
106-98), expanded through the District of Columbia College
Access Improvement Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-157), and
amended and reauthorized through Public Law 110-97. This
program provides eligible college-bound District residents the
opportunity to expand their higher education choices.
Under the program, financial assistance is available to
qualified District residents who attend public colleges outside
of the District of Columbia, private postsecondary institutions
in the District of Columbia, Maryland, or Virginia, or any
historically black college or university. The private-school
tuition grants are restricted to nonprofit institutions.
Students who attend public schools receive assistance equal to
the difference between the tuition paid by residents of the
State in which the institution is located and the tuition
charged to nonresident students, with an annual limit of
$10,000 and a lifetime limit of $50,000. Private-school
students receive a $2,500 maximum annual grant, with a lifetime
limit of $12,500.
Since its inception, the program has disbursed over
$218,975,600 for the benefit of over 14,125 District of
Columbia residents. Thirty-eight percent of the grantees are
the first members of their families to attend college.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $35,100,000
for the resident tuition support (DC TAG) program, the same as
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request. The Committee understands that the program will have
$192,774 in carryover funds available in fiscal year 2010. The
Committee urges the Office of the State Superintendent of
Education to continue its efforts to improve the student
retention and college graduation rate of program participants.
Because program costs have the potential of growing beyond a
level for which increased Federal funding may be available and
sustainable, the Committee directs the Mayor and the Office of
the State Superintendent of Education to continue the use of
effective cost containment measures and regularly report to
Congress on the effects of these efforts. The Committee further
directs the District to fully explore non-Federal sources of
additional funds to augment the Federal investment to meet
program needs. As specified in Public Law 106-98 which
established the program, the Committee directs the Mayor to
address any insufficiency in funding through ratable reductions
and other adjustments or prioritization considerations based on
the income and need of eligible students.
According to data collected by the National Student
Clearinghouse [NCS], more than 3,600 students participating in
the DC TAG program have earned 2- or 4-year college degrees.
The Committee understands that the Office of the State
Superintendent of Education is currently conducting a
comprehensive review of graduation rates for students enrolled
in the DC TAG program. The Committee directs the District of
Columbia to promptly provide the results of the completed
review to the Committees on Appropriations, the Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and
the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY COSTS IN THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $39,177,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,350,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Due to the fact that the District of Columbia is the seat
of the Federal Government and headquarters of many
international organizations, District police, fire, and
emergency personnel have had to provide security for a number
of events. As the need for the District of Columbia to provide
security increases, overtime costs for personnel escalate and
divert local police from neighborhood patrols. The President
has supported reimbursing the District for these costs.
In addition, the District of Columbia National Guard, under
the exclusive jurisdiction of the President of the United
States, is specifically trained to support law enforcement
during critical missions, such as demonstrations, Presidential
inaugurations and funerals, and emergency services for weather-
related contingencies. The D.C. Air Guard patrols the skies
over the District on round-the-clock alert. However, residency
restrictions preclude a significant number of Guard members
from eligibility for tuition assistance programs, which has
severely hampered recruitment and retention efforts.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a total payment of $15,350,000, of
which $15,000,000 is for the District of Columbia for the costs
of providing public safety at events related to the presence of
the national capital in the District of Columbia, for the costs
of providing support requested by the United States Secret
Service Division in carrying out their protective duties under
the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for
the costs of providing support to respond to immediate and
specific terrorist threats or attacks in the District of
Columbia or surrounding jurisdictions.
In addition, the District may use any funds remaining from
prior year appropriations under this heading. The District may
use the payment to cover the costs of Executive transportation
support including motorcades and helicopter landings. The
Committee directs the District of Columbia to submit a detailed
budget justification with its funding request for fiscal year
2011. The Committee further directs the District of Columbia to
submit, within 60 days of the end of fiscal year 2010, a report
to the House and the Senate Committees on Appropriations
detailing the purposes and amounts expended using the funds,
particularly noting any deviation from the original proposed
spending.
In addition, the Committee recommends $350,000 for a
tuition assistance program for nonresident District of Columbia
National Guard members.
The total funding is $23,827,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and $350,000 above the budget request. The
Committee notes that in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009
(Public Law 111-8), an enhanced Federal payment of $38,825,000
was provided to support the unprecedented security and planning
costs incurred by the District of Columbia for the January 2009
Presidential Inauguration.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $248,409,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 248,592,000
Committee recommendation................................ 258,517,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33, title
XI), the Federal Government is required to finance the District
of Columbia Courts. This Federal payment to the District of
Columbia Courts funds the operations of the District of
Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, the Court System,
and the Capital Improvement Program. Capital improvements
include a complete restoration of the historic Old Courthouse,
as well as design and renovation work on the H. Carl Moultrie I
Courthouse and several other buildings as part of a master plan
for Judiciary Square. By law, the annual budget includes
estimates of the expenditures for the operations of the Courts
prepared by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration as
well as the President's recommendation for funding the Courts'
operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the District
of Columbia Courts of $258,517,000, which is $10,108,000 above
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $9,565,000 above the
President's budget request. This amount includes $12,014,000
for the Court of Appeals, $110,836,000 for the Superior Court,
$60,147,000 for the Court System, and $75,520,000 for capital
improvements to courthouse facilities.
The Committee recommendation for the Superior Court of the
District of Columbia is $2,345,000 above the President's
recommended funding of $108,491,000, and will permit the Court
to enhance juvenile probation services through a community-
based drop-in center to supervise youth and establish a mental
health court coordinator to strengthen services for defendants
with mental illness.
The Committee recommendation for the District of Columbia
Court System is $1,700,000 above the President's recommended
funding of $58,447,000, and will permit the Court System to
enhance performance reporting and strategic management to
increase the Courts' accountability to the public and support
an IT infrastructure program manager to ensure that physical
relocation of the information technology offices within the
court complex is not disruptive to court operations.
The Committee recommendation for capital improvements
provides $5,520,000 above the President's recommendation of
$70,000,000 to support maintenance of infrastructure, including
HVAC, electrical, and plumbing upgrades, and other repair
projects to address health and safety risks, improve signage,
enhance ADA access, and update technology. The Committee
supports the $15,000,000 included in the President's
recommendation to complete the modernization of the adult
cellblock and United States Marshals Service administrative
space to address health, safety, and security concerns.
The Committee commends the courts on the steps taken to
address concerns about the substandard working conditions of
the United States Marshals Service at the Moultrie Courthouse.
The Committee encourages the District of Columbia Courts to
continue progress on the plan to upgrade the conditions to an
acceptable level. The Committee directs the District of
Columbia Courts to keep the Committee regularly informed on the
status of the renovations, including prompt notification of any
significant cost increases or schedule delays.
DEFENDER SERVICES IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $52,475,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 52,475,000
Committee recommendation................................ 55,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The District of Columbia Courts appoint and compensate
attorneys to represent persons who are financially unable to
obtain such representation. The Defender Services programs
provide counsel for indigent persons who are charged with
criminal offenses, for family proceedings involving child
abuse, neglect, and termination of parental rights, and for
guardianship proceedings for protection of mentally
incapacitated individuals and minors whose parents are
deceased.
In addition to legal representation, these programs provide
indigent persons with services such as transcripts of court
proceedings, expert witness testimony, foreign and sign
language interpretation, and investigations and genetic
testing.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $55,000,000
for Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts. This
is $2,525,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$2,525,000 above the budget request.
To promote access to justice and ensure that high-quality
legal representation remains available to the indigent in the
District of Columbia Courts, the Committee recommends an
increase to support a continued phase-in of the compensation
adjustment from $80 to $90 per hour for attorneys appointed to
represent persons under the Criminal Justice Act, the Counsel
for Child Abuse and Neglect program, and the Guardianship
program.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $203,490,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 212,408,000
Committee recommendation................................ 212,408,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA]
for the District of Columbia is an independent Federal agency
created by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33, title
XI). CSOSA acquired the operational responsibilities for the
former District agencies in charge of probation and parole, and
houses the Pretrial Services Agency within its framework. The
mission of CSOSA is to increase public safety, prevent crime,
reduce recidivism, and support the fair administration of
justice in close collaboration with the community. The CSOSA
appropriation supports the Community Supervision Program which
monitors or supervises approximately 15,000 offenders on a
daily basis and the Pretrial Services Agency which monitors
approximately 5,269 defendants at any given time and has placed
over 1,788 defendants into substance abuse treatment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $212,408,000,
which is $8,918,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level
and the same as the budget request. The Committee notes that
the increased resources will enable CSOSA to expand the global
positioning system [GPS] program capacity for surveillance of
high-risk offenders and GPS data information sharing with
District of Columbia public safety officials.
The Committee is supportive of CSOSA's efforts to
successfully return ex-offenders to their communities. For a
number of years, CSOSA has worked with grassroots, nonprofit
providers of transitional housing, including faith-based
organizations, that offer counseling, mentoring, and life
skills training to men and women returning home from prison.
The Committee notes that this is a model program for the
Nation.
The Committee is encouraged that the Pretrial Services
Agency reduced caseloads from 115 per officer in fiscal year
2007 to 82 to per officer in fiscal year 2008. The Committee is
concerned that even with the proposed budget increase, funding
for CSOSA for offender contract treatment, including substance
abuse, halfway-back residential sanctions, mental health and
sex offender assessments, and transitional housing is
constrained.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $35,659,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 37,316,000
Committee recommendation................................ 37,316,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of
Columbia, an independent organization established by a District
of Columbia statute (16 D.C. Code 2-1601-1608), has a distinct
mission to provide and promote quality legal representation
services within the District of Columbia justice system. PDS
provides legal representation to indigent adults and children
facing loss of liberty and provides support in the form of
training, consultation, and legal reference services to members
of the local bar appointed as counsel in criminal, juvenile,
and mental health cases involving indigent individuals.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the Public
Defender Service for the District of Columbia of $37,316,000,
which is $1,657,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level
and the same as the budget request. The increased funding will
support continued progress on a new case management system as
well as address inflationary increases in compensation and
fixed costs.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $16,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Approximately one-third of the District is served by a
combined sewer system, constructed by the Federal Government in
1890, in which both sanitary waste and storm water flow through
the same pipes. When the collection system or the Blue Plains
treatment plant reach capacity, typically during periods of
heavy rainfall, the system is designed to overflow the excess
water. This mixture of sewage and storm water runoff is
discharged to the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek, and
tributary waters between 60 and 75 times each year. Under a
judicial consent decree, the Water and Sewer Authority is
undertaking a 20-year, $2,200,000,000 sewer construction
program to reduce combined sewer overflows [CSO]. The program
includes deep underground storage tunnels, side tunnels to
reduce flooding, pump station rehabilitation, and the
elimination of over a dozen CSO outfalls along the Potomac and
Anacostia Rivers and Rock Creek. When completed in 2025, this
project is expected to vastly improve water quality and
significantly reduce debris in our Nation's capital waterways.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $20,000,000,
to be matched by at least $20,000,000 provided by the Water and
Sewer Authority, to continue implementation of the Long-Term
Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan. This is an increase of
$4,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the
same as the budget request.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COUNCIL
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,774,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,774,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,774,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for the District
of Columbia [CJCC] is the primary forum in which District of
Columbia criminal justice agencies can identify and address
interagency coordination issues. Its mission is to address
coordination difficulties among District of Columbia criminal
justice agencies and address criminal justice issues, such as
illegal drugs, juvenile justice, halfway houses, information
technology, and identification of arrestees. The CJCC was
originally established pursuant to a memorandum of agreement in
May 1998 and operates as an independent working group to foster
cooperation among the more than a dozen Federal and local
governmental agencies which have law enforcement responsibility
in our Nation's capital. As part of a local enactment in August
2001, the CJCC was established as an independent agency within
the District of Columbia.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,774,000 to
the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council [CJCC]. This is the
same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the
budget request. The Committee directs the CJCC to submit annual
performance measures in an annual report, which should also
describe progress made on individual CJCC initiatives.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure provides
support to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and
Superior Court through reviewing and investigating allegations
of judicial misconduct. The Judicial Nomination Commission
recommends candidates to the President of the United States for
nomination to judicial vacancies in these courts. In accordance
with the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government
Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33), the Federal
Government is responsible for financing of the District of
Columbia Courts, including the operations of the District of
Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, the Court System,
and the Capital Improvement Program. Although independent of
the Courts by design, these two Commissions provide important
functions within the judicial branch of local government in the
District of Columbia.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides $500,000 as a Federal payment for
the judicial commissions, of which $295,000 is designated for
the Judicial Nomination Commission and $205,000 is designated
for the Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure. This
amount is $500,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
the same as the budget request. The Committee supports the
rationale of recognizing these commissions as local judicial
branch agencies for which Federal support for the operations is
necessary.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $4,888,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,000,000 to
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the District of
Columbia. This is $3,888,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and $1,000,000 above the budget request. These funds are
for health, education, environmental, social service, and
economic development initiatives in the District of Columbia.
The Committee directs that of this amount, $1,000,000 shall be
transferred to the Children's National Medical Center [CNMC] in
Washington, DC, to meet the growing demand for critical
intensive care services. With the funds provided, CNMC will
renovate an unoccupied unit adjacent to the current pediatric
intensive care unit, which will increase the number of beds
from 23 to 33.
The Committee is supportive of the CNMC and the critical
services it provides to the District of Columbia's children and
families. Founded in 1870 as a small community hospital to
treat children orphaned by the Civil War, CNMC has grown into
an internationally recognized team of more than 5,000 pediatric
healthcare professionals serving children regionally,
nationally, and internationally.
The Committee commends CNMC for its role as both an
international pediatric specialty care destination for children
from nearly 20 countries, and as a safety net hospital for the
children in its community. As the single largest provider of
pediatric services in the District of Columbia, CNMC touches
the lives of more than 600,000 children annually. From serving
as the medical home for the District's children in foster care
through its DC KIDS program to employing all the nurses in 163
District public and public charter schools, CNMC is an integral
part of the fabric of the District of Columbia.
Because of a commitment of Federal resources for capital
improvements, CNMC has successfully leveraged private
philanthropic support. It has used Federal funds and private
funds to expand and upgrade its facilities, including
completion of a 54 bed neonatal intensive care unit,
decontamination unit, quarantine facility and a 250 bed
inpatient tower providing family centered accommodations and
state-of-the art technology.
The Committee directs CNMC as a grantee of funding under
this account to submit a detailed budget and a comprehensive
description of the activities to be carried out with the funds
no later than June 1, 2010 to the Chief Financial Officer and
the Committees on Appropriations. The Committee further directs
that any funds made available to the grantee under this account
must be spent primarily in the District of Columbia to benefit
District of Columbia residents.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $54,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 74,400,000
Committee recommendation................................ 75,400,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Committee continues its commitment to improving
educational opportunities for the children of the District of
Columbia. The Committee enhances a three-sector funding
arrangement to provide Federal resources for the District of
Columbia Public Schools, public charter schools, and for a
scholarship program for low-income students to attend private
schools. The Committee is encouraged by the progress to date to
implement the Mayor's initiative to chart a new management
course for the District's troubled public school system in
response to Public Law 110-33, which vested authority over the
school superintendent, operating budget, and capital program in
the Mayor.
The Committee acknowledges the daunting challenges this
undertaking presents, given that District of Columbia public
school students chronically perform well below national
averages in reading and mathematics, but notes that progress
has been made over the past 2 years under the leadership of the
Chancellor to streamline bureaucracy, recruit new principals,
expand course offerings available to students, and raise math
and reading test scores. The Committee is further encouraged by
plans to implement an innovative teacher compensation system
that has the potential to attract and retain excellent teachers
in District public schools.
Public charter schools in the District of Columbia have
grown considerably since the first two opened in 1996 and
served 160 students. Today, there are 59 tuition-free,
autonomous public charter schools on 95 campuses operating in
the District, enrolling approximately 25,000 students, one-
third of all District of Columbia public school students. The
District of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-
134), one of the strongest charter school laws in the Nation,
guarantees charter school autonomy from the District of
Columbia Public Schools and from the District government and
mandates uniform per student funding of all public school
students, both traditional and charter.
The Committee is encouraged by the work being done by the
District of Columbia Public Charter School Board to enforce a
high standard of academic quality for all District charter
schools and to close poorly performing schools. The Committee
recognizes that the test scores of some of the charter schools
are unacceptably low and calls on the District of Columbia
Public Charter School Board to demand improvement on a timely
basis, reform, or close these failing charter schools.
Congress established the private school scholarship
(voucher) program as a 5-year pilot in 2003. The intent of this
program, operated by the Washington Scholarship Fund under a
grant from the Department of Education, is to help increase the
District of Columbia's capacity to provide parents,
particularly low-income parents whose children attend low-
performing schools, more options for quality education. In
school year 2008-2009, over 1,700 students participated in the
program at 49 nonpublic schools.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $75,400,000,
which is $21,400,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level
and $1,000,000 above budget request. These funds are allocated
as follows: $42,200,000 for the District of Columbia Public
Schools to improve public school education; $20,000,000 to
expand quality charter schools; and $13,200,000 to the
Secretary of Education for opportunity scholarships for low-
income students in the District of Columbia, of which
$1,000,000 may be used for program oversight and
administration, and of which $1,000,000 may be used to
administer testing of students to determine and compare
academic performance of participating schools.
District of Columbia Public Schools
The Committee directs the District of Columbia Public
Schools to submit a detailed spending plan outlining specific
activities no later than 60 days after enactment of this act
and that this spending plan should contain a particular
emphasis on the recruitment and retention of a high-quality
teacher and principal workforce in District public schools.
The District has 11,000 special needs students for whom the
District must provide or secure educational services. District
taxpayers currently spend $200,000,000 each year on private
school tuition and transportation costs for more than 2,300 of
these special needs students, one-fifth of all special needs
students, that the public schools are unable to serve. The
District of Columbia is required to comply with a Federal
court-ordered consent decree entered in 2006 to settle a 9-year
class action lawsuit brought by parents of special needs
children. Under the judicial consent decree, the District is
required to reduce its backlog of cases on placement
assessments for individual special needs students, to fix its
long-broken data management system, which makes it difficult
for parents to access their children's files, and to hire more
special needs staff. As part of the increased Federal funds
provided for the District of Columbia Public Schools for fiscal
year 2010 in this bill, the Committee expects the District to
make substantial progress in achieving compliance with the
consent decree, eliminating inadequacies in treatment and
support for special needs students, and establishing more
inclusive learning environments for these students within the
District of Columbia Public Schools system.
District of Columbia Public Charter Schools
The Committee notes that the District of Columbia's fiscal
year 2010 Budget Act contains a decrease in the public charter
schools per pupil facilities allowance in the amount of
$7,300,000. The Committee also notes that, even before this
decrease, public charter schools in the District receive
approximately one-half as much facilities funding per student
as does the District of Columbia Public Schools [DCPS]. The
Committee believes that facilities funding should be equitably
distributed among all District public school students and urges
the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to
distribute to the public charter schools, on a per pupil basis,
$5,000,000 in additional facilities allowance funding. The
Committee encourages the District of Columbia to fund the
remaining $2,300,000 shortfall.
With respect to the Federal payment for fiscal year 2010,
the Committee directs the District of Columbia Public Charter
School Board to submit to Congress, through the Office of the
State Superintendent of Education [OSSE], a detailed spending
plan outlining specific activities no later than 60 days after
enactment of this act. This spending plan should contain a
particular emphasis on enhancing the academic quality of
existing charter schools, expanding the capacity of high-
performing charter schools, and instituting a robust
performance management system to help identify low-performing
schools and close them. The Committee expects that funding
provided for charter schools will be used in accordance with
the plan submitted. Federal funding made available through this
appropriation directed to OSSE should be made available to the
District of Columbia Public Charter School Board no later than
30 days after enactment of this act.
Over the years, public charter schools have moved into and
revitalized former DCPS school buildings that otherwise would
have been developed into condominiums or used for other
commercial purposes. These buildings, including several
historic structures, often long-abandoned and severely
blighting neighborhoods, have been converted to public charter
schools.
The Committee further notes that the public charter schools
have been permitted to enter into negotiations to acquire only
a handful of the 24 school buildings recently declared surplus
by the Mayor and Chancellor. It is evident to the Committee
that the District of Columbia continues its long-standing
practice of ignoring the public charter schools' right of first
offer on surplus school buildings as outlined in the District
of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-134). The
Committee notes that this right applies to all school buildings
no longer needed by DCPS, including ones in which the District
of Columbia government would rather locate government agencies
or use for economic development or other purposes. The
Committee directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia to
submit to the Committees on Appropriations, no later than
January 15, 2010, a detailed fiscal year 2010-2014 public
education facilities plan that will ensure public charter
school access to surplus or underutilized DCPS space.
Finally, the Committee reminds the government of the
District of Columbia that students in public charter schools
are to have access to the same publicly funded services that
are offered to students in traditional public schools. These
include school nurses, School Resource Officers, crossing
guards, and mental health and other wrap-around services.
Opportunity Scholarship Program
The Committee believes that any school enrolling a
scholarship participant under the Opportunity Scholarship
Program should satisfy certain minimum reasonable expectations
as an educational setting. Therefore, the Committee expressly
provides that none of the funds provided for opportunity
scholarships shall be used by an eligible student to enroll in
any participating school under the D.C. School Choice Incentive
Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-199) unless (1) the participating
school has and maintains a valid certificate of occupancy
issued by the District of Columbia; and (2) the core subject
matter teachers of the eligible students hold 4-year bachelor's
degrees.
The Committee emphasizes that the authorization for the
private scholarship program expired on September 30, 2008.
Accordingly, the Committee directs that funds provided for the
scholarship program shall be used for currently enrolled
participants rather than new scholarship applicants. The
Committee is particularly sensitive to the potential impact of
disrupting students' educational settings, but is also
concerned about the potential damage of allowing students to
remain in low-quality private schools.
The purpose of the pilot opportunity scholarship program
was to provide students with academic opportunities not
available in low-performing public schools. Therefore, the
Committee continues funding for current recipients of
opportunity scholarships, but directs the Secretary of
Education to submit a report to Congress assessing the quality
of all participating schools. The Committee directs the
Secretary to allow the use of scholarships after school year
2010-11 only at schools performing at an academic level
superior to District of Columbia public schools.
For purposes of determining the performance of
participating schools, the Committee further directs the
Secretary to administer the same test to opportunity
scholarship participants that will be administered to the
District public school students in the 2009-2010 school year
for the purposes of compiling the requested report. The
Committee directs schools enrolling students participating in
the opportunity scholarship program and the administrator of
the program to comply fully and promptly with all requests by
the Secretary for data and information necessary for the
completion of the report to Congress. The Committee provides
additional funding to the Secretary to administer the
assessments and compile the report to Congress.
In November 2007, the Government Accountability Office
[GAO] detailed several program shortcomings in some of the
participating schools in the scholarship program, including
unsuitable learning environments, teachers without bachelor's
degrees, and lack of occupancy permits. GAO also cited concerns
about the sufficiency of financial controls and management
issues, including failure to determine accreditation of
participating schools.
A federally mandated evaluation of the program is being
conducted by the Department of Education's Institute of
Education Sciences. Results assessing the overall impact of the
program after the first 3 years of implementation, reflect that
student test scores in reading improved by an equivalent of 3
months of additional learning over 3 years, but that there was
no statistically significant difference in scores for male
students, in math scores for any students, or for students
coming from public schools designated as ``in need of
improvement.'' The program had a positive impact on parents'
perception of safety and satisfaction but no impact on student
reports of safety and satisfaction.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO JUMP START PUBLIC SCHOOL REFORM
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
With the enactment of Public Law 110-33, providing the
Mayor of the District of Columbia with authority over the
budget and administrative functions of the District of Columbia
school system, the District of Columbia has launched an
aggressive and comprehensive reform of its failing public
school system. Under the direction of the Chancellor of the
District of Columbia Public Schools, a multitude of critical
initiatives are underway. For fiscal year 2009, Congress
provided a one-time Federal contribution to support the
recruitment and training of principals and other school
leaders; the development of optimal school programs; and the
enhancement of the District's data reporting capabilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides no funding in this account for
fiscal year 2010, the same as the budget request. The Committee
provides funds for local education initiatives through the
``Federal Payment for School Improvement'' account within this
title.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CONSOLIDATED LABORATORY FACILITY
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $21,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The District's forensics laboratory capacity has not kept
pace with the innovations in the field and is therefore unable
to meet the demands of the current workload. As a result, the
District is forced to seek help from the FBI crime laboratory
in Quantico, Virginia and other Federal agencies. Because the
FBI has its own workload capacity, it strictly limits the
evidence it will process for the District in violent crime
cases.
The lack of capacity and outmoded technology have led to
many so-called ``cold'' or unsolved crime cases in the
District. The District of Columbia Metropolitan Police
Department [MPD] has a backlog of thousands of sexual assault
and homicide cases, and the volume continues to grow.
Currently, the FBI reports that approximately 30 percent of
their DNA analysis is casework from MPD. Further, the Drug
Enforcement Agency performs all of MPD's drug analysis on
controlled dangerous substances, and the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has tested approximately 100
arson cases on behalf of the District.
A new comprehensive laboratory, housing both anti-terrorism
and criminal forensic components under one roof, will not only
allow the District to more effectively and efficiently process
crime cases, but it will be an essential element in processing
evidence associated with potential bioterrorism attacks.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $15,000,000
for costs associated with completing the construction of a new
comprehensive laboratory facility in the District of Columbia.
This is $6,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level,
and the same as the budget request. The Committee directs that
this Federal payment be equally matched with local funds.
The Committee notes that over the past 5 fiscal years
Congress has provided over $43,000,000 in Federal payments,
matched by over $160,000,000 in local investments. When
completed, the facility will provide services to all agencies
within the borders of the District. United States Capitol
Police, United States Park Police, and the United States Secret
Service all submit evidence to the District's Firearms Unit,
which will be housed in the consolidated lab. The public health
lab portion of the facility will allow the District to join the
national Laboratory Response Network.
The Committee expects that the $15,000,000 provided will be
the final Federal payment for the project. The Committee is
aware of the withdrawal of a construction contract award in
June 2009 and is concerned that the anticipated scheduled
completion in the fall of 2011 may be impacted. The Committee
urges the Mayor to keep the Committee regularly informed of the
progress on the project.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE D.C. NATIONAL GUARD
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment
of $2,000,000 for the D.C. National Guard's D.C. Government
Operations. The D.C. National Guard is a Federal, rather than a
local, entity and responds to orders of the President of the
United States who is the Commander-in-Chief of the D.C.
National Guard pursuant to law [District of Columbia Official
Code Sec. 49-409 and Executive Order No. 11485 (October 1,
1969)]. Unlike a governor of a State, the Mayor is not
authorized to deploy the National Guard under any
circumstances. In fiscal 2009, local funds support 33 civilian
administrative personnel, a Federal Facilities Operations and
Maintenance Activities grant supports facilities maintenance
currently performed by an additional 39 civilian personnel, and
the D.C. National Guard receives appropriations annually
through the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee does not recommend a new Federal payment for
the D.C. National Guard. The Committee provides a payment for
the D.C. National Guard under the Federal Payment for Emergency
Planning and Security account within the bill. The D.C.
National Guard also receives Federal funding through the
Department of Defense appropriation.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $19,200,000
Committee recommendation................................................
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment
of $19,200,000 to help transform the delivery of services and
reduce chronic and family homelessness in the District of
Columbia. As proposed, the requested funds would augment a
local investment in the Mayor's ``Housing First'' initiative to
develop and provide permanent supportive housing and wrap-
around services. The Committee notes that due to the downturn
in the economy, the District proposes to decrease its budget
using local funds for this program from the $12,071,000 to
$10,071,000, which will allow the District to continue to
support the 427 individuals and 80 families currently housed
through Housing First.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
While the Committee lauds the Mayor for his efforts to
fulfill his pledge to replace homeless shelters with housing
and address the critical needs of the most severely disabled
and longest-term homeless individuals and families in the
District, the Committee is unable to support the proposed
Federal contribution at this time. The Committee strongly urges
the District of Columbia government to evaluate and take
advantage of Federal grant funding available through the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Committee
further notes the work of the Urban Institute and its June 2008
report, ``Transforming the District of Columbia's Public
Homeless Assistance System,'' which offers an array of
recommendations for engaging developers in programs to move the
chronically homeless into permanent supportive housing and
cites exemplary best practices and experiences of other
communities in the country that have successfully mobilized
resources for permanent supportive housing.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RECONNECTING DISCONNECTED YOUTH
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment
of $5,000,000 to support a local initiative designed to
significantly reduce the number of young people in the District
of Columbia who are currently not connected to positive work or
school activities or at risk of becoming disconnected from
these critical influences. The District of Columbia proposes to
use Federal funds to augment a local investment in new
neighborhood-based service coalitions to expand opportunities
to youth and families by engaging community-based organizations
in the neighborhoods where the youths reside and building the
capacity of neighborhoods to serve their residents.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee does not recommend a new Federal payment to
the District of Columbia for reconnecting disconnected youth.
In fiscal year 2009, this initiative was funded predominantly
with local resources, augmented with a small amount of private
grants. The Committee appreciates that in this uncertain
economic climate and challenging local budgetary constraints,
the District diverted local resources that may have otherwise
been devoted to this program to other more pressing, higher
priority needs. The Committee is unable to support a new
Federal investment at this time, and urges the District of
Columbia government to explore and exhaust other Federal grant
options and private sources to support this program in fiscal
year 2010.
FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CENTRAL LIBRARY AND BRANCH LOCATIONS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Many of the District's public libraries are in a state of
significant disrepair and are poorly equipped. The adult
illiteracy rate in the District of Columbia is 37 percent. In
many major metropolitan areas around the country, new libraries
have revitalized many distressed neighborhoods. A Blue Ribbon
Task Force of local and national experts recommended the
creation of a state-of-the-art library system to add multi-
lingual support, hundreds of new computers with broadband
technology, and deep reference materials and children's
programs.
The District of Columbia Public Library is undergoing a
transformation that includes services, programs, collections,
and buildings. The Library is in the process of rebuilding four
neighborhood libraries--Anacostia, Benning, Tenley-Friendship,
and Watha T. Daniel/Shaw. Old buildings have been razed and
library services are being provided by interim facilities in
the four neighborhoods. Construction of the new state-of-the-
art libraries is scheduled to begin in late summer 2008 and
expected to be completed by the end of 2009 in order to open to
the public in the spring of 2010.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends no new funding as a Federal
payment contribution toward the costs of renovating and
rehabilitating District of Columbia public libraries.
The Committee is pleased that the District library system
is proceeding with a long-needed, multi-year facilities
modernization project, with four new libraries under
construction, and investing in literacy initiatives that will
complement and support the Mayor's education reform agenda.
FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $3,388,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee does not recommend a Federal payment to the
Executive Office of the Mayor of the District of Columbia. This
is $3,388,000 below the fiscal year 2009 level and the same as
the budget request.
DELAYS IN PROPERTY CONVEYANCES
The Committee is aware that certain conveyances of land
authorized by the Federal Government and the District of
Columbia Government and Real Property Act of 2006 (Public Law
109-396) have not yet occurred. The delay in completing these
conveyances has resulted in the continued deterioration of a
historically significant property, the Old Naval Hospital on
Capitol Hill. This property was a small Civil War-era hospital
and is the last significant un-restored historic building on
Capitol Hill. The property has been through a competitive
process conducted by the District of Columbia government to
choose an operating entity to be granted lease for the property
for the purpose of its complete historic renovation and
ultimate operation as a community center dedicated to lifetime
education. The Committee is concerned that the cost and
viability of the restoration of this property will continue to
diminish if the hospital property remains tied to the larger
transfers in the act, and urges the General Services
Administration, the Architect of the Capitol, and the District
of Columbia government to expedite the exchange of land
conveyances authorized by Public Law 109-396.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LOCAL OPERATING BUDGET
The Committee recommends a total of $8,858,278,000 for the
operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in
the fiscal year 2010 budget submitted to the Congress by the
government of the District of Columbia in June 2009. Of the
total, $5,721,742,000 is from local funds, $2,575,447,000 is
from Federal grant funds, $556,429,000 is from other funds, and
$4,660,000 is from private funds. The Committee directs that
any changes to the financial plan as submitted by the District
must follow the reprogramming guidelines.
TITLE V
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Administrative Conference of the United States
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,625,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Administrative Conference of the United States [ACUS]
is a newly reauthorized independent agency and advisory
committee that was created to study administrative processes in
order to recommend improvements to Congress and agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,500,000 for ACUS, $1,125,000
below the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2009
enacted level. The Committee reminds ACUS that pursuant to
section 609 of division D of the Omnibus Appropriations Act,
2009 (Public Law 111-8), not to exceed 50 percent of
unobligated balances from salaries and expenses remaining
available at the end of fiscal year 2009 shall remain available
until September 30, 2010. The Committee expects ACUS to use
these carryover funds, in addition to the recommended funds,
for fiscal year 2010 operating expenses.
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation is an
independent agency established by Congress in 1992 (Public Law
102-281) to encourage and support research, study, and labor
designed to produce new discoveries in all fields of endeavor
for the benefit of mankind. Its mission is accomplished through
the sponsorship of national competitions designed to recognize
and award cutting-edge innovation in the fields of homeland
security, life sciences, and education. During its 16-year
existence, the Foundation has awarded approximately $7,600,000
to worthy American scientists, student inventors, and exemplary
teachers who inspire despite especially challenging educational
environments or personal physical disabilities.
The Committee acknowledges that initial funding for the
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation was derived from the
sale of three denominations of specially minted coins sold by
the United States Mint from August 1992 through June 1993.
Revenues from the coin sales surcharges were deposited in the
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Fund at the Department of the
Treasury, and made available to the Foundation. To address the
fact that the coin sales revenues had been depleted, Congress
authorized funding for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship
Foundation in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law
111-8).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for
the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation. This is the
same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,000,000 above
the budget request.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $146,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 160,600,000
Committee recommendation................................ 177,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was
established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a).
The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7
U.S.C. section 1, et seq. The 1974 Act brought under Federal
regulation futures trading in all goods, articles, services,
rights, and interests; commodity options trading; and leverage
trading in gold and silver bullion and coins; and otherwise
strengthened the regulation of the commodity futures trading
industry. It established a comprehensive regulatory structure
to oversee the volatile futures trading complex.
The CFTC is the sole Federal regulator responsible for
overseeing the futures markets by encouraging competitiveness
and efficiency, ensuring market integrity, and protecting
market participants against manipulation, abusive trading
practices, fraud, and other unscrupulous activities. Effective
oversight by the CFTC enables the markets to better serve their
designated functions of providing a price discovery mechanism
and a means to offset price risk.
Programs in support of the overall mission include market
surveillance analysis and research; registration, audits, and
contract markets; enforcement; reparations; proceedings; legal
counsel; agency direction; and administrative support services.
CFTC activities are carried out in Washington, DC and in
regional offices located in Chicago, New York City, and Kansas
City.
The enacted 2008 farm bill (Public Law 110-246)
reauthorized the CFTC and made several amendments to the
Commodity Exchange Act to (1) clarify the CFTC's jurisdiction
over retail financial contracts based on foreign currencies;
(2) make the CFTC's anti-fraud authority applicable to certain
off-exchange or over-the-counter derivatives contracts; (3)
increase civil monetary and criminal penalties for violations;
(4) permit cross-margining of accounts in security futures and
options; and (5) establish CFTC regulation over certain
exchange-like trading facilities that are currently exempt from
most regulation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $177,000,000
for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is
$31,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$16,400,000 above the budget request. The Committee supports
the need for significantly increased resources for the CFTC to
ensure appropriate oversight of the futures markets, which are
expanding steadily in volume and new users, and rapidly
evolving in their complexity and diversity.
The Committee further acknowledges the need for CFTC to
make mission-critical investments in technology to sort through
the millions of pieces of information generated by markets,
much of it electronic, daily. Proper oversight of markets
requires transparency. The backbone of the CFTC's market
surveillance program is the large trader reporting system. The
amount and detail of trade data collected and analyzed at the
CFTC is unprecedented among regulatory financial agencies.
In the past decade, trading volume has increased more than
ten-fold--reaching well over 3.4 billion trades in 2008.
Actively traded contracts have quintupled--from 258 in 1997 to
1,521 in 2008. The notional value of contracts traded per day
has experienced exponential growth from $4,000,000,000 in 1976
to an estimated $5,000,000,000,000 in 2008. Despite this
phenomenal surge in activity, CFTC staffing levels have not
kept pace, and in fact, have dropped 21 percent. The
globalized, electronic, and round-the-clock nature of the
marketplace and the emergence of derivatives and hedge funds
have transformed the regulatory environment.
Additional authorities provided through enactment of the
2008 farm bill (Public Law 110-246), coupled with escalating
public concern about record energy and agricultural commodity
prices, and compounded by a growing influx of financial funds
into the futures markets, make the CFTC's staffing situation
unsustainable. These combined factors underscore the importance
of the Committee's recommended funding increase.
The Committee commends the CFTC for its decision to conduct
a series of hearings to solicit input from consumers,
businesses, and market participants on how the CFTC can best
use its existing authorities, with the first hearing focused on
whether Federal speculative limits should be set by the CFTC
for all commodities of finite supply, particularly energy
commodities, as well as a review of the appropriateness of
exemptions from limits for certain market participants.
The Committee is also pleased that the CFTC is taking steps
to improve the transparency of market data to better inform
market participants and the public.
The Committee is aware of discussions to harmonize
regulatory oversight of futures and securities products to
achieve greater protection of investors, ensure market
integrity, and promote price transparency. Building on previous
work, the Committee directs the Government Accountability
Office to report to Congress not later than March 1, 2010 on
the extent of conflicts in statutes and regulations with
respect to the similarities in futures and securities and
provide recommendations that would reduce or eliminate
discrepancies and gaps, enhance regulatory effectiveness and
efficiency, and heighten market transparency.
Consumer Product Safety Commission
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $105,404,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 107,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 115,000,000
program description
The Consumer Product Safety Commission [CPSC] is an
independent regulatory agency that was established on May 14,
1973, and is responsible for protecting the public against
unreasonable risks of injury from consumer products; assisting
consumers to evaluate the comparative safety of consumer
products; developing uniform safety standards for consumer
products and minimizing conflicting State and local
regulations; and promoting research and investigation into the
causes and prevention of product-related deaths, illnesses, and
injuries.
In carrying out its mandate, the CPSC establishes mandatory
product safety standards, where appropriate, to reduce the
unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from consumer
products; helps industry develop voluntary safety standards;
bans unsafe products if it finds that a safety standard is not
feasible; monitors recalls of defective products; informs and
educates consumers about product hazards; conducts research and
develops test methods; collects and publishes injury and hazard
data, and promotes uniform product regulations by governmental
units.
On August 14, 2008, Congress reauthorized the Commission by
enacting the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008
[CPSIA] (Public Law 110-314). CPSIA represents the most
substantial change in the Consumer Product Safety Commission's
authorities since the creation of the Commission. Among other
things, it enhances the Commission's recall authority,
streamlines the rulemaking process, provides for the creation
of a new searchable database of consumer product complaints,
and requires product certification.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $115,000,000 for the Consumer
Product Safety Commission, which is $9,596,000 above the fiscal
year 2009 funding level and $8,000,000 above the budget
request.
This increased funding level is provided for the Consumer
Product Safety Commission to carry out its increased
responsibilities under the CPSIA. The Committee is aware that
in fiscal year 2009 CPSC has received hundreds of complaints
about health and safety problems associated with drywall
imported from China. The Committee is appreciative of the fact
that CPSC is leading a coordinated, comprehensive, and multi-
faceted Federal investigation of imported drywall products. The
Committee notes that funds provided in fiscal year 2010 will be
available to support CPSC's investigation of imported and
domestic drywall products.
Small Business Compliance.--CPSIA established many vital
safeguards for ensuring that children's products are safe. In
December 2008, the CPSC sought comments from the public on
section 102 of CPSIA, which requires testing of certain
children's products. In particular, the CPSC sought comments
regarding testing component parts of children's products rather
than testing the final product. The Committee believes that
small businesses could benefit greatly by protocol and guidance
from the CPSC for those circumstances under which the testing
of component parts is sufficient for a small business to
demonstrate that its products are in compliance with section
102. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the CPSC expedite
the issuance of such guidance.
Within the funds provided, the Committee has included
sufficient resources for the Commission to educate micro-
businesses, such as home-based businesses, thrift stores,
second-hand shops and operators of church fairs, about
compliance with CPSIA.
Election Assistance Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $17,959,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 16,530,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,530,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the
Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA] (Public Law 107-252).
Under HAVA, the EAC's role is to promulgate voluntary State
guidelines for election systems, develop a national
certification program for voting equipment, and provide related
guidance. The EAC is also charged with awarding grants to
improve election administration and to enhance election
equipment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides $16,530,000 for EAC's administrative
expenses, which is $1,429,000 less than the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee
bill requires that $3,250,000 of these funds be transferred to
the National Institute for Standards and Technology for
technical assistance related to the development of voluntary
State voting systems guidelines.
ELECTION REFORM PROGRAMS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $106,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 52,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 52,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation provides grants for grant programs
authorized by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law
107-252) and for related grant programs to improve the
administration of elections.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $52,000,000 for election reform
programs. This amount is $54,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and the same as the budget request.
Federal Communications Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $341,875,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 335,794,000
Committee recommendation................................ 335,794,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] is charged with
regulating interstate and international communications by
radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC is also
charged with promoting the safety of life and property through
wire and radio communications. The mandate of the FCC under the
Communications Act is to make available to all people of the
United States a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide
wire and radio communication service. The FCC performs five
major functions to fulfill this charge: (1) spectrum
allocation, (2) creating rules to promote fair competition and
protect consumers where required by market conditions, (3)
authorization of service, (4) enhancing public safety and
homeland security, and (5) enforcement.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommendation provides $335,794,000 for the
salaries and expenses of the Federal Communications Commission
[FCC], of which $335,794,000 is to be derived from the
collection of fees. The recommendation is $6,081,000 below the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is equal to the budget
request.
Universal Service Fund.--The Committee notes that Congress
established the Universal Service Fund [USF] in 1996 to help
provide communities across the country with affordable
telecommunications services. The Committee continues to be
concerned about the FCC's lack of proper oversight over USF
programs, which in fiscal year 2010 are estimated to expend
over $8,800,000,000. While FCC has delegated the operational
management of USF to the Universal Service Administrative
Company [USAC], FCC continues to have responsibility for the
management and oversight of USF programs.
The Committee fully supports auditing and investigations of
Federal spending, including of USF programs and recipients.
Auditing and other oversight activities are critical to help
ensure proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars. However, the
Committee is very concerned that recent audits of
telecommunications providers receiving USF support have been
unnecessarily burdensome. The Committee directs the FCC to work
with USAC and the FCC Inspector General [IG] to develop more
uniform audit processes that are as consistent as possible so
that telecommunications providers are fully informed of
document retention and other audit requirements. The Committee
also directs the FCC to work with USAC and the FCC IG to ensure
that all USF auditors are familiar with the telecommunications
industry.
The Committee directs FCC to report to the Committee on
Appropriations within 60 days of enactment of this act with
detailed information on all audit activity since fiscal year
2007 conducted by FCC, USAC and the FCC IG, including the cost
of audit activity, audit methodologies, and the results of such
audits. The report shall also include detailed information on
FCC's plans for continued required reviews under the Improper
Payments Information Act (Public Law 107-300), USAC's plans for
continued auditing, and plans for FCC, the FCC IG, and USAC to
communicate more effectively to USF recipients. Finally, the
Committee notes that a detailed analysis of the FCC IG audit
program performed by USAC has reported no instance of fraud in
any of the program's audits, and has recognized a generally
high level of program compliance.
Rural Health Care Pilot Program.--The Committee notes that
the Commission dedicated over $417,000,000 for the construction
of 67 statewide or regional broadband telehealth networks in 42
States and 3 U.S. territories under the Rural Health Care Pilot
Program [RHCPP]. This program is designed to significantly
increase access to acute, primary, and preventive healthcare in
rural America.
The Committee notes that there is a particular need for
broadband access in rural healthcare, where isolated clinics
can save lives by using advanced communications technology to
tap the expertise of modern urban medical centers.
The Commission's RHCPP will eventually support the
connection of more than 6,000 public and nonprofit health care
providers nationwide to broadband telehealth networks. The
healthcare facilities participating in the Pilot Program
include hospitals, clinics, universities and research centers,
behavioral health sites, correctional facility clinics, and
community health centers. Telehealth and telemedicine services
provide patients in rural areas with access to critically
needed medical specialists in a variety of practices, including
cardiology, pediatrics, and radiology, in some instances
without leaving their homes or communities. Intensive care
doctors and nurses can monitor critically ill patients around
the clock and video conferencing allows specialists and mental
health professionals to deliver medical care for patients in
different rural locations, often hundreds of miles away.
The Committee is very concerned that, to date, the
Commission has made funding commitments for only 6 of the 67
approved projects. The Committee therefore directs the
Commission to place a high priority on the roll-out of this
vital pilot initiative. The Committee specifically notes that
the Commission has not made any funds available for the New
England Telehealth Consortium, the largest regional rural
telehealth network in the country. This project will serve
rural residents in over 300 sites across Vermont, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Maine. The Committee directs the
Commission to better manage the Universal Service
Administrative Company and its role in providing these funding
commitments.
Broadcast Television Standards.--The Committee continues to
be concerned about the declining standards of broadcast
television and the impact this decline is having on America's
children. In broadcast television, sexual content, foul
language, and violence have greatly increased over the past
decade. The Committee directs the FCC to continue to report to
Congress on the issues associated with resurrecting a broadcast
industry code of conduct for content of programming that, if
adhered to by the broadcast industry, would protect against the
further erosion of broadcasting standards.
The Committee has included language (sec. 501) to extend
FCC's exemption from the Anti-deficiency Act [ADA] until
December 31, 2010. The ADA contains accounting rules which
could complicate the operation of the FCC's universal service
electronic rate program.
The Committee has included language (sec. 502) that
prohibits the FCC from enacting certain recommendations
regarding universal service that were made to it by the Joint
Board of FCC members and State utility commissioners. The
recommendation would limit universal support to one line. This
would be harmful to small businesses, especially in rural
areas, which need a second line for a fax or for other business
purposes.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Appropriations, 2009.................................... ($27,495,000)
Budget estimate, 2010................................... (37,942,000)
Committee recommendation................................ (37,942,000)
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The FDIC Office of Inspector General [OIG] conducts audits,
investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the
FDIC's contribution to the stability of, and public confidence
in, the Nation's financial system. A separate appropriation
more effectively ensures the OIG's independence consistent with
the Inspector General Act of 1978 and other legislation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $37,942,000 for the FDIC inspector
general, the same as the budget request and $10,447,000 more
than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. Funds are to be
derived by transfer from the Deposit Insurance Fund and the
Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation [FSLIC]
resolution fund.
Federal Election Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $63,618,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 64,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 67,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through
the 1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 (Public Law 93-443). Consistent with its duty of executing
our Nation's Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of
its mission of maintaining public faith in the integrity of the
Federal campaign finance system, FEC conducts three major
regulatory programs: (1) providing public disclosure of funds
raised and spent to influence Federal elections; (2) enforcing
compliance with restrictions on contributions and expenditures
made to influence Federal elections; and (3) administering
public financing of Presidential campaigns.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $67,000,000 for the Federal
Election Commission, $3,000,000 more than the budget request
and $3,382,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
The Committee recommends the increase in funding over the
budget request to enable the FEC to maintain current staffing
levels and services, address audit findings related to
information technology, enhance public access to electronic
records, and address increased workload demands.
Federal Labor Relations Authority
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $22,674,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 24,773,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,773,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an
independent administrative Federal agency created by title VII
of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-454)
with a mission to carry out five statutory responsibilities in
relation to the Federal workforce: (1) determining the
appropriateness of units for labor organization representation;
(2) resolving complaints of unfair labor practices; (3)
adjudicating exceptions to arbitrator's awards; (4)
adjudicating legal issues relating to the duty to bargain; and
(5) resolving impasses during negotiations.
The FLRA's authority is divided by law and by delegation
among a three-member authority and an Office of General
Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate
confirmation; and the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which
consists of seven part-time members appointed by the President.
In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related
interventions, training and facilitation of labor-management
partnerships, and resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-
management cooperation by providing training and assistance to
labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes,
facilitates the creation of partnerships, and trains the
parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal Labor
Relations Management statute.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,773,000
for the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is the
same as the budget request and $2,099,000 above the fiscal year
2009 enacted level.
The Committee supports the efforts of the FLRA in reducing
the caseload backlog and is pleased with the planned movement
towards electronic filing of public records.
Federal Trade Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $259,200,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 287,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 289,300,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of
Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in
the antitrust area include detection and elimination of illegal
collusion, anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-firm
conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC regulates
advertising practices, service industry practices, marketing
practices, and credit practices as it addresses fraud and other
consumer concerns.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommendation provides $289,300,000. The
recommendation is $30,100,000 above the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and $2,100,000 above the budget request.
The amounts recommended above the budget request are
provided to enhance consumer protection activities and to
support required activities related to the health information
technology provisions included in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA] (Public Law 111-5).
Of the amounts provided, $102,000,000 is derived from Hart-
Scott-Rodino pre-merger filing fees and $21,000,000 is derived
from Do-Not-Call fees. The total amount of direct
appropriations for this account is therefore $166,300,000. The
Committee notes that this change reflects a net decrease in
offsetting fee collection receipts since last year.
Consumer Protection.--Additional funds shall include
support for investigations into fraud related to the housing
crisis, including mortgage and other financial services fraud.
The Committee continues to be concerned about the role that
deceptive and misleading practices in the financial services
industry have played in the recent housing crisis. Additional
consumer protection funding shall also support investigations
regarding unfair and deceptive practices associated with
Federal programs promoting economic stimulus and stabilization,
including ARRA and the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of
2008 (Public Law 110-343, known commonly as the Troubled Assets
Relief Program, or TARP). The Committee is concerned that
fraudulent activity conducted under the disguise of these
programs can be particularly deceptive to consumers because
such schemes use language and symbols associated with
Government programs to gain the attention of consumers.
Do-Not-Call Initiative.--The recommendation includes
$21,000,000 for the FTC Do-Not-Call initiative and
implementation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule [TSR], of which
the entire amount is to be derived from the collection of fees.
The Do-Not-Call initiative was launched pursuant to the FTC's
amended TSR to establish a national database of telephone
numbers of consumers who choose not to receive telephone
solicitations from telemarketers. The Do-Not-Call initiative
has received broad support from, and will provide significant
benefits to, consumers from all corners of the United States.
Gas and Diesel Prices.--The Committee continues to be
concerned with the potential for market manipulation and
anticompetitive behavior in the oil and natural gas industries.
The FTC is encouraged to continue its investigations and other
activities related to these concerns. The Committee directs the
FTC to keep the Committee apprised of findings made regarding
fuel prices, as well as other planned activities and
investigations regarding the oil and gas industries.
Child Protection.--In September 2000, the FTC released a
report entitled: ``Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children:
A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the
Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries.''
The report was highly critical of the entertainment industry
and its persistent and calculated marketing of violent games,
movies, and music to children. In response to this report, the
entertainment industry has promised to impose tougher
regulations on itself and to voluntarily comply with the
report's recommendation. The FTC should continue with, and
expand upon, its efforts in this area. The Committee directs
the Commission to continue to engage in consumer research and
workshops, underage shopper-retail compliance surveys, and
marketing data collection and analysis.
Used Motor Vehicles.--The Committee notes that the FTC has
been petitioned by several consumer groups to modify the Used
Motor Vehicle Trade Regulation Rule to inform prospective
purchasers of used Chrysler vehicles that, as a result of the
Chrysler bankruptcy proceeding, the restructured Chrysler
company is absolved of liability for product defect claims
arising from vehicles that were manufactured pre-bankruptcy.
The Committee directs the FTC to report to the Committee within
90 days of enactment on how the Commission plans to inform
potential purchasers of used cars about the extent to which the
Chrysler and the General Motors bankruptcy proceedings may have
limited the rights of consumers to recover for product defect
or asbestos exposure claims associated with used Chrysler and
General Motors vehicles.
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32).
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission was established in
the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-
21) to examine the causes, domestic and global, of the current
financial and economic crisis in the United States. An
emergency appropriation of $8,000,000, to remain available
until February 15, 2011, for the necessary expenses of the
Commission was provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2009 (Public Law 111-32).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends no new funding for the Financial
Crisis Inquiry Commission. This is the same as the budget
request.
General Services Administration
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The General Services Administration [GSA] was established
by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949
(Public Law 81-152) when Congress mandated the consolidation of
the Federal Government's real property and administrative
services. GSA is organized into the Public Buildings Service,
the Federal Acquisition Service, the Office of Government-wide
Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Annual 5-Year Plans for Federal Buildings and Border
Stations.--The Committee is disappointed that the 2010 Budget
request did not include the two 5-year plans required by the
Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8). The
Committee reiterates the requirement that the GSA include in
its annual budget submission to Congress, detailed 5-year plans
for Federal building and land port of entry (border station)
construction projects with yearly updates of total project
future funding needs for construction. The 5-year plan for
border stations shall be a coordinated effort between GSA and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Los Angeles Courthouse.--The Committee remains quite
troubled by the lack of progress achieved in constructing a new
courthouse in Los Angeles, California. Designated as the
judiciary's top priority and a judicial emergency in 2000, the
Los Angeles courthouse project has received more than
$33,000,000 for courthouse design and for the purchase and
preparation of the construction site. In 2004 and 2005 Congress
appropriated more than $350,000,000 for construction of the
courthouse. Numerous problems followed, and a construction
contract was never awarded. Despite the fact that Congress has
appropriated nearly $400,000,000 for the project, the project
has completely stalled, and there appears to be little
likelihood that construction will begin in the foreseeable
future. Nearly 10 years after being identified as a judicial
emergency, today, the Los Angeles courthouse project remains
the judiciary's highest construction priority.
The Committee appreciates the efforts GSA has made in
recent years in trying to find a cost-effective solution.
According to a GAO report (GAO-08-889), GSA has developed eight
different proposals to house the court, some of which involve
splitting the District Court between two locations. GSA
reported to the Committee that the judiciary has been steadfast
in opposing alternatives other than a single courthouse that
will house all the District Judges and that there is no
consensus on the best way to proceed.
The Committee recognizes the desirability of consolidating
all the District Judges in one new courthouse. However, if this
is an essential objective of the project, GSA and the judiciary
must pursue the design of a much more modest facility than has
been proposed to date and must ensure that the existing Roybal
Federal Building and Courthouse location is fully utilized. The
Committee directs GSA to work with the judiciary in developing
a cost-effective design proposal that would not require
splitting of the District Court. GSA shall report quarterly to
the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, beginning in January 2010, on progress made in
reaching a mutually agreeable solution to this longstanding
problem. The Committee urges GSA and the judiciary to work
collaboratively and creatively, considering options such as
courtroom sharing, to meet this challenge.
Yuma, Arizona Courthouse.--The Committee has not included
construction funding for a new courthouse in Yuma, Arizona.
Instead, the committee directs GSA to proceed expeditiously to
enter into a contract for a non-prospectus level lease-
construct courthouse facility that is critically needed in
Yuma. This Southwest border court lacks the space and security
features necessary to handle the volume and types of Federal
court proceedings being held at this location. A lease-
construct project is an appropriate strategy in instances such
as this in which the court space need is modest, acute, and in
a location where an extensive Federal presence is not needed.
Lease-construct Report.--The Committee is concerned that
decisions regarding the provision of courthouse space for the
judiciary are made without any consultation with the judiciary,
particularly with respect to whether to undertake a new
construction project or utilize a lease-construct strategy for
acquiring space. The Committee directs the General Services
Administration and the judiciary to develop and submit a joint
report to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and
the House of Representatives no later than 120 days after
enactment of this act. The report should identify the
circumstances under which it would be appropriate to provide
court facilities using a lease-construct strategy. The
Committee understands that this approach may be more conducive
to the effective delivery of justice and warranted in instances
when the need is modest, acute, and in a location where a large
Federal court presence is not needed.
Use of Stairs.--The Committee commends GSA for carrying out
an annual program that promotes the use of stairs through the
display of appropriate signage in federally owned and leased
buildings. This program delivers considerable health benefits
for the Federal workforce and the general population at a very
low cost to the Government. The Committee believes that the
Federal Government should be a leader in encouraging workplace
wellness, and there is mounting evidence that even small
amounts of exercise accumulated throughout the day can provide
significant health benefits. In addition, lessening the use of
elevators will speed their movement for those that genuinely
need them. The Committee supports the continued promotion of
the use of stairs and directs GSA to display appropriate
signage next to elevator buttons, at the entrance to
stairwells, and at the base of escalators in federally owned
and leased buildings.
Promoting Energy Efficiency Through Use of Revolving
Doors.--The Committee supports the promotion of the use of
revolving doors over swing doors by staff, tenants, and
visitors to Federal buildings, when possible and appropriate,
as a significant component of energy conservation. One of the
most common ways that outside air penetrates a building is
through the doors. Revolving doors maintain the existing
environment within a building because they create a seal that
prevents outside air from flowing into a building. On average,
eight times as much air is exchanged when a swing door is
opened compared to a revolving door. In addition to keeping
heat and cold in or out, revolving doors create a better inside
environment by reducing pollution, noise, and dirt.
Unfortunately, the use of revolving doors is not as prevalent
as it could be, resulting in less energy efficiency within
buildings. The Committee looks forward to receiving GSA's
upcoming report on the actions taken and achieved to promote
the use of revolving doors.
Custom House in New Orleans.--The Committee is aware that
Hurricane Katrina caused a roof collapse on one of the most
architecturally and historically significant Government-owned
structures in the southern United States, the U.S. Custom House
in New Orleans, Louisiana. While renovations are being
conducted by GSA and the Customs and Border Patrol, work has
been proceeding slowly. The Committee is supportive of the
project and expects that contracts will be awarded in a timely
manner.
Community Involvement.--The Committee is concerned that GSA
frequently shows a lack of concern for the opinions of local
communities when developing and planning construction projects.
The Committee urges GSA to make every possible attempt to
address community concerns during the development stage of all
GSA projects. The Committee directs GSA to coordinate with the
community leaders and stakeholders in Madawaska, Maine, to
address concerns during the development of the new port of
entry.
Contracts for Design and Construction of Border Stations
and Ports of Entry.--The Committee is aware that the
construction of new border patrol stations and land ports of
entry will enhance America's security and improve cross-border
commerce. The Committee also acknowledges that these
construction projects represent significant economic
opportunity, particularly in rural America. Therefore, the
Committee encourages GSA to make every effort to involve small
businesses at all stages of design and construction of border
stations and land ports of entry. The Committee directs GSA and
Customs and Border Protection to limit their reliance on
indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts for design
and construction of border stations and ports of entry.
FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND--LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE
Limitation on availability of revenue:
Limitation on availability, 2009\1\................. $13,973,771,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010... 8,530,685,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,488,585,000
\1\Includes $5,546,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), of which not less than
$750,000,000 was made available for Federal Buildings and United States
Courthouses, not less than $300,000,000 was made available for border
stations and land ports of entry, and not less than $4,500,000,000 was
made available for measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-
Performance Green Buildings, as defined in section 401 of Public Law
110-140. This does not include $4,000,000 provided in the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act that was transferred to the Government-
wide Policy account.
The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the
following activities financed from rent charges:
Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.--Space is
acquired through the construction or purchase of facilities and
prospectus-level extensions to existing buildings. All costs
directly attributable to site acquisition, construction, and
the full range of design and construction services, and
management and inspection of construction projects are funded
under this activity.
Repairs and Alterations.--Repairs and alterations of public
buildings as well as associated design and construction
services are funded under this activity. Protection of the
Government's investment, health and safety of building
occupants, transfer of agencies from leased space, and cost
effectiveness are the principal criteria used in establishing
priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to
prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support
systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides
for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus
extensions.
Installment Acquisition Payments.--Payments are made for
liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and
lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover
principal, interest, and other requirements on the debt
incurred for construction of Federal buildings.
Rental of Space.--Space is acquired through the leasing of
buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S.
Postal Service facilities. GSA provided 177 million square feet
of rental space in fiscal year 2008. GSA expects to provide 190
million square feet of rental space in fiscal year 2009 and 194
million in fiscal year 2010.
Building Operations.--Services are provided for Government-
owned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and
fuel, maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving,
evaluation of new materials and equipment, and field
supervision), and general management and administration of all
real property related programs including salaries and benefits
paid from the Federal Buildings Fund.
Other Programs.--When requested by Federal agencies, the
Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as
tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and
protection services which are in excess of those services
provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation
purposes, the balances of the Unconditional Gifts of Real,
Personal, or Other Property Trust Fund have been combined with
the Federal Buildings Fund.
CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
Limitation on availability, 2009\1\..................... $746,317,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010....... 657,637,000
Committee recommendation................................ 734,037,000
\1\Of the $5,550,000,000 provided by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) for deposit in the Federal
Buildings fund, not less than $750,000,000 was made available for
Federal buildings and United States Courthouses, and not less than
$300,000,000 was made available for border stations and land ports of
entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The construction and acquisition fund shall be available
for site, design, construction, management, and inspection
costs for the construction of new Federal facilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $734,037,000 for
construction and acquisition, including non-prospectus
projects.
CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Calexico, Calexico West, Land Port of Entry $9,437,000
CO Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation 9,962,000
DC Southeast Federal Center Remediation 15,000,000
FL Miami, FBI Consolidation 190,675,000
GA Savannah, U.S. Courthouse 7,900,000
ME Madawaska, Land Port of Entry 50,127,000
MD White Oak, FDA Consolidation 137,871,000
PA Pennsylvania, Lancaster, U.S. Courthouse 6,500,000
TX El Paso, Tornillo-Guadalupe, Land Port of Entry 91,565,000
TX San Antonio, U.S. Courthouse 4,000,000
UT Salt Lake City, U.S. Courthouse 211,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS
Limitation on availability, 2009\1\..................... $692,374,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010....... 496,276,000
Committee recommendation................................ 453,776,000
\1\Of the $5,550,000,000 provided by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) for deposit in the Federal
Buildings fund, not less than $4,500,000,000 was made available for
measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-Performance Green
Buildings, as defined in section 401 of Public Law 110-140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Under this activity, the General Services Administration
[GSA] executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations
[R&A] of both Government-owned and leased facilities under the
control of GSA. The primary goal of this activity is to provide
commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. Safety,
quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given
primary consideration in carrying out this responsibility.
R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite
inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and
building managers. The work identified through these
inspections is programmed in order of priority into the
Inventory Reporting Information System and incorporated into a
5-year plan for accomplishment, based upon funding
availability, urgency, and the volume of R&A work that GSA has
the capability to execute annually. Since fiscal year 1995,
design and construction services activities associated with
repair and alteration projects have been funded in this
account.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends new obligational authority of
$453,776,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2010.
This amount is $232,098,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level and $36,000,000 below the President's request. The
Committee has included limited funding for two special emphasis
programs, energy and water retrofit and conservation measures
and Federal high-performance green buildings. The Committee
strongly supports these programs and expects GSA to use funding
made available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) to support these programs in fiscal
year 2010 in addition to the funding provided for fiscal year
2010.
REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC East Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement $114,500,000
DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building Courtyard 10,000,000
Replacement
DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building Roof 15,000,000
Replacement
DC New Executive Office Building 30,276,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS
Limitation on availability, 2009........................ $149,570,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010....... 140,525,000
Committee recommendation................................ 140,525,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enable GSA to enter
into contractual arrangements for the construction of a backlog
of approved but unfunded projects. This activity provides for
the payment of interest to the Federal Financing Bank related
to facilities acquired pursuant to the Public Buildings
Amendments of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 592).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $140,525,000 for
installment acquisition payments. This amount is $9,045,000
below the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the same as the
budget request.
RENTAL OF SPACE
Limitation on availability, 2009........................ $4,642,156,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010....... 4,879,871,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,829,871,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and
land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except in cases
where GSA has delegated its leasing authority. GSA's policy is
to lease privately owned buildings and land only when: (1)
Federal space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated
satisfactorily in existing Government-owned or leased space;
(2) leasing proves to be more efficient than the construction
or alteration of a Federal building; (3) construction or
alteration is not warranted because requirements in the
community are insufficient or are indefinite in scope or
duration; or (4) completion of a new Federal building within a
reasonable time cannot be assured.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,829,871,000 for
rental of space. The Committee recommendation is $187,715,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is $50,000,000
below the budget request.
BUILDING OPERATIONS
Limitation on availability, 2009........................ $2,197,354,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010....... 2,356,376,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,330,376,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This activity provides for the operation of all Government-
owned facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building
services in GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do
not require the lessor to furnish such services. Services
included in building operations are cleaning, protection,
maintenance, payments for utilities and fuel, grounds
maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting
services include various real property management and staff
support activities such as space acquisition and assignment;
the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations
in order to provide better space utilization in existing
buildings; onsite inspection of building services and
operations accomplished by private contractors; and various
highly specialized contract administration support functions.
The space, operations, and services referred to above are
furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment
of rent. Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA
also provides varying levels of above-standard services in
agency headquarters facilities, including those occupied by the
Executive Office of the President, such as the east and west
wings of the White House.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,330,376,000 for
building operations. This amount is $133,022,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $26,000,000 below the budget
request.
ENERGY-EFFICIENT FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE FLEET PROCUREMENT
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $300,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\Provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public
Law 111-5) provided $300,000,000 for capital expenditures and
necessary expenses of acquiring motor vehicles with higher fuel
economy, including hybrid vehicles, electric vehicles, and
commercially-available plug-in hybrid vehicles. These funds are
to remain available until September 30, 2011.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends no new funding for Energy-
Efficient Federal Motor Vehicle Fleet Procurement. This is the
same as the budget request.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $58,578,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 65,165,000
Committee recommendation................................ 61,165,000
\1\Includes $4,000,000 by transfer as provided in the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Government-wide Policy provides for
Government-wide policy development, support, and evaluation
functions associated with real and personal property, supplies,
vehicles, aircraft, information technology, acquisition,
transportation, and travel management. This office also
provides for the Federal Procurement Data Center, Workplace
Initiatives, Regulatory Information Service Center, the Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance, and the Committee Management
Secretariat. The Office of Government-wide Policy, working
cooperatively with other agencies, provides the leadership
needed to develop and evaluate the implementation of policies
designed to achieve the most cost-effective solutions for the
delivery of administrative services and sound workplace
practices, while reducing regulations and empowering employees.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $61,165,000
for Government-wide Policy. This amount is $2,587,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included funds
transferred by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Public Law 111-5) and $4,000,000 below the budget
request.
High-performance Green Buildings.--The Committee notes that
the budget requests that $4,000,000 be provided for the Office
of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings to support a
staffing level of 9 full-time equivalents [FTEs]. The budget
request indicates that the request is a continuation of funding
provided in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009
[ARRA] (Public Law 111-5). ARRA provided $4,000,000 to be
transferred to the Government-wide Policy account for the
Office of Green Buildings, as authorized in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 [EISA] (Public Law 110-
140). These funds are available for obligation through fiscal
year 2010.
The Committee is extremely disappointed that GSA has, to
date, failed to obligate any of the funds provided in ARRA for
the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings. The
Committee reminds GSA that ARRA provided over $12,000,000,000
across Government for investments in Federal buildings and
Federal facilities. Many of these appropriations provide funds
for investments in energy efficiency, energy-efficient
retrofits to existing facilities, or energy projects. Funding
for the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings was
included in ARRA with the expectation that the Federal director
would assist all Federal agencies in using these funds to
implement improved green building standards. The Committee is
dismayed that GSA appears to have taken no actions in this
regard.
In light of GSA's critical responsibilities under EISA and
ARRA, the Committee directs GSA to use the $4,000,000 provided
in ARRA to fully establish and stand up the Office of Federal
High-Performance Green Buildings, including hiring the
requested nine FTEs as soon as possible and then immediately
begin fulfilling its responsibilities. The Committee directs
GSA to submit to the Committees on Appropriations a detailed
expenditure plan for this Office within 30 days of enactment of
this act. The plan should describe the budget, timeline,
objectives, and benefits of the Office and its projects. The
Committee further directs GSA to report to the Committee on the
obligation of these funds on a monthly basis.
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $70,645,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 71,881,000
Committee recommendation................................ 71,881,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Operating Expenses provides for the salaries and expenses
of Government-wide activities associated with utilization and
donation of surplus personal property and disposal of real
property; agency-wide policy direction, management, and
communications; the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; and
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $71,881,000
for Operating Expenses. This amount is $1,236,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $61,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 60,080,000
Committee recommendation................................ 58,000,000
\1\Includes $7,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and
investigative functions to identify and correct management and
administrative deficiencies within the General Services
Administration [GSA], including conditions for existing or
potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. This
audit function provides internal audit and contract audit
services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters
relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing,
and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and
evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test
internal control systems, and develop information to improve
operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The
investigative function provides for the detection and
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving GSA
programs, personnel, and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,000,000
for the Office of Inspector General. This amount is $3,000,000
below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $2,080,000 below
the budget request.
ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $33,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This program supports interagency ``electronic government''
or ``e-gov'' initiatives, i.e., projects that use the Internet
or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses,
and government agencies with simpler and more timely access to
Federal information, benefits, services, and business
opportunities.
Proposals for funding of e-gov initiatives must meet
capital planning guidelines and include adequate documentation
to demonstrate a sound business case, attention to security and
privacy, and a mechanism to measure performance against planned
results. In addition, a small portion of the funds may be used
for awards to project management teams that delivered the best
product to meet customer needs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,000,000
for the Electronic Government Fund. This amount is $35,000,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $2,000,000 above
the budget request.
The Committee strongly supports the activities of the
Federal CIO Council related to ``cloud computing'' and
encourages the council to continue to assess and address the
escalating costs, inefficiencies, and stove-piping related to
the management of Federal data. The Committee has included
$35,000,000 for electronic government activities related to
Cloud Computing Infrastructure Pilots and Collaboration,
$2,000,000 above the President's request. This amount includes
$15,000,000 for improving innovation, efficiency and
effectiveness in Federal IT, including an initiative on
optimizing common services and solutions/cloud-computing. This
initiative would provide for pilots to identify enterprise-wide
common solutions to eliminate duplication at the agency level
and lower the total cost of Federal IT infrastructure. Of this
$15,000,000, the Committee is including $7,500,000 for the
Center for IT Excellence proposed by GSA. The center will
deploy a selected set of infrastructure services, cloud based
applications, offer Infrastructure as a service to agencies,
and provide portal government applications.
The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for USASpending.gov for
implementation of the Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282). At
USASpending.gov, citizens will be able to see how, when, with
whom, and on what the Government is spending taxpayer funds,
and whether or not that money is delivering results.
The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Efficient Federal
Workforce activities, an initiative that will provide a
significant expansion of technologies for file sharing and
access management, and investment in a system that spans across
all agencies, rather than relying on agency-centric systems.
The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for participation and
collaboration, including, harnessing new technologies, an
initiative for the development and deployment of Web 2.0
technologies in a way that would encourage citizen
participation and collaboration.
Finally, $3,000,000 is recommended for Data.gov, an online
repository that allows the public to easily find, download, and
use publicly available data sets that are generated and held by
the Federal Government.
The Committee urges GSA to administer this funding in joint
consultation with the Office of Management and Budget. The
Committee expects GSA to use funds for infrastructure pilots
primarily on infrastructure migration activities related to
consolidation, standardization, and optimization. This will
allow GSA to identify enterprise-wide common solutions that
have the potential to eliminate duplication and lower the total
cost of Federal information technology infrastructure. To
increase efficiencies, the Committee urges GSA to use the funds
provided for the Center of IT Excellence to further examine the
use of secure virtualized data centers by co-locating the
Center at an existing multi-tenant, Government Owned/Government
Operated [GOGO] data facility.
ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $2,934,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 3,756,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,756,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation provides for an annual pension and
compensation for office staffs and other related operating
expenses for each former President pursuant to Public Law 85-
745. The cost of franking privileges for the widows of former
President Reagan and former President Ford are also funded in
this appropriation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $3,756,000 for allowances and
office staff for former Presidents, $822,000 above the fiscal
year 2009 funding level and the same as the budget request.
Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee's
recommendation for fiscal year 2010 funding:
FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carter G.H. Bush Clinton G.W. Bush Widows Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation........................ 96 96 96 150 ......... 438
Personnel Benefits............................ 2 64 70 102 ......... 238
Benefits for Former Presidents................ 199 199 210 210 ......... 818
Travel........................................ 2 56 5 80 ......... 143
Rental Payments to GSA........................ 102 175 579 345 ......... 1,201
Communications, Utilities, and Miscellaneous
Charges:
Telephone................................. 10 17 7 85 ......... 119
Postage................................... 15 13 14 20 14 76
Printing...................................... 5 14 18 26 ......... 63
Other Services................................ 75 112 51 162 ......... 400
Supplies & Materials.......................... 5 15 2 40 ......... 62
Equipment..................................... 7 69 36 86 ......... 198
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total Obligations....................... 518 830 1,088 1,306 14 3,756
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $8,520,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
This appropriation provides for an orderly transfer of
executive leadership, in accordance with the Presidential
Transition Act of 1963. Funds are only requested during a
Presidential election year and are not available for obligation
by the incumbent administration. The Committee is therefore not
recommending funding for fiscal year 2010.
FEDERAL CITIZEN SERVICES FUND
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $36,096,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 36,515,000
Committee recommendation................................ 36,515,000
program description
The Federal Citizen Services Fund [FCSF] (formerly the
Federal Citizen Information Center) appropriation provides for
the salaries and expenses of the Office of Citizen Services
[OCS]. The FCSF consolidates all of GSA's citizen-oriented
programs into a single funding source by unifying OCS programs
formerly funded by the Federal Citizen Information Center Fund
and the Operating Expenses appropriations. The Office of
Citizen Services provides citizens, businesses, other
governments, and the media with access points to easily obtain
Government information and services via the Internet, e-mail,
print, and telephone.
The OCS provides information and services to the public
primarily through USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov, the official web
portals of the U.S. Government. OCS also operates
pueblo.gsa.gov, consumeraction.gov and consumidor.gov,
webcontent.gov, and kids.gov websites. OCS provides direct
telephone (1-800-FED-INFO), e-mail and online assistance to
citizens through the National Contact Center, and offers simple
and cost-effective contact center solutions to customer Federal
agencies through the USA Services program. OCS also coordinates
the publication and distribution of information through the
Government Printing Office's Public Documents Distribution
Center in Pueblo, Colorado.
OCS supports effective Government by training web and
contact center managers across the Federal Government through
Web Manager University, and provides administrative support to
various interagency steering committees. OCS provides
management of the USA.gov hosting infrastructure, including
support for all Federal agency applications on USA.gov, and
provides development and facilitation services to Federal
agencies and initiatives to enhance their delivery of citizen
services. OCS brings Federal, State, territorial, local and
Indian tribal governments together to improve services to
citizens through sharing of best practices, and serves as a
point of contact to other nations to share experiences in
delivering citizen services and to bring new solutions to the
U.S. Government.
The FCSF is financed through annual appropriations to pay
for the salaries and expenses of OCS staff. Reimbursements from
Federal agencies pay for the direct costs of information
services OCS provides on their behalf. The FCSF also receives
funding from user fees for publications ordered by the public,
payments from private entities for services rendered, and gifts
from the public. All income is available without regard to
fiscal year limitations, but is subject to an annual aggregate
expenditure limit as set forth in appropriation acts.
committee recommendation
The Committee recommends $36,515,000 for the Federal
Services Center, an increase of $419,000 above the fiscal year
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request.
The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from
Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications,
user fees from the public, and other income.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Section 510 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of
passenger motor vehicles.
Section 511 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the
Federal buildings fund for meeting program requirements.
Section 512 requires that the fiscal year 2011 budget
request meet certain standards.
Section 513 provides that no funds may be used to increase
the amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning
services, security enhancements, or any other service usually
provided, to any agency which does not pay the requested rate.
Section 514 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay
small claims less than $250,000 made against the Government.
Section 515 provides that certain lease agreements must
conform to an approved prospectus.
Section 516 authorizes GSA to allow volunteer and other
nongovernmental organizations supporting the National Response
Framework, under Emergency Support Function [ESF] #6--Mass
Care, Housing, and Human Services, access to GSA Sources of
Supply.
Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $500,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 660,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation is an independent
agency established by Congress in 1975 (Public Law 93-642) to
encourage exceptional college students to pursue careers in
public service through the Truman Scholarship program. The
Truman Scholarship is a merit-based award available to college
juniors who plan to pursue careers in Government or elsewhere
in public service. Truman Scholars receive up to $30,000 for
graduate or professional school, participate in leadership
development activities, and have special opportunities for
internships and employment with the Federal Government.
The Foundation Trust Fund was established with a one-time
$30,000 appropriation in 1976. The authorizing legislation
directed that this endowment be invested solely in U.S.
Treasury Securities, the interest from which has funded the
Foundation's operating budget. With the decline in interest
rates, the Foundation has experienced a significant decline in
Federal financial support. From fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year
2009, despite having cut expenditures by 27 percent, annual
trust fund revenue has declined 33 percent. The Foundation
anticipates a budget deficit of $500,000 for fiscal year 2010
if appropriations are not provided.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $660,000 for
the Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation. This amount is
$160,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $660,000
above the budget request. The appropriation is provided to
offset the decline in trust fund revenues, to increase direct
financial support to scholars, to ensure compliance with
government audit reporting requirements, and to invest in
technology and financial development activities.
Merit Systems Protection Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $38,811,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 40,339,000
Committee recommendation................................ 40,339,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB] was established
by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent
quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merit
systems against partisan political and other prohibited
personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for
employees against abuses by agency management.
MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based
civil service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case
basis through hearing and deciding employee appeals and on a
systemic basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations
of the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting
studies of the civil service and other merit systems. The
intended results of MSPB's efforts are to assure that personnel
actions taken against employees are processed within the law
and that actions taken by OPM and other agencies support and
enhance Federal merit principles.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,339,000
for the Merit Systems Protection Board. This is an increase of
$1,528,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the
same as the budget request. The Committee makes available not
more than $2,579,000 for adjudicating retirement appeals
through an appropriation from the trust fund consistent with
past practice.
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Foundation
MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY FOUNDATION
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $3,750,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,850,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is
invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the
needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments are
used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall
Foundation. The Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships,
and grants, and funds activities of the Udall Center.
The Morris K. Udall Foundation also supports training
programs for professionals in health care policy and public
policy, such as the Native Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, based
at the University of Arizona, provides Native Americans with
leadership and management training, and analyzes policies
relevant to tribes.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,850,000 for
the Morris K. Udall Foundation. This amount is $100,000 above
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,650,000 above the
budget request. The Committee includes language to allow up to
60 percent of the appropriation to be used for the expenses of
the Native Nations Institute.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $2,100,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 3,800,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is
a Federal program established by Public Law 105-156 to assist
parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and
public lands conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K.
Udall Foundation and serves as an impartial, non-partisan
institution providing professional expertise, services, and
resources to all parties involved in such disputes. The
Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem
solving is appropriate for specific environmental conflicts,
how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion,
and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator might be
helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to reach
consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the
Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and
mediators with substantial experience in environmental conflict
resolution and can help parties in selecting an appropriate
neutral professional.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for
the Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This
amount is $900,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$800,000 below the budget request.
National Archives and Records Administration
The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is
the national recordkeeper, managing the Government's archives
and records, and operating the Presidential libraries. NARA is
an independent agency created by statute in 1934 and tasked
with the unique mission to identify, access, protect, preserve,
and make available for use the important documents and records
of all three branches of the Federal Government. NARA
administers the Information Security Oversight Office, is the
publisher of the Federal Register, and makes grants for
historical documentation through the National Historical
Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. In addition, NARA
is charged with additional responsibilities including mediating
Freedom of Information Act disputes and coordinating controlled
unclassified information.
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $330,308,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 339,770,000
Committee recommendation................................ 339,770,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account provides for basic operations dealing with
management of the Federal Government's archives and records,
operation of Presidential libraries, review for
declassification of classified security information, and other
duties.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $339,770,000 for operating
expenses of the National Archives and Records Administration
for fiscal year 2010. This amount is $9,462,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
The Committee's recommendation includes requested funds to
implement the Controlled Unclassified Information [CUI] Office
to oversee the CUI framework, operate the Office of Government
Information Services to support accessibility to records under
the Freedom of Information Act, expand the archival staff by 12
FTE to build a cadre of new technology savvy archivists to
handle the influx of new records which need to be processed,
preserved and stored, and store newly accessioned civilian
official personnel files transferred to NARA's custody.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $4,100,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,100,000
\1\Appropriations for the Office of the Inspector General were included
within the Operating Expenses appropriation in fiscal year 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The mission of the Office of Inspector General [OIG] is to
ensure that NARA safeguards and preserves the records of our
Government while providing the American people with access to
the essential documentation of their rights and the actions of
their Government. The OIG accomplishes this by combating fraud,
waste, and abuse through high-quality objective audits and
investigations covering all aspects of agency operations at 44
facilities nationwide. The OIG also serves as an independent,
internal advocate for the economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness of NARA and its operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides $4,100,000 for the Office of
Inspector General [OIG] as a new separate appropriation, the
same as the budget request. In previous fiscal years,
appropriations for the OIG were a component of the Operating
Expenses appropriation. The Committee supports a distinct
account for the OIG in order to clearly identify the resources
necessary to staff and operate the expanding mission-critical
oversight and accountability functions performed by the OIG to
ensure responsible NARA stewardship over records. The Committee
acknowledges that as the missions of NARA expand, including the
establishment of the George W. Bush Presidential Library, the
implementation of the Office Government Information Services,
and the start-up of the Controlled Unclassified Information
Office, the OIG's audit and investigative responsibilities
grow. The Committee supports the increase above the fiscal year
2009 funding to support the hiring of two criminal
investigators and one program auditor in the OIG.
ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $67,008,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 85,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 85,500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Since 2001, NARA has been developing an Electronic Records
Archives [ERA] that will permit management of records
electronically and ensure the preservation of and access to
Government electronic records. With the rapid changes in
technology today, the formats in which records are stored
become obsolete within a few years, making records inaccessible
even if they are preserved intact with the most modern
technology. ERA will preserve electronic records generated in a
manner that enables requesters to access them on computer
systems now and in the future. ERA will include a base system
for Federal records and a separate system for Presidential
records.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $85,500,000 for the ERA project.
This amount is an increase of $18,492,000 above the fiscal year
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The
Committee provides additional resources as requested in the
budget to support the deployment of public access and initial
preservation capabilities developed during 2009. The bill
includes a provision requiring NARA to submit a spending plan
for these funds.
The Committee expects that the expenditure plan submitted
for fiscal year 2010 shall specifically identify and explain
the outcomes that NARA expects from the funding made available,
particularly the extent to which completed system increments
include all or only partial planned functionality.
The Committee strongly supports the ERA program at NARA and
is committed to working to ensure that this program is
adequately funded on an expedited basis so ERA can preserve the
Nation's important records at the earliest feasible date.
The Committee is highly concerned about the lack of
progress in developing ERA capabilities to ingest electronic
records from the previous Presidential administration. The
Committee is aware that NARA certified initial operating
capability for the Executive Office of the President [EOP]
System in December 2008. However, a recent review by the
Government Accountability Office [GAO] determined that less
than 3 percent of the electronic records from the Bush
administration had been ingested into the system at the time of
the review and that NARA did not expect the remainder to be
ingested until October 2009.
The Committee is concerned that until NARA completely and
accurately ingests the Bush administration Presidential records
into the EOP system, it will be unable to use the system for
its intended purpose. Furthermore, NARA will incur additional
costs maintaining the systems it is now using to support
requests for these records. The Committee urges NARA to place a
high priority on addressing the delay in ingesting records. The
Committee directs NARA to report to Congress no later than
December 31, 2009 on the status of the Bush administration
records ingestion project.
The Committee is also concerned that NARA lacks a
contingency plan for the ERA system in the event of a failure
or disruption, and a fully functional backup and restore
process for ERA, a key component for ensuring system
availability. The Committee directs that the funding provided
be devoted to establish a robust online backup and restoration
service and ensure that adequate capabilities are in place for
managing restricted information.
The Committee notes that in March 2009, NARA officials
became aware that an external hard drive containing copies of
Clinton administration EOP data was missing from one of its
facilities. The Committee recognizes that the sheer volume of
archived materials, combined with a limited operating budget,
means that such losses may occur. However, the loss of any
information, particularly classified materials or personally
identifiable information, should be considered a serious matter
and NARA should take steps to promptly notify those individuals
affected and the congressional committees of jurisdiction. The
Committee is very concerned that NARA did not timely inform the
Committee of the loss of this material. The Committee directs
NARA to inform all relevant committees of jurisdiction of any
such data breaches within 24 hours of when a data breach has
been discovered.
REPAIRS AND RESTORATION
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $50,711,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 27,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 27,500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This account provides for the repair, alteration, and
improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries
nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will
better enable NARA to maintain its facilities in proper
condition for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees,
and also maintain the structural integrity of the buildings.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $27,500,000 for the repairs and
restoration account. This amount is $23,211,000 below the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
The Committee is aware of the great need of repairs of
Presidential libraries, particularly the FDR Presidential
Library, which suffers from flooding, whose infrastructure is
dangerously deteriorated and outdated, and whose systems
violate NARA's standards for preservation.
The Committee is pleased to support the request, which
includes $17,500,000 to complete the renovation of the FDR
Presidential Library, the oldest in the Presidential library
system. This funding will ensure that this facility meets
modern standards and that the records of President Roosevelt
are housed in appropriate space. The Committee is particularly
encouraged that the budget request reflects the highest
priority needs in the capital improvement plan. The Committee
expects the remaining $10,000,000 to be used to fund repairs
and restorations to 16 NARA-owned facilities.
The Committee appreciates NARA's submission of an update of
its comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire
infrastructure of Presidential libraries and records
facilities, as part of the fiscal year 2010 budget submission
and urges NARA to include an appropriate level of funding for
repair of valuable historic Presidential libraries in the
fiscal year 2011 budget request.
NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION
GRANTS PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $11,250,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The National Historical Publications and Records Commission
[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish
records that document American history. Administered within the
National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps
State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal
records, helps publish the papers of major figures in American
history, and helps archivists and records managers improve
their techniques, training, and ability to serve a range of
information users.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the National
Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This
amount is $750,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and
$2,000,000 above the budget request. As requested, the
Committee does not include a transfer of funds to the Operating
Expenses account for administrative support in fiscal year
2010, as such support for staff costs will be provided through
the base ``Operating Expenses'' account. The Committee notes
that this will enable more of the funds to be available for
grants than in previous fiscal years.
The Committee strongly supports the NHPRC program and has
provided funding to continue this important program. This
program has played a central role in the preservation and
dissemination of the Nation's documentary heritage and has been
successful in leveraging private sector contributions.
The Committee notes that the funding provided will enable
NARA, through the NHPRC, to undertake a variety of initiatives,
including (1) accelerating the Founding Fathers Online project
to provide online access to the pre-publication transcriptions
of the papers of the Founding Fathers without charge; (2)
publishing historical papers of key figures and movements in
our Nation's history; and (3) advancing archives preservation,
access, and digitization projects within the interlocking
repositories of historic records and hidden collections. The
Committee directs that of the total funds made available, not
less than $3,000,000 be designated for each of these three
efforts. The Committee further notes the creation of two new
grant programs in the Presidential Historical Records
Preservation Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-404), including grants
for Presidential centers of historical excellence and grants to
preserve records of servitude, emancipation, and post-Civil War
Reconstruction. The Committee appreciates the competing demands
for scarce resources, and provides an additional $2,000,000
above the request to address the additional responsibilities.
The Committee expects that up to $1,000,000 of the funds
provided be devoted to each of the two new grant programs under
Public Law 110-404. The Committee urges NARA to consult with
the members of the NHPRC in formulating prioritization of
resources.
National Credit Union Administration
central liquidity facility
program description
The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central
Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit
Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95-630). The
CLF is a mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by the
National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by its
member credit unions.
The purpose of the CLF is to improve the general financial
stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal and
emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings,
support consumer and mortgage lending, and provide basic
financial resources to all segments of the economy. To become
eligible for CLF services, credit unions invest in the capital
stock of the CLF, and the facility uses the proceeds of such
investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds to meet the
liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary sources of funds
for the CLF are stock subscriptions from credit unions and
borrowings.
The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount
of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed
capital stock and surplus.
Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for
funds attributable to emergency outflows from managerial
difficulties or local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is
also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical
changes in such areas as agriculture, education, and retail
business. Loans can also be made to offset protracted credit
problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline.
committee recommendation
The Committee recommends that lending through the CLF be
limited to the maximum level provided for by section
307(a)(4)(A) of the Federal Credit Union Act. This limitation
provides the NCUA maximum flexibility to assist with credit
unions' financial liquidity during the economic downturn. The
Committee also recommends the budget request of limiting
administrative expenses for the CLF to $1,250,000 in fiscal
year 2010.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program
[CDRLF] was established in 1979 to assist officially designated
``low-income'' credit unions in providing basic financial
services to low-income communities. Low-interest loans and
deposits are made available to assist these credit unions.
Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, although
shorter repayment periods may be considered. Technical
assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income
credit unions for improving operations as well as addressing
safety and soundness issues. Credit unions use TAG funds for
specific initiatives, including taxpayer assistance, financial
education, home ownership initiatives, and training assistance.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for technical
assistance grants to community development credit unions. This
funding level is equal to the budget request and the fiscal
year 2009 enacted level. The Committee expects the CDRLF to
continue making loans from available funds derived from repaid
loans and interest earned on previous loans to designated
credit unions.
The Committee supports NCUA's outreach efforts to
underserved rural and urban communities across America through
technical assistance grants provided within CDRLF. The
Committee encourages NCUA to continue its efforts to provide
financial education, particularly regarding consumer credit and
home mortgages, and to provide alternatives to predatory
lending services through targeted technical assistance grants
and support.
Office of Government Ethics
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $13,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 13,665,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,665,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency
within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-521). OGE is charged by
law to provide overall direction of executive branch policies
designed to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high
ethical standards. OGE carries out these responsibilities by
developing regulations pertaining to conflicts of interest,
postemployment restrictions, standards of conduct, and public
and confidential financial disclosure in the executive branch;
by monitoring compliance with financial disclosure requirements
by recommending appropriate corrective action when necessary;
by evaluating the effectiveness of applicable laws; and by
preparing advisory opinions and policy memoranda interpreting
requirements regarding conflicts of interest, post employment
restrictions, standards of conduct, and financial disclosure.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,665,000
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics in
fiscal year 2010. This amount is $665,000 above the fiscal year
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The
Committee encourages OGE to keep the Committee regularly
informed of any emerging needs resulting from enactment of any
new legislation affecting ethics obligations of executive
branch officials and employees, as well as initiatives
undertaken to fulfill OGE's critical role in Presidential
transition issues, including education on post-employment
restrictions for outgoing officials and processing the public
financial disclosure reports filed by the Presidential nominees
for high-level positions requiring Senate confirmation. The
funding level will also allow OGE to provide the necessary
training and guidance to equip both new and experienced ethics
officials to handle ethics issues within their agencies.
Office of Personnel Management
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $92,829,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 94,970,000
Committee recommendation................................ 94,970,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by
Public Law 95-454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,
enacted on October 13, 1978. OPM is responsible for management
of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit
civil service system. Although individual agencies are
increasingly responsible for personnel operations, OPM provides
a Government-wide policy framework for personnel matters,
advises and assists agencies (often on a reimbursable basis),
and ensures that agency operations are consistent with
requirements of law on issues such as veterans preference. OPM
oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues
regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay,
training, investigations, other aspects of personnel
management, and operates a reimbursable training program for
the Federal Government's managers and executives. OPM is also
responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits,
and life insurance programs affecting most Federal employees,
retired Federal employees, and their survivors.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a general fund appropriation of
$94,970,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of
Personnel Management. This amount is $2,141,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 level and the same as the budget request.
The recommendation includes $5,908,000 for the Enterprise
Human Resources Integration project and $1,364,000 for the
Human Resources Line of Business project.
Retirement Systems Modernization.--The Committee is
appreciative of the new Director's intention to make retirement
systems modernization a top priority for OPM. In its April 2009
report, GAO recommended that OPM provide immediate attention to
ensure that six actions are taken. The Committee is encouraged
that OPM agrees with the six recommendations outlined in the
GAO report and has begun to address them. The Committee is
providing additional funds for fiscal year 2010 to allow OPM to
begin taking the critical, foundational steps necessary to
ensure success for this program. Getting this program back on
track with appropriate management leadership, controls,
oversight, and with the goal of ensuring accurate and timely
computation of annual annuities for all Federal retirees, is a
high priority.
Disability Policy and Leadership.--OPM, as the personnel
agency for the Federal Government, should be committed to
helping the Federal Government become the model employer
Congress and the law mandate that it be, with regard to
individuals with disabilities. The Committee commends OPM on
its outreach to Federal agencies, stakeholders, and job seekers
regarding the Schedule A appointing authority. The Committee
believes, however, that greater use could be made of the
Internet in communicating the Federal Government's policies
regarding employing persons with disabilities. The Committee
believes that the USAJOBS electronic employment portal could be
made more user-friendly for those seeking information and
applicants who wish to be considered under Schedule A
authority. Including direct links to clearly written
explanations of the Schedule A authority and including this
topic in presentations of frequently asked questions would
greatly improve the value of the website. The Committee directs
OPM to work expeditiously to improve the USAJOBS site to make
information about Schedule A authority more readily accessible
and to report to the Committee of specific actions taken. The
report should be submitted not later than 120 days after
enactment.
Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and
Nursing Shortage.--The Committee is concerned with the ongoing
shortage of nurses, which is due in large part to the national
shortage of nurse faculty, and encourages OPM to assist in
alleviating the shortage through the Intergovernmental
Personnel Act Mobility Program. This program provides for the
temporary assignment of personnel between the Federal
Government and State and local governments, colleges and
universities, and other eligible entities. Federally employed
nurses could be given the opportunity to serve a temporary
assignment in an accredited school of nursing. The U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics projects that more than 1 million new and
replacement registered nurses will be needed by 2016. However,
schools of nursing are forced to turn away thousands of
qualified applicants each year due to faculty shortages. The
Federal Government currently employs more than 53,000 nurses
domestically, and many have the educational background and
expertise to teach the next generation of nurses, in the
process gaining valuable experience and informing students
about careers in government service.
The Committee directs OPM to carry out the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program with special
attention provided to Federal agencies employing more than
2,000 nurses. OPM may develop guidelines that provide Federal
agencies direction or guidance in using their authority under
the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program--
--to provide financial assistance to Federal employees
holding a degree in nursing to accept an assignment to
teach in an accredited school of nursing in exchange
for a commitment from the individual to serve for an
additional term in Federal service or a commitment from
the school of nursing to take additional steps to
increase its number of nursing students that will
commit to Federal service upon graduation; and
--to provide financial or other assistance to Federal
employees who have served as a nurse in the Federal
Government, are eligible for retirement, and are
qualified to teach to expedite the transition of such
individuals into nurse faculty positions.
The Committee is mindful of the challenges the Federal
Government faces in recruitment efforts to attract and retain
talented nurses. OPM should work with the Committee to
determine the best approach to assigning Government-employed
nurses to public and private universities and ways to encourage
accredited schools of nursing to promote nursing careers in
Federal agencies.
Employment for the Blind.--The Committee applauds the
administration's commitment to programs which support disabled
Americans to become fully employed and integrated into their
communities. The Committee looks forward to receiving and
considering the previously requested report on this matter,
including the views of the Federal employee labor
organizations.
limitation
(TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)
Limitation, 2009........................................ $118,082,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 113,238,000
Committee recommendation................................ 112,738,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust
funds of the Office of Personnel Management to cover
administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance
programs, including the cost of automating the retirement
recordkeeping systems.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $112,738,000,
which is $5,344,000 less than the fiscal year 2009 level and
$500,000 less than the budget request. The amount includes not
more than $4,000,000 for retirement systems modernization.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,828,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,136,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,136,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Office of Inspector General is charged with
establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts
which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office
of Personnel Management's activities which prevent and detect
fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency's programs.
Contract audits provide professional advice to agency
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters
regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing,
and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and
evaluate all facets of agency operations, including financial
statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide detailed
technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits
review the operations of health and life insurance carriers,
healthcare providers, and insurance subscribers. The
investigative function provides for the detection and
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving
programs, personnel, and operations. Administrative sanctions
debar from participation in the health insurance program those
healthcare providers whose conduct may pose a threat to the
financial integrity of the program itself or to the well-being
of insurance program enrollees.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,136,000 for
salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in
fiscal year 2010. This amount is $308,000 more than the fiscal
year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request.
(LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)
Limitation, 2009........................................ $18,755,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 20,428,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,428,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the
trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General
activities totaling $20,428,000 for fiscal year 2009. This
amount is $1,673,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted
level, and the same as the budget request.
government payment for annuitants, employees health benefits
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $9,533,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 9,814,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,814,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This appropriation covers the Government's share of the
cost of health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal
Employees Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as
administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of
$9,814,000,000 for Government payments for annuitants,
employees health benefits.
government payment for annuitants, employee life insurance
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $46,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 48,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 48,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Public Law 96-427, the Federal Employees' Group Life
Insurance Act of 1980, requires that all employees under the
age of 65 who separate from the Federal Government for purposes
of retirement on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make
contributions toward their basic life insurance coverage after
retirement until they reach the age of 65. These retirees will
contribute two-thirds of the cost of the basic life insurance
premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal
employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active
Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute
one-third of the cost of the premium for retirees' basic
coverage. OPM, acting as the payroll office on behalf of
Federal retirees, has requested, and the Committee has
provided, the funding necessary to make the required Government
contribution associated with annuitants' post-retirement life
insurance coverage.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of
$48,000,000 for the Government payment for annuitants, employee
life insurance.
payment to civil service retirement and disability fund
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $10,550,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 10,276,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,276,000,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The civil service retirement and disability fund was
established in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of
annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The
fund covers the operation of the Civil Service Retirement
System and the Federal Employees' Retirement System.
This appropriation provides for the Government's share of
retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded
liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military
service, and survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of
some annuitants who did not elect survivor coverage.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of
$10,276,000,000 for payment to the civil service retirement and
disability fund.
Office of Special Counsel
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $17,468,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 18,495,000
Committee recommendation................................ 18,495,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] was first
established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 until 1989, it
operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm
of the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]. In 1989, Congress
enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act (Public Law 101-12),
which made OSC an independent agency within the executive
branch. In 1994, the Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act [USERRA] (Public Law 103-353) became
law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in
connection with military service, prohibited discrimination
against them because of that service, and gave OSC new
authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal
agencies.
OSC investigates Federal employee and applicant allegations
of prohibited personnel practices (including reprisal for
whistleblowing) and other activities prohibited by civil
service laws, and when appropriate, prosecutes before the MSPB.
OSC provides a secure channel for whistleblower disclosures by
Federal employees and applicants, and may transmit
whistleblower allegations to the agency head concerned and
require an agency investigation. OSC also enforces the USERRA.
OSC advises on and enforces the Hatch Act restrictions on
political activities by Government employees.
In 2008, OSC's assistance or action was sought by Federal
employees and others in more than 7,399 instances, an increase
of over 31 percent over 2007. OSC obtained 62 favorable actions
in prohibited personnel practice cases, 32 corrective actions
in Hatch Act complaints, and 28 corrective actions in USERRA
cases. OSC received 445 Hatch Act complaints during 2008, an
increase of nearly 58 percent over 2007. OSC issued 4,283 Hatch
Act advisory opinions (both written and oral) to persons who
sought advice, an increase of over 53 percent. During 2008,
OSC's Disclosure Unit received 530 new disclosure matters for
possible referral, an increase of 10 percent. The Disclosure
Unit referred matters to agency heads for their review a total
of 40 times during 2008.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,495,000
for the Office of Special Counsel. This amount is $1,027,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the
budget request.
The Committee strongly urges the OSC to work with
whistleblower advocacy organizations to promote the highest
level of confidence in the Whistleblower Protection Act and the
OSC. The Committee acknowledges that OSC continues to
experience dramatic growth in its caseload, as a result of
heightened awareness of the Hatch Act stemming from media focus
on several high-profile cases, a more vigorous focus on
complaints under the Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act, and actions under the Whistleblower
Protection Act. The Committee encourages the OSC to continue
progress made to improve its case processing efficiencies.
Postal Regulatory Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $14,043,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 14,333,000
Committee recommendation................................ 14,333,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent agency
that has exercised regulatory oversight over the United States
Postal Service since its creation by the Postal Reorganization
Act of 1970. For over three decades, that oversight consisted
primarily of conducting public, on-the-record hearings
concerning proposed rates, mail classification, and major
service changes, and recommended decisions for action to the
Postal Service Board of Governors.
The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law
109-435) assigned significant new responsibilities to the
Commission. These enhanced authorities include providing
regulatory oversight of the pricing of Postal Service products
and services, ensuring Postal Service transparency and
accountability, consulting on delivery service standards and
performance measures, consulting on international postal
policies, preventing cross-subsidization or other
anticompetitive postal practices, and serving as a forum to act
on complaints with postal products and services. The Commission
provides leadership and recommends policies that foster a
robust and viable postal system.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the
Postal Fund, of $14,333,000 for the Postal Regulatory
Commission. This amount is $290,000 above the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The funds
will support 74 FTEs and enable the Commission to meet its
mission of ensuring transparency and accountability in postal
operations, services, and finances. The Committee notes that in
fiscal year 2010, the Commission will issue an annual
compliance determination report assessing the Postal Service's
compliance with the ratemaking regulations and applicable laws.
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,500,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Recommended by the July 22, 2004 report of the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/
11 Commission), the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
[PCLOB] was originally established through the Intelligence
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-
458). The PCLOB was made a component of the White House Office
within the Executive Office of the President.
Under the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53), the PCLOB was
reconstituted as an independent agency within the executive
branch. The mission of the PCLOB is to (1) analyze and review
actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from
terrorism, ensuring that the need for such actions is balanced
with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties; and (2)
ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in
the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and
policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against
terrorism.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,500,000 for
the PCLOB. The Committee strongly supports the mission of the
PCLOB. The Committee notes that the former Board ceased
operations on January 30, 2008 with the intention that a new,
more independent Board would be instituted in its place. The
Committee is concerned that now, 18 months later, the new PCLOB
has not yet been reconstituted and staffed as required by
Public Law 110-53. The Committee urges the administration to
nominate members to the PCLOB as expeditiously as possible. The
Committee urges the PCLOB, once it is reconstituted, to
promptly provide a detailed budget justification to the
Committee.
Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board
Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$84,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
\1\Includes $84,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board
(Recovery Board) was authorized in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) (Recovery Act). The
Recovery Board is composed of Inspectors General of agencies
administering programs and overseeing spending authorized in
the Recovery Act. The Recovery Board conducts and coordinates
activities related to the accountability, transparency, and
oversight of spending under the Recovery Act and oversees the
administration of Recovery.gov, a website providing detailed
information on the implementation of the Recovery Act.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee does not recommend additional funding for the
Recovery Board for fiscal year 2010 which is consistent with
the budget request. Funding for the Recovery Board in fiscal
year 2010 shall be derived from funds provided in the Recovery
Act, which will remain available until September 30, 2011 for
the salaries, expenses, and operating costs of the Board as
well as the administration of Recovery.gov.
Securities and Exchange Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $970,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,026,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,126,000,000
\1\Includes $10,000,000 in emergency appropriations provided in the
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is an
independent agency responsible for administering many of the
Nation's laws regulating the areas of securities and finance.
The mission of the SEC is to administer and enforce Federal
securities laws in order to protect investors, maintain fair,
honest, and efficient markets, and promote capital formation.
This includes ensuring full disclosure of financial
information, regulating the Nation's securities markets, and
preventing and policing fraud and malpractice in the securities
and financial markets. The strength of the American economy and
our Nation's financial markets is dependent upon investors'
confidence in the financial disclosures and statements released
by publicly traded companies. The SEC, as the investor's
advocate oversees more than 30,000 registrants including 12,000
public companies, 4,600 mutual funds, 11,300 investment
advisers, 600 transfer agents, and 5,500 broker dealers.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a total budget (obligational)
authority of $1,126,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of
the SEC, including $1,115,780,000 from new fee collections and
$10,220,000 from prior year balances. This total funding level
is $166,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, not
including emergency funds provided in the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32) and $100,000,000
above the budget request, to allow the SEC to begin to address
staffing shortfalls and upgrade inadequate information
technology.
With the markets experiencing a steady increase in the
number of complex securities products and market participants
and in light of problems plaguing the credit markets as a
result of subprime lending, it is imperative that our Nation's
top securities regulator has the resources to effectively meet
its mandate. The Committee acknowledges that funding shortfalls
have hampered SEC's ability to fulfill its mission. The SEC's
staffing remain 5 percent below what the SEC was provided in
2005 when the SEC received additional funding due to Enron and
other corporate scandals. Staffing shortfalls impact the SEC's
ability to ensure adequate supervision of market participants
and promote and sustain public confidence in the integrity of
our capital markets.
The Committee's recommended funding increase would allow
the SEC to return to fiscal year 2005 staffing levels and fund
an additional 5 percent staffing increase to support more
aggressive policing of the securities markets through
examinations and enforcement actions. The recommended funding
increase would strengthen SEC's examination responsibilities by
enabling SEC's Office of Compliance Inspections and
Examinations to hire market experts to strengthen risk-based
oversight of the investment management industry and expand its
inspections of credit rating agencies. The recommended funds
would permit SEC to conduct more comprehensive examinations,
reach a broader universe of the entities it regulates, and
improve its ability to uncover and prosecute fraud. While the
number of registered investment advisers dramatically grew
since 2005, the SEC staff overseeing these entities dropped by
over 7 percent.
Similarly, in the SEC's Division of Enforcement, the
recommended increase would allow the SEC to vigorously advance
its enforcement mission by hiring more trial lawyers and
experienced staff with specialized skills. Resource challenges
in recent years have affected the SEC's ability to bring
enforcement actions promptly and efficiently. Reduced staffing
levels have prevented promising leads from being pursued and
have resulted in cases being closed prematurely.
The Committee also supports expansion of the SEC's Office
of Risk Assessment and its program to bring in seasoned
industry professionals to help uncover hidden risks to
investors.
In addition, the recommended increase would support urgent,
critical investments in information technology upgrades so that
SEC's staff have cutting edge automation support tools to
enhance their ability to promptly handle tips, complaints, and
referrals as well as to better identify emerging risks using
improved surveillance tools.
The Committee strongly believes that fair and orderly
markets are essential to restore public confidence in and
bolster the integrity of our capital markets. The Committee
emphasizes that with this significant recommended funding
increase comes a concomitant responsibility on the part of the
SEC to aggressively safeguard the investing public. The SEC
must be vigilant in its enforcement of securities laws, and
failures to properly investigate and take appropriate action
will not be condoned.
As noted previously in this report, the Committee is aware
of discussions to harmonize regulatory oversight of futures and
securities products to achieve greater protection of investors,
ensure market integrity, and promote price transparency. As
specified earlier under the Committee's discussion of its
recommendations for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission,
the Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to
report to Congress not later than March 1, 2010 on the extent
of conflicts in statutes and regulations with respect to the
similarities in futures and securities and provide
recommendations that would reduce or eliminate discrepancies
and gaps, enhance regulatory effectiveness and efficiency, and
heighten market transparency.
The Committee is concerned that American investors may be
unwittingly investing in companies with ties to countries that
sponsor terrorism or are linked to human rights violations. The
Committee believes that a company's association with sponsors
of terrorism and human rights abuses, no matter how large or
small, can have a materially adverse result on a public
company's operations, financial condition, earnings, and stock
prices, all of which can negatively affect the value of an
investment. In order to protect American investors' savings and
to disclose these business relationships to investors, an
Office of Global Security Risk was established within the
Division of Corporation Finance. The Committee expects the work
of the Office to remain a high priority during fiscal year 2010
and directs the SEC to continue to submit quarterly reports on
its activities.
The Committee expects the SEC to implement key controls to
effectively safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of its financial and sensitive information and
systems.
The Committee encourages the SEC to continue its efforts to
improve the timeliness of disbursement of funds to investors
victimized by securities fraud. The Committee applauds the
SEC's efforts to establish a specialized office devoted to
ensuring that funds are promptly disbursed and install a new
computer system to simplify the tracking, collection, and
distribution of assessed penalties.
The Committee is pleased that the SEC has made strides to
simplify complex information and improve electronic public
access to investment information through interactive data
systems. The Committee is aware of a growing need for SEC-
regulated entities to provide accurate and consistent reporting
of their financial risks due to climate change. In order to
ensure such information is provided to investors and the
public, the SEC is encouraged to issue guidance clarifying the
disclosures of climate change-related risk that regulated
entities should provide in their regular financial reporting
under current law.
Selective Service System
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $22,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 24,400,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,400,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Selective Service System is an independent Federal
agency, operating with permanent authorization under the
Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.).
The agency is not part of the Department of Defense, but its
basic mission is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed
Forces adequate to ensure the security of the United States
during a time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed
Forces have relied on volunteers to fill military manpower
requirements. However, the Selective Service System remains the
primary vehicle by which personnel will be brought into the
military if Congress and the President should authorize a
return to the draft.
In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law
(Public Law 100-180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a post-
mobilization healthcare personnel delivery system capable of
providing the necessary critically skilled healthcare personnel
to the Armed Forces in time of emergency. An automated system
capable of handling mass registration and inductions is now
complete, together with necessary draft legislation, a draft
Presidential proclamation, prototype forms and letters, and
other products. These products will be available should the
need arise. The development of supplemental standby products,
such as a compliance system for healthcare personnel, continues
using very limited existing resources.
committee recommendation
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,400,000
for the Selective Service System. This amount is $2,400,000
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the
budget request. The Committee encourages the System to continue
the development of its Central Registrant Processing Portal
Initiative, and to improve the cost effectiveness of the
registration process by continuing to increase the percentage
of electronic and automatic registrations.
The Committee supports the allocation of $2,000,000 for
upgrading the Service's information technology systems. A
modernized information technology system will help improve
business processes and national registration compliance
statistics while sustaining an all-volunteer military
recruiting effort. It will also ensure more accurate and
expeditious processing of registrations, enable more secure
storage of personally identifiable information, and facilitate
improved customer services through the Internet.
Small Business Administration
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $1,342,280,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 779,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 860,904,000
\1\Includes $730,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
The Committee recommendation provides $860,904,000 for the
Small Business Administration [SBA]. The recommendation is
$481,376,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which
included funds provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is $81,604,000 above the budget
request. Funding is distributed among the SBA appropriation
accounts as described below.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $455,896,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 422,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 444,000,000
\1\Includes $69,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
The Committee recommendation provides $444,000,000 for
salaries and expenses of the SBA. The recommendation is
$11,896,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which
included funds provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA], and is $22,000,000 above the
budget request.
Non-credit Business Assistance Programs.--Within the
amounts made available under this heading, the Committee
recommendation provides $185,630,000 for the SBA non-credit
business assistance programs. The recommendation is $26,718,000
above the budget request and $658,000 below the 2009 enacted
level, which included funds provided in ARRA.
The Committee recommendations for non-credit business
assistance, by program, are displayed in the following table:
NON-CREDIT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
2010 budget Committee
estimate recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Business Development Centers...... 97,000 114,400
Drug-free Workplace Grants.............. 1,030 1,030
SCORE................................... 5,148 7,000
Women's Business Centers................ 13,020 14,300
Women's Business Council................ 773 1,000
Microloan Technical Assistance.......... 10,000 22,000
Veterans Programs....................... 2,200 2,500
PRIME................................... 3,120 5,500
Native American Outreach................ 1,040 1,500
7(j) Technical Assistance............... 3,397 3,400
HUBZone................................. 2,184 3,000
Entrepreneurial Development Initiative.. 20,000 10,000
-------------------------------
Total, Non-credit Business 158,912 185,630
Assistance Programs..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee directs that the amounts provided for SBA's
Non-Credit Business Assistance Programs, as specified in the
table above, shall be administered in the same manner as
previous years and shall not be reduced, reallocated, or
reprogrammed to provide additional funds for other programs,
initiatives, or activities.
The Committee continues to support the Small Business
Development Center [SBDC] Program and recommends $114,400,000
for fiscal year 2010, an increase of $17,400,000 above the
budget request and $4,400,000 above the fiscal year 2009
enacted level. The Committee is concerned with the
administration's request to reduce funding for SBDCs in fiscal
year 2010 to $97,000,000, a reduction of $13,000,000 below the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level. The SBDC network--which
encompasses over 900 service centers across the Nation--
provides management and technical assistance to an estimated
1.2 million small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs
each year. As the economy struggles, SBDCs have reported a
significant increase in demand for their expertise as
businesses seek guidance on how to weather the economic
downturn and as newly unemployed Americans look for advice on
starting a small business as a new career path. Providing
support for SBDCs is more critical than ever as our economy
works to recover and grow.
The Committee recommends that up to $10,000,000 shall be
available for a new Entrepreneurial Development program
administered by the SBA, $10,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009
enacted level and $10,000,000 below the budget request. The
Committee is pleased with the administration's planned
initiatives under this proposed program to enhance the
effectiveness of veterans assistance programs, encourage
regional economic clusters, and provide small business
development assistance to areas most devastated by the current
economic crisis. The Committee directs the SBA to allocate such
funds to the maximum extent possible to its current partners--
namely, SBDCs, Women's Business Centers, the Service Corps of
Retired Executives [SCORE], and Veterans Business Outreach
Centers. These partners will provide an experienced
infrastructure for meeting the goals of the Entrepreneurial
Development initiative. The Committee notes that the amounts
recommended for SBA's Non-Credit Business Assistance Programs,
as specified in the table above, shall be administered in the
same manner as previous years and shall not be reduced,
reallocated, or reprogrammed to provide additional funds for
this or any other program. The Committee directs SBA to report
to the Committee on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment
on the strategies and goals of each initiative, methodologies
for assessing the performance of each initiative and each
individual project selected under each initiative, and
methodologies planned for selection of individual projects and
recipients. The Committee also directs SBA to provide to the
Committee on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment an
operating plan detailing funding planned for grants, contracts,
and salaries and expenses of both current and new SBA
employees, including travel expenses. Such plan shall
individually address each proposed initiative. The Committee
directs SBA to notify the Committee on Appropriations not less
than 15 days prior to obligation of funds provided for the
Entrepreneurial Development program.
The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for grants to
Microloan intermediaries under the Microloan program for
marketing, management, and technical assistance provided to
borrowers. An additional $3,000,000 is recommended under the
heading ``Business Loans Program Account'' to support lending
under the Microloan program. The Committee includes a provision
that, for funding provided for fiscal year 2010, temporarily
increases the maximum amount of grant funding eligibility for
qualified Microloan intermediaries and temporarily waives the
requirement for Microloan intermediaries to contribute non-
Federal matching funds. These temporary conditions will provide
relief to Microloan intermediaries that are providing increased
assistance to Microloan borrowers and struggling to secure
private matching funds during the economic downturn. The
Committee fully expects to restore these requirements for
fiscal year 2011 funding.
The Committee supports funding for veterans programs and
veterans business outreach centers and provides $2,500,000 for
veterans programs, an increase of $300,000 above the budget
request and $1,300,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level
to support additional grants to veterans business outreach
centers. When determining the allocation of the additional
funding, the Committee strongly encourages SBA to consider
centers with significant experience in conducting outreach to
veterans, including those previously receiving Federal funding.
The Committee understands how critical it is to assist
small business owners in their beginning start-up stages.
Through the Office of Government Contracting and Business
Development, SBA's 7(j) program provides training to 8(a) firms
(firms that are socially or economically disadvantaged). These
firms are eligible for Government contracts set-aside
specifically for small businesses; however, because of a firm's
status as a socially or economically disadvantaged firm, its
employees need more than just financial opportunities to grow.
These firms are also in need of technical assistance to help
them meet the demands of these contracts. 7(j) training is a
significant part of the 8(a) program effort to promote small
business opportunities and growth. The Committee directs SBA to
provide a status update report reviewing the last 5 years of
the 7(j) program, including the number of clients trained, the
length of training program, the cost per client per training
program, follow-up actions, description and examples of
curricula provided, and all other relevant information that
would provide the Committee with insight into the performance
of the 7(j) program. This report shall be submitted no later
than 180 days from the date of enactment.
Operating Expenses.--Within the amounts made available
under this heading, the Committee recommendation provides
$258,370,000 for SBA's operating expenses. The recommendation
is $11,238,000 below the 2009 enacted level, which included
funds provided in ARRA, and is $4,718,000 below the budget
request. The funding recommendations are made in accordance
with the information included in the budget justification, with
the following exceptions: up to $8,000,000 is provided to hire
80 additional FTEs to enhance operational support associated
with the expected increase in purchases, processing, and
monitoring of existing SBA loans; $1,000,000 is provided for
quality assurance and best practice reviews; $1,000,000 is
provided for a study of the next generation of equity capital
companies; and $1,000,000 is provided as an additional amount
for costs associated with administering the small business
development and entrepreneurship initiatives provided in
section 503. The Committee directs SBA to utilize funding
provided for operating expenses in fiscal year 2010 and funding
available from prior year appropriations, including funding
provided in ARRA, to support full-time, dedicated staff,
including a Director, for the Microloan program.
The Committee is pleased with SBA's progress to date on
implementing provisions in ARRA related to increasing access to
capital for small businesses. The Committee notes that SBA has
made a strong effort to implement new programs and changes in
existing programs under ARRA in a timely manner while ensuring
that such programs are designed and administered efficiently
and effectively. The Committee directs SBA to continue placing
a top priority on implementing ARRA programs.
Within the amounts recommended for SBA's operating
expenses, $11,690,500 is provided for the agency-wide effort to
modernize SBA's loan management and accounting systems. Current
systems are outdated and limit capabilities, and new systems
are needed to enhance the management of SBA's $90,000,000,000
loan portfolio. The Committee continues to be concerned about
the risks inherent in such a relatively large acquisition,
including risks related to contractor oversight. The Committee
notes that this large modernization effort coincides with SBA's
implementation of ARRA programs and SBA's proposal to initiate
new entrepreneurial development programs, both of which are
significant endeavors. The Committee directs the agency to
place a top priority on ensuring a successful acquisition of
and transition to the new systems because the final product
will have a long-term impact on SBA's capabilities and
effectiveness as an agency. SBA shall submit a quarterly
written report to the Committee on Appropriations summarizing
the agency's progress regarding the modernization effort,
including milestones planned and achieved and progress on cost
and schedule.
The Committee strongly supports the SBA's Historically
Underutilized Business Zone [HUBZone] program and believes that
it is a critical resource for distressed communities,
especially during the current economic downturn. The program
was created to stimulate economic development and job creation
in distressed areas by providing access to more Federal
contracting opportunities for qualified small businesses.
Accordingly, the Committee has provided additional funding as
requested by the administration to improve SBA's administration
and oversight of the HUBZone program and strongly encourages
SBA to continue its efforts in strengthening its management and
oversight of this important program.
The Committee is pleased with the results of the Office of
Personnel Management's 2008 survey, ``Best Places to Work in
the Federal Government.'' SBA employee responses to questions
related to job satisfaction resulted in SBA ranking 26 out of
30 agencies, a significant improvement from the 2007 ranking of
last place. The Committee is encouraged by the administration's
plans to focus efforts on employee training. Training is a key
part of improving employee morale because staff can anticipate
professional growth and career progression within the
organization, as well as see how improving their skills can
contribute to improving agency performance. The Committee
directs SBA to document a comprehensive plan for training that
links core competencies to SBA's goals, in accordance with
recommendations from the Government Accountability Office.
Finally, the Committee recommends that, in addition to pursuing
valuable outside studies of quality assurance and best practice
reviews, senior management seek and incorporate the opinions of
experienced career staff on further steps that can be taken to
improve the administration of SBA programs and job satisfaction
of SBA employees.
In light of the increased need to assist small businesses
that have been affected by manufacturing closures across the
country, the Committee directs SBA, in consultation with local
district offices, to review vacant Regional Manager positions,
especially positions which have remained vacant for several
years, to ensure adequate services for small businesses.
The Committee is aware that the SBA currently has 17
international finance specialists posted throughout the country
at one-stop assistance centers operated by the Department of
Commerce. This program has facilitated well over
$10,000,000,000 in exports in the last 10 years, helping to
create 140,000 new and higher-paying jobs. The Committee
directs the SBA to review and make efforts to fill
international finance specialist vacancies in high export
areas, especially vacancies which have remained unfilled for
several years.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $26,750,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 16,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,300,000
\1\Includes $10,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
The Committee recommendation provides $16,300,000 for the
Office of Inspector General. The recommendation is $10,450,000
below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included funds
provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,
and is the same as the budget request.
The Committee directs the Inspector General to continue
routine analysis and reporting on SBA's modernization of its
loan management and accounting systems, including acquisition,
contractor oversight, implementation, and progress regarding
budget and schedule.
SURETY BOND GUARANTEES REVOLVING FUND
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $17,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
\1\Includes $15,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
The Committee recommendation provides $1,000,000. The
recommendation is $16,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level, which included funds provided in the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is the same as the
budget request.
BUSINESS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009\1\................................. $776,980,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 236,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 236,000,000
\1\Includes $636,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
The Committee recommendation provides $236,000,000. The
recommendation is $540,980,000 below the fiscal year 2009
enacted level, which included funds provided in the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is equal to the
budget request.
The recommendation provides $153,000,000 for administrative
expenses, which may be transferred to and merged with SBA
salaries and expenses to cover the common overhead expenses
associated with the business loans programs.
The recommendation provides $3,000,000 for the Microloan
direct loan program. An additional amount of $22,000,000 is
recommended under the heading ``Salaries and Expenses'' for
technical assistance grants to Microlending intermediaries. The
Committee notes that while only 165 entities are qualified as
Microlending intermediaries under the Microloan program, the
Small Business Act authorizes the administration to fund up to
300 Microloan intermediaries annually. The Committee urges SBA
to conduct outreach to existing financial entities that may be
well-suited to participate in the Microloan program so that the
program can grow and expand access to microcapital across the
country. SBA shall submit a written report to the Committee on
Appropriations within 90 days of enactment summarizing the
agency's plans for conducting such outreach and other plans for
expanding the reach of the Microloan program.
The recommendation provides $80,000,000 to subsidize the
7(a) guaranteed loan program. For a typical year, estimated
fees collected from lenders and borrowers fully offset
estimated Government payments on losses under the 7(a) program.
However, the budget requests additional funding for fiscal year
2010 because fee collections are not expected to offset the
cost to the Government for that year due to changes in
assumptions related to the economic downturn. The recommended
funding will allow SBA to continue operating the 7(a) program
in fiscal year 2010. The Committee expects the program to
return to typical operation when the economy recovers.
The Committee is familiar with SBA's loan program known as
Patriot Express, and its efforts to conduct outreach to
veterans who may be seeking to start or grow a small business.
The Committee directs SBA to collaborate with the U.S.
Department of Labor, especially its Veterans Employment and
Training Services Office, and the U.S. Veterans Administration,
the U.S. Department of Defense, all other relevant Federal
agencies, State and local governments, not-for profit
organizations, and other stakeholders to identify existing
studies, programs, resources, and all available Federal funding
to assist veterans in starting and/or growing a small business.
The Committee directs SBA to provide a report, no later than
180 days from the date of enactment, on its findings and
recommended next steps for greater assistance to veteran small
business owners through existing grants, loans, and educational
programs and assistance.
DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010................................... $104,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 104,000,000
The Committee provides $104,000,000 for the Disaster Loans
program. The recommendation is $104,000,000 above the fiscal
year 2009 enacted level and is equal to the budget request. Of
the total funding, $1,690,000 is recommended for two pilot
disaster loan guarantee programs authorized in the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246) and
$102,310,000 is recommended for necessary administrative
expenses for carrying out disaster loan programs. Any direct
loan subsidies required in fiscal year 2010 will be derived
from available unobligated balances. As always, SBA is urged to
seek out emergency funding in the event of a disaster requiring
loan assistance.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Section 520 continues a provision concerning transfer
authority and availability of funds.
Section 521 provides that all disaster loans issued in
Alaska or North Dakota shall not be sold.
Section 522 provides $59,604,000 for small business
development and entrepreneurship initiatives, including
programmatic and construction activities, to be awarded as
follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Project Amount
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBA...................................... Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership for the AMBIT Youth Entrepreneurship Curriculum, $200,000
Anchorage, AK.
SBA...................................... Alcorn State University for the Systems Research Institute, MS............................... $250,000
SBA...................................... Amoskeag Business Incubator, Manchester, NH.................................................. $120,000
SBA...................................... Bennett College for Women, The Center for Women's Entrepreneurship, Greensboro, NC........... $100,000
SBA...................................... Boise State University for a research, economic development and entrepreneurial initiative, $200,000
ID.
SBA...................................... Brewer Business and Commerce Park, Brewer, ME................................................ $1,050,000
SBA...................................... Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY......................... $117,500
SBA...................................... Central Connecticut State University, for a manufacturing workforce initiative and technical $100,000
assistance program, New Britain, CT.
SBA...................................... Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf's Community $100,000
Kitchen Expansion Project, Burlington, VT.
SBA...................................... City of Buffalo, Buffalo clean energy incubator, Buffalo, NY................................. $117,500
SBA...................................... City of Jal, renovation of Burke Junior High School to house business ventures, Jal, NM...... $85,000
SBA...................................... City of Los Angeles, Port of Los Angeles Technology Advancement Program and Clean Technology $250,000
Development Center, Los Angeles, CA.
SBA...................................... City of Providence, Department of Planning and Development, Rhode Island Center for Life $300,000
Sciences, research, development and commercialization, Providence, RI.
SBA...................................... City of Salem, downtown revitalization ``toolbox'' program, Salem, OR........................ $200,000
SBA...................................... City of Santa Rosa, Ilfeld Warehouse business incubator, Santa Rosa, NM...................... $170,000
SBA...................................... College of Notre Dame of Maryland, for lab facilities, Baltimore, MD......................... $100,000
SBA...................................... Colorado State University, Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO......... $200,000
SBA...................................... Community College of Philadelphia, Northeast Regional Center for small business education, $100,000
growth, and training, Philadelphia, PA.
SBA...................................... Community Economic Development Fund Foundation, Small Business Institute, for training and $100,000
technical assistance to stabilize small business operations, Meriden, CT.
SBA...................................... Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation Park, $250,000
Oahu, HI.
SBA...................................... Community Service Society of New York, financial education project, New York, NY............. $117,500
SBA...................................... Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Entrepreneurial Development and Government $300,000
Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI.
SBA...................................... Cuyahoga Community College, veterans outreach and business development program, Cleveland, OH $200,000
SBA...................................... Delaware Valley Industrial Resource Center [DVIRC] for small business succession planning $175,000
services, Philadelphia, PA.
SBA...................................... Department of Community Affairs, Division on Women, New Jersey Women's Microbusiness Credit $100,000
Program, for training and mentoring activities, Trenton, NJ.
SBA...................................... Detroit Renaissance, Detroit Creative Corridor Center, Detroit, MI........................... $200,000
SBA...................................... Eastern Washington University for accelerating economic development in rural and underserved $200,000
communities of the Inland Pacific Northwest, Spokane, WA.
SBA...................................... Entrepreneurial Development Center Program, College Park, GA................................. $125,000
SBA...................................... Fitzsimons Redevelopment Authority, Colorado Drug, Device, and Diagnostic Development $220,000
Institute, Aurora, CO.
SBA...................................... Florida Institute of Technology, Florida Advanced Combustion Center, Brevard County, FL...... $200,000
SBA...................................... Great Falls Development Authority, to support the administrative costs of the Central Montana $137,500
Growth Fund, Great Falls, MT.
SBA...................................... Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce, Space Alliance Technology Outreach Program [SATOP], $117,500
Syracuse, NY.
SBA...................................... Hannah Grimes Center, business incubator renovation and expansion, Keene, NH................. $80,000
SBA...................................... Haymarket Center for a workforce development initiative, Chicago, IL......................... $700,000
SBA...................................... HOPE Community Development Corporation for an economic development initiative, Charleston, WV $137,500
SBA...................................... Illinois Eastern Community Colleges for the Small Business Development Center, Olney, IL..... $200,000
SBA...................................... Illinois Institute of Technology for University Technology Park, Chicago, IL................. $600,000
SBA...................................... Illinois State Library to expand access to Illinois public libraries, Springfield, IL........ $300,000
SBA...................................... Illinois State University for the McLean County Business Incubator, Normal, IL............... $500,000
SBA...................................... Jackson State University for Economic and Community Development through Heritage Tourism, MS. $500,000
SBA...................................... Kansas World Trade Center for the Wichita EcoPartnership, Wichita, KS........................ $400,000
SBA...................................... Kelley Road Business Park, Orono, ME......................................................... $200,000
SBA...................................... Latin Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Leadership Program, Las Vegas, NV........................ $213,333
SBA...................................... Lawrence CommunityWorks, Union Crossing Mill Redevelopment, Lawrence, MA..................... $200,000
SBA...................................... Leavenworth Technology and Research Park, Leavenworth, KS.................................... $300,000
SBA...................................... Loring Commerce Centre Infrastructure Development for the Loring Development Authority, $975,700
Limestone, ME.
SBA...................................... Louisiana Office of Social Entrepreneurship for administrative costs of a business planning $137,500
initiative, Baton Rouge, LA.
SBA...................................... Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota, Credit Counseling Capacity Building, St. Paul, MN...... $200,000
SBA...................................... McNeese State University, Southwest Louisiana Entrepreneurial and Economic Development Center $137,500
[SEED], Lake Charles, LA.
SBA...................................... Minot State University-Bottineau, Entrepreneurial Center for Horticulture, Bottineau, ND..... $250,000
SBA...................................... Mississippi Biotechnology Association for Capacity Building for the Mississippi Biotechnology $250,000
Industry, Ridgeland, MS.
SBA...................................... Mississippi State University for the Entrepreneurship Center to Develop New Entity Creation $500,000
[ECDEC], MS.
SBA...................................... Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, MS....... $850,000
SBA...................................... Missouri Chamber Education Foundation to develop a small business technology, training and $1,000,000
outreach center, Jefferson City, MO.
SBA...................................... Montana Technology Venture Center, for expansion and operations of the TechRanch next step $137,500
program, Bozeman, MT.
SBA...................................... Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE......................... $275,000
SBA...................................... Neighborhood Development Center, Midtown Global Market business technical assistance, St. $200,000
Paul, MN.
SBA...................................... Nevada Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology [NCET], small business and entrepreneurship $213,333
development, NV.
SBA...................................... Nevada Small Business Development Center, for Imagine 2012, an Hispanic business development $213,334
initiative, Reno, NV.
SBA...................................... North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center for a Rural Business Finance Program, $250,000
Raleigh, NC.
SBA...................................... North Carolina School of the Arts/Winston-Salem State University, The Center for Design $100,000
Innovation, Winston-Salem, NC.
SBA...................................... Northern Virginia Community College for retraining displaced workers in Geographic $200,000
Information Systems, Richmond, VA.
SBA...................................... Northwest Pennsylvania Incubator Association for an incubator project, Erie County, PA....... $100,000
SBA...................................... Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN............................. $750,000
SBA...................................... Phillips County Economic Development for a Entrepreneur Business Enhancement Program [EBEP], $300,000
Phillips County, KS.
SBA...................................... Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse for the Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA. $50,000
SBA...................................... Port of Clarkston, Asotin County Industrial Park infrastructure completion, Asotin County, WA $300,000
SBA...................................... Portland Community College, sustainable careers for a green economic recovery, Portland, OR. $200,000
SBA...................................... Prospera (Gallatin Valley Development Corporation), Accelerated Entrepreneur Program, $200,000
Bozeman, MT.
SBA...................................... Rhode Island School of Design and Brown University, Partnership for Sustainable Development/ $150,000
Rhode Island Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship [RI-CIE], for technical assistance
to small businesses on green product design and marketing and on developing and
commercializing innovative products and services, Providence, RI.
SBA...................................... Rural Business Energizer Program, Milbridge, ME.............................................. $150,000
SBA...................................... Rural Enterprises of Oklahoma, Inc, for a Women and Veteran's Business Resource Center at $200,000
Seminole State College, Durant, OK.
SBA...................................... Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Jersey urban entrepreneurship development $271,050
initiative, New Brunswick, NJ.
SBA...................................... Shawnee Community College for the Small Business Development Center, Ullin, IL............... $200,000
SBA...................................... Souris Basin Regional Planning Center, North Dakota REAP Zones, ND........................... $250,000
SBA...................................... South Dakota Rural Enterprise, Dakota Rising for an entrepreneur development system, SD...... $250,000
SBA...................................... The Cuban American National Council [CNC] New Jersey Regional Office, Latino financial $100,000
education, foreclosure prevention, and home ownership program, Union City, NJ.
SBA...................................... The University of Mississippi for the Technology Commercialization Initiative, Oxford, MS.... $250,000
SBA...................................... The University of Southern Mississippi for the Early Stage Entrepreneur and Commercialization $500,000
Development, Hattiesburg, MS.
SBA...................................... Uhlich Children's Advantage Network for job training, placement and retention services, $400,000
Chicago, IL.
SBA...................................... University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for business development related to clean water $250,000
technologies, Milwaukee, WI.
SBA...................................... University of Alabama for a Business Development Research Project, Tuscaloosa, AL............ $1,000,000
SBA...................................... University of Alaska, Small Business Development Center, Ketchikan, AK....................... $300,000
SBA...................................... University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Small Business Innovation Center, Little Rock, AR..... $225,000
SBA...................................... University of Arkansas Technology Development Foundation, Arkansas Research and Technology $225,000
Park, Fayetteville, AR.
SBA...................................... University of Connecticut for the Avery Point Technology Center, Groton, CT.................. $200,000
SBA...................................... University of Delaware, Delaware Small Business and Technology Development Center, Newark, DE $350,000
SBA...................................... University of Maryland-Baltimore BioPark, Baltimore, MD...................................... $100,000
SBA...................................... University of Northern Iowa for MyEntreNet, a national rural entrepreneurship development $250,000
system, IA.
SBA...................................... University of Southern Maine for the Science Technology Research Center, Portland, ME........ $850,000
SBA...................................... Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, economic development center expansion, Boston, MA.... $200,000
SBA...................................... Urban League of Philadelphia Entrepreneurship Center, Philadelphia, PA....................... $50,000
SBA...................................... Valencia County IT program, upgrade and training, Valencia County, NM........................ $145,000
SBA...................................... Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, the 50 for 25 Demonstration Project, $50,000
Burlington, VT.
SBA...................................... Vermont Farms Association for an agritourism best practices and standards project, Rochester, $50,000
VT.
SBA...................................... Vermont Small Business Development Center, technical assistance to high-tech small businesses $250,000
and emerging businesses, Randolph, VT.
SBA...................................... Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication $200,000
improvements, Herndon, VA.
SBA...................................... Wayne State University for the Law School's Small Business Clinic, Detroit, MI............... $200,000
SBA...................................... West Virginia Northern Community College, Center for Economic and Workforce Advancement, $137,500
Weirton, WV.
SBA...................................... Western Illinois University for the Small Business Development Center, Macomb, IL............ $400,000
SBA...................................... Western Kentucky University Bowling Green Data Center, Bowling Green, KY..................... $1,100,000
SBA...................................... Women's Business Development Center, for entrepreneurial small business training & $100,000
assistance, Stamford, CT.
SBA...................................... World Trade Center Institute Delaware, for the export assistance webinar series for business $50,000
education, Wilmington, DE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States Postal Service
PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $111,831,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 118,328,000
Committee recommendation................................ 118,328,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal
Service in 1971 as an independent establishment of the
executive branch of the United States Government. The Postal
Service's basic function and obligation is to provide postal
services to bind the Nation together through the personal,
educational, literary, and business correspondence of the
people. Its mission is to provide prompt, reliable, and
efficient services to patrons in all areas and render postal
services to all communities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends appropriations totaling
$118,328,000 for payment to the Postal Service Fund, an
increase of $6,497,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level
and the same as the budget request.
This amount includes $29,000,000 for revenue forgone on
free and reduced-rate mail pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 2401(d). The
recommendation also includes $89,328,000 as an advance
appropriation for fiscal year 2011, which includes $68,776,000
for 2010 costs and $20,552,000 for 2007 and 2008 reconciliation
adjustments.
Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables
postage rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized rates
for certain categories of mail as authorized by subsections (c)
and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code. Free
mail for the blind and overseas voters will continue to be
provided at the funding level recommended by the Committee.
The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would
assure that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind
shall continue to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural
delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that
none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close
small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 2010.
These are services that must be maintained in fiscal year 2010
and beyond.
The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of
the most important services provided by the Federal Government
to its citizens. Especially in rural and small town America,
this critical postal service is the linchpin that serves to
bind the Nation together.
Mail-related Recycling Initiatives.--Every year the Postal
Service recycles about 1 million tons of wastepaper, cardboard,
plastics, cans, and other materials. The Postal Service also
generates about $7,500,000 in revenue from those recycling
activities. The Postal Service also purchases more than
$200,000,000 worth of products containing recycled content each
year. Many of the containers in the Postal Service mail system
are made from recycled materials, and so are the stamped
envelopes, post cards, stamp booklet covers, and packaging
materials provided by the Postal Service. The adhesives used in
U.S. postage stamps are biodegradable, and the Postal Services
priority and express boxes and envelopes are recyclable.
Through various continued successful partnerships, the Postal
Service has facilitated reuse or recovery of overstock and
outdated electronic equipment, saving tons of potential
landfill waste.
The Committee remains concerned about the fiscal health of
the Postal Service. In June 2009, the Postal Service indicated
that it anticipates a net loss of about $7,000,000,000 by the
end of fiscal year 2009. Significant declines in mail volume,
exacerbated by the struggling economy, have contributed to the
most recent Postal Service financial crisis. In its unaudited
monthly financial report to the Postal Regulatory Commission
[PRC], the Postal Service claimed a total net loss of
$677,000,000 for the month of May, bringing actual year-to-date
losses to over $3,300,000,000. Compared to the same year-to-
date time period for 2008, total volume was down by 19.9
percent and total revenues had declined by about
$1,000,000,000.
The Postal Service has made efforts to reduce costs,
primarily by cutting work hours and capturing processing
efficiencies. Through May 2009, the Postal Service had cut
roughly $3,600,000,000 in expenses compared to the same period
last year. In June 2009, the Postal Service indicated that cost
savings could reach as much as $6,100,000,000 in fiscal year
2009, exceeding expectations by $200,000,000.
Despite its efforts to cut costs, the Postal Service fiscal
prospects are still dire, and the Postmaster General has sought
the aid of Congress. In particular, the Postal Service has
requested that Congress moderate the requirement, included in
the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 [PAEA],
which directs the Postal Service to pre-fund a significant
portion of its future retiree health benefits through the end
of fiscal year 2016. Under the PAEA, the Postal Service is
required to pay into the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits
Fund (the Fund) between $5,200,000,000 and $5,800,000,000 for
each fiscal year, through fiscal year 2016. After fiscal year
2016, any residual unliquidated liability must be amortized
through fiscal year 2046 and paid down through regular future
payments. Separately, the Postal Service is required to pay
premiums to the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] for
current retiree health benefits.
Under its relief proposal, the Postal Service would
continue to make annual payments to the Fund as required by the
PAEA, but it would be permitted to use the Fund to pay for its
current retiree health benefits, instead of making these
separate payments from other operating funds. According to the
Postal Service, this proposal could yield a savings of between
$2,000,000,000 and $4,200,000,000 for each of the affected
years. Nonetheless, the Government Accountability Office [GAO]
has expressed concern about this proposal because it unravels
fiscally responsible requirements that Congress established in
the PAEA.
To provide a limited measure of relief that maintains the
fiscally responsible requirement to pre-fund a significant
portion of future retiree health benefits, the Committee
considered a proposal that would have reduced the amount of the
required payments to the Fund and would have provided a
benchmark for unliquidated Fund liabilities as of September 30,
2017. If the modified stream of payments would not have
exceeded this liabilities benchmark, then the Postal Service,
in coordination with OPM and the Office of Management and
Budget [OMB], would have been authorized to cut the amount of
the required payment to the Fund for any given fiscal year
through 2016. To maintain fiscal soundness, the provision also
would have required an increase in payments if the stream of
payments failed to liquidate the enumerated benchmark for the
Fund.
The Committee was willing to consider this proposal based
on the results of a recent Inspector General [IG] report, which
indicated that the stream of payments under PAEA would result
in a 6 percent overpayment to the Fund by the end of fiscal
year 2016. Under the IG's analysis, the current stream of
payments required by PAEA would yield approximately
$5,600,000,000 more than the Postal Service would need by the
end of fiscal year 2016 to fully pre-fund its retiree health
benefits.
Because some experts, including OPM, have expressed
concerns about the assumptions made in the Postal Service IG
report, the Committee directs the Postal Service, in
coordination with OPM and OMB, to develop a fiscally
responsible legislative proposal to grant a limited measure of
relief from the PAEA requirements to pre-fund retiree health
benefits. These proposals should consider: (1) whether the
PAEA-mandated stream of future payments overfunds through
fiscal year 2016 the anticipated liability of the Postal
Service for future retiree health benefits, (2) whether
modifications to the mandated payments could meet the
unliquidated liability goals contained in the PAEA, and (3)
whether a decrease in mandated payments will reduce the
incentive of the Postal Service to continue to cut additional
costs, including the labor costs that account for the most
significant portion of annual total costs. Additionally, these
proposals should take into account the result of the PRC's
study of the PAEA payments.
Consolidation of Mail Processing Facilities.--The Committee
understands that the Postal Service has undertaken initiatives
to develop a mail processing network conducive to current and
future needs, to reduce inefficiencies and redundancies, and
increase operational flexibility without impacting service. One
such initiative has been the realignment of area mail
processing [AMP] facilities. The Committee is aware that the
Quincy, Illinois AMP is among the facilities for which a
possible realignment feasibility study has been announced. The
Committee is concerned about the impact on the community and
postal customers of eliminating jobs or transferring functions.
The Committee directs the Postal Service to provide the
Committee with a detailed explanation of the criteria used to
select the Quincy AMP for a study no later than 30 days after
enactment. The Committee further directs the Postal Service to
not proceed with the Quincy AMP study or any other related
actions to implement that study during fiscal year 2010.
Idaho Rural Airmail Delivery.--The Committee directs the
Postmaster General to continue rural airmail delivery service
in Idaho. The level of service shall be no less than the
January 2009 level.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $239,356,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 244,397,000
Committee recommendation................................ 244,397,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The United States Postal Service Office of Inspector
General [OIG] is an independent organization established in
1996 and charged with reporting to Congress on the overall
efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of Postal Service
programs and operations. The OIG plays a key role in
maintaining the integrity and accountability of America's
postal service, its revenue and assets, and its employees. The
OIG meets this responsibility by conducting and supervising
objective and independent audits, investigations, and other
reviews. In fiscal year 2008, the OIG efforts resulted in 455
audits and evaluations being completed identifying potential
monetary benefits of nearly $1,200,000,000, 7,679 completed
investigative cases, 928 arrests and indictments, 3,699
administrative actions referred, $25,700,000 in monetary
recoveries to the Postal Service, and over $207,000,000 in
workers' compensation and contract fraud cost avoidance. As a
result the return-on-investment was $7.54, up from $5.85 in
fiscal year 2007.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the
Postal Fund, of $244,397,000 for the United States Postal
Service Office of Inspector General. This amount is $5,041,000
above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the same as the
budget request. The funds will support 1,194 FTEs and enable
the Office of Inspector General to concentrate on its fiscal
year 2010 goals of reviewing field financial areas, audit work
in response to Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, audits of data
collection systems and procedures, and increasing total
investigative financial, criminal, and administrative outcomes.
United States Tax Court
salaries and expenses
Appropriations, 2009.................................... $48,463,000
Budget estimate, 2010................................... 49,241,000
Committee recommendation................................ 49,241,000
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the
legislative branch established in 1969 under Article I of the
Constitution of the United States. The Court was created to
provide a national forum for the resolution of disputes between
taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service, resolve cases
expeditiously while giving careful consideration to the merits
of each matter, and ensure the uniform interpretation of the
Internal Revenue Code. The matters over which the Court has
jurisdiction are set forth in various sections of title 26 of
the United States Code.
The Court is composed of 19 judges, one of whom the judges
elect as chief judge. In their judicial duties the judges are
assisted by senior judges, who participate in the adjudication
of regular cases, and by special trial judges, who hear small
tax cases and certain regular cases assigned to them by the
chief judge.
The Court conducts trial sessions throughout the United
States, including Hawaii and Alaska. Decisions by the Court are
reviewable by the U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is
granted, by the Supreme Court.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $49,241,000
for the U.S. Tax Court. This amount is $778,000 above the
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget
request. The Committee notes that the increased funding is
expected to help the Tax Court comply with the Court Security
Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-177) which authorizes the United
States Marshals Service to provide protective services to the
Tax Court at the same level as such services are provided to
other Federal Courts on a reimbursable basis. This level of
protection includes the presence of United States Marshals
Service security personnel in courtrooms where the Tax Court
presides. In addition, the funds will enable the Tax Court to
fill necessary staff vacancies to fulfill its statutory
mission.
STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Financial Services and General Government appropriation
bill includes general provisions which govern both the
activities of the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some
cases, activities of agencies, programs, and general government
activities that are not covered by the bill.
The bill contains a number of general provisions that have
been carried in this bill for years and which are routine in
nature and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained
under this section of the report. Those general provisions that
deal with a single agency only are shown immediately following
that particular agency's or department's appropriation accounts
in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or
directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill
are contained in title VI. General provisions that are
Government-wide in scope are contained in title VII of this
bill. General provisions applicable to the District of Columbia
are contained in title VIII of this bill.
TITLE VI
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT
Section 601 continues the provision prohibiting pay and
other expenses of non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory
or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this act.
Section 602 continues the provision prohibiting obligations
beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds
unless expressly provided.
Section 603 continues the provision limiting expenditures
for consulting service through procurement contracts where such
expenditures are a matter of public record and available for
public inspection.
Section 604 continues the provision prohibiting funds in
this act from being transferred without express authority.
Section 605 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
funds to engage in activities that would prohibit the
enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat.
590).
Section 606 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
funds unless the recipient agrees to comply with the Buy
American Act.
Section 607 continues the provision prohibiting funding for
any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American
Act.
Section 608 continues the provision authorizing the
reprogramming of funds and specifies the reprogramming
procedures for agencies funded by this act.
Section 609 continues the provision ensuring that 50
percent of unobligated balances may remain available for
certain purposes.
Section 610 continues the provision restricting the use of
funds for the Executive Office of the President to request
official background reports from the Federal Bureau of
Investigation without the written consent of the individual who
is the subject of the report.
Section 611 continues the provision ensuring that the cost
accounting standards shall not apply with respect to a contract
under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.
Section 612 continues the provision referencing non-foreign
area cost of living allowances.
Section 613 continues the provision waiving restrictions on
the purchase of non-domestic articles, materials, and supplies
in the case of acquisition by the Federal Government of
information technology.
Section 614 continues a provision on the acceptance by
agencies or commissions funded by this act, or by their
officers or employees, of payment or reimbursement for travel,
subsistence, or related expenses from any person or entity (or
their representative) that engages in activities regulated by
such agencies or commissions.
Section 615 continues a provision allowing the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board to obligate amounts
collected from monetary penalties for the purpose of funding
scholarships for accounting students, as authorized by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-204).
Section 616 is a provision rescinding $1,500,000 from
unobligated balances for prior year appropriations made
available for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.
Section 617 is a provision related to agricultural trade
with Cuba.
TITLE VII
GENERAL PROVISIONS--GOVERNMENT-WIDE
Departments, Agencies, and Corporations
Section 701 continues the provision requiring agencies to
administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its
workplaces are free from the illegal use of controlled
substances.
Section 702 continues the provision setting specific limits
on the cost of passenger vehicles purchased by the Federal
Government with exceptions for police, heavy duty, electric
hybrid, and clean fuels vehicles.
Section 703 continues the provision allowing funds made
available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters
allowances and cost-of-living allowances.
Section 704 continues but modifies the provision
prohibiting the government, with certain specified exceptions,
from employing non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be
in the continental United States.
Section 705 continues the provision ensuring that agencies
will have authority to pay the General Services Administration
for space renovation and other services.
Section 706 continues the provision allowing agencies to
use receipts from the sale of materials for acquisition, waste
reduction and prevention, environmental management programs,
and other Federal employee programs.
Section 707 continues the provision providing that funds
for administrative expenses may be used to pay rent and other
service costs in the District of Columbia.
Section 708 continues the provision precluding interagency
financing of groups absent prior statutory approval.
Section 709 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in
accordance with the applicable law of the United States.
Section 710 continues the provision limiting the pay
increases of certain prevailing rate employees.
Section 711 continues the provision limiting the amount
that can be used for redecoration of offices under certain
circumstances.
Section 712 continues the provision that permits
interagency funding of national security and emergency
preparedness telecommunications initiatives, which benefit
multiple Federal departments, agencies, and entities.
Section 713 continues the provision requiring agencies to
certify that a schedule C appointment was not created solely or
primarily to detail the employee to the White House.
Section 714 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
funds to prevent Federal employees from communicating with
Congress or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against
employees for such communication.
Section 715 continues the provision prohibiting Federal
training not directly related to the performance of official
duties.
Section 716 continues the provision prohibiting the
expenditure of funds for the implementation of agreements in
certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are
included in the policies.
Section 717 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to
support or defeat legislation pending before Congress.
Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
appropriated funds by an agency to provide home addresses of
Federal employees to labor organizations, absent employee
authorization or court order.
Section 719 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
appropriated funds to provide non-public information such as
mailing or telephone lists to any person or organization
outside of the Government without approval of the Committees on
Appropriations.
Section 720 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes within
the United States not authorized by Congress.
Section 721 continues the provision directing agencies'
employees to use official time in an honest effort to perform
official duties.
Section 722 continues the provision authorizing the use of
current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of
the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board administrative
costs.
Section 723 continues the provision authorizing agencies to
transfer funds to or reimburse the Government-wide Policy
account of the General Services Administration to finance an
appropriate share of various government-wide boards and
councils.
Section 724 continues the provision authorizing
breastfeeding at any location in a Federal building or on
Federal property.
Section 725 continues the provision permitting interagency
funding of the National Science and Technology Council, and
requiring an OMB report on the budget and resources of the
Council.
Section 726 continues the provision requiring
identification of the Federal agencies providing Federal funds
and the amount provided for all proposals, solicitations, grant
applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other
publications related to the distribution of funding to a State.
Section 727 continues the provision prohibiting the use of
funds to monitor personal information relating to the use of
Federal Internet sites.
Section 728 continues the provision regarding contraceptive
coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.
Section 729 continues the provision recognizing the U.S.
Anti-Doping Agency as the official anti-doping agency for
Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic sports in the United
States.
Section 730 continues the provision allowing departments
and agencies to use official travel funds to participate in the
fractional aircraft ownership pilot programs.
Section 731 continues the provision prohibiting funds for
implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to the
legislative branch and placing certain limitations on the Coast
Guard Congressional Fellowship program.
Section 732 continues the provision prohibiting the
expenditure of funds for the acquisition of certain additional
Federal law enforcement training facilities.
Section 733 continues the provision providing funding for
the Midway Atoll Airfield.
Section 734 continues a provision that prohibits the use of
funds to begin or announce a study or a public-private
competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance
of any function performed by civilian Federal employees
pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 or
any other administrative regulation, directive, or policy.
Section 735 is a new provision requiring agencies to submit
annual inventories of activities performed pursuant to
contracts for services and specifying other government
reporting responsibilities relating to contracted work.
Section 736 continues a provision, with modifications,
providing that the adjustment in rates of basic pay for
employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in fiscal
year 2010 shall be an increase of 2.9 percent.
Section 737 continues a provision that prohibits executive
branch agencies from creating or funding prepackaged news
stories that are broadcast or distributed in the United States
unless specific notification conditions are met.
Section 738 continues the provision prohibiting funds used
in contravention of the Privacy Act, section 552a of title 5,
United States Code or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code
of Federal Regulations.
Section 739 continues the provision requiring each
department and agency to evaluate the creditworthiness of an
individual before issuing the individual a Government purchase
charge card or travel card.
Section 740 includes a provision prohibiting funds from
being used for any Federal Government contract with any foreign
incorporated entity which is treated as an inverted domestic
corporation.
Section 741 includes a provision requiring improvements to
enhance public access to information on agency Inspector
General websites.
Section 742 requires the Office of Management and Budget to
provide a report no later than 120 days after enactment on the
status of a pilot program to develop and implement an inventory
to track the cost and size of service contracts in at least
three cabinet-level departments, as required by section 748 of
division D of Public Law 110-161.
Section 743 prohibits the Office of Personnel Management or
any other agency from using funds to implement regulations
changing the competitive areas under reductions-in-force for
Federal employees.
Section 744 repeals section 748 of the Financial Services
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law
111-8, Division D) relating to making permanent Executive Order
13423 on strengthening the environmental, energy, and
transportation management of Federal agencies.
Section 745 continues a provision requiring reports on
executive branch workforce composition.
Section 746 declares the inapplicability of these general
provisions to title IV and title VIII.
TITLE VIII
GENERAL PROVISIONS--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Section 801 continues the provision that specifies that an
appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall be
considered as the maximum amount that may be expended for said
purpose or object.
Section 802 continues the provision that permits funds for
travel and payment of dues.
Section 803 continues the provision that appropriates funds
for refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for paying
settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia
government.
Section 804 continues the provision that prohibits the use
of the appropriation for publicity or propaganda purposes, and
permits the use of local funds for carry out lobbying activity.
Section 805 modifies the provision that establishes
notification requirements for certain reprogramming and
transfer requirements with respect to funds and specifies a
timeframe for approval and execution of requests to reprogram
and transfer local funds.
Section 806 continues the provision that restricts the use
of funds only to the objects for which the appropriations were
made.
Section 807 continues the provision that prohibits the use
of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs
associated with the offices of U.S. Senator or Representative
under section 4(d) of the D.C. Statehood Constitutional
Convention Initiatives of 1979.
Section 808 continues the provision that restricts the use
of official vehicles to official duties and not between a
residence and workplace, except under certain circumstances.
Section 809 continues the provision that prohibits the use
of appropriated funds by the District of Columbia Attorney
General or any other officer or entity of the District
government to provide assistance for any petition drive or
civil action which seeks to require Congress to provide for
voting representation in Congress for the District of Columbia.
Section 810 continues the provision that prohibits the use
of any Federal funds in this act to carry out any program of
distributing sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic
injection of any illegal drug.
Section 811 continues the provision that includes a
``conscience clause'' on legislation that pertains to
contraceptive coverage by health insurance plans.
Section 812 continues the provision that requires the Mayor
of the District of Columbia to submit annual reports on various
indicators pertaining to the District of Columbia.
Section 813 continues the provision prohibiting use of
funds to change the legality of marijuana use.
Section 814 modifies the provision relating to abortion to
restrict the use of Federal funds.
Section 815 continues a provision to mitigate the necessity
for dual budgeting of local funds when such funds are
transferred but not expended.
Section 816 is a new provision requiring the submittal of a
revised appropriated funds budget that reflects the total
amount of the approved appropriation and realigns all budget
data for personal services and other-than-personal-services
with anticipated actual expenditures.
Section 817 is a new provision requiring the submittal of a
revised appropriated funds budget for the District of Columbia
Schools that aligns the schools budgets to actual enrollment.
Section 818 continues the provision which limits references
to ``this Act'' as referring to only this title.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.''
Items providing funding for fiscal year 2010 which lack
authorization are as follows:
Department of the Treasury
Departmental Offices
Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments
Office of the Inspector General
Inspector General for Tax Administration
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Financial Management Service
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Bureau of the Public Debt
Community Development and Financial Institutions Fund
Internal Revenue Service:
Taxpayer Services
Enforcement
Operations Support
Business Systems Modernization
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration
Executive Office of the President
Office of Management and Budget
ONDCP: Training for drug court professionals
District of Columbia
Federal Payment for the District of Columbia Water and
Sewer Authority
Federal Payment for School Improvement
Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility
Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the
District of Columbia
Independent Agencies
Election Assistance Commission
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Election Commission
Federal Trade Commission
General Services Administration:
Federal Building Fund
GSA E-government Fund
Office of Government Ethics
Office of Special Counsel
Merit Systems Protection Board
National Credit Union Administration: Community Development
Revolving Loan Fund
Securities and Exchange Commission
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 9, 2009,
the Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 1432)
making appropriations for financial services and general
government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010,
subject to amendment and consistent with the budget allocation,
and authorized the chairman of the committee or the chairman of
the subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate-reported bill
as a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the
House companion measure, by a recorded vote of 29-1, a quorum
being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Inouye Mr. Brownback
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu
Mr. Reed
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson
Mr. Pryor
Mr. Tester
Mr. Specter
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Mr. Voinovich
Ms. Murkowski
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the Committee.''
In compliance with this rule, the following changes in
existing law proposed to be made by this bill are shown as
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
TITLE 40--PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS
SUBTITLE I--FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Chapter 33--Acquisition, Construction, and Alteration
Sec. 3314. Delegation
(a) * * *
(1) shall, except for the authority contained in section
3305(b) of this title, be delegated on request to the
appropriate [executive] federal agency when the estimated cost
of the project does not exceed $100,000; and
(2) may be delegated to the appropriate [executive] federal
agency when the Administrator determines that delegation will
promote efficiency and economy.
------
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1992, PUBLIC LAW 102-550
TITLE XIII--GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES
SUBTITLE A--SUPERVISION AND REGULATION OF ENTERPRISES
PART 2--AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY
Subpart B--Housing Goals
SEC. 1338. EFFECTIVE DATE OF TRANSITION GOALS.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1339. CAPITAL MAGNET FUND.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Leverage of funds.--Each grant from the Capital
Magnet Fund awarded under this section shall be
reasonably expected to result in eligible housing, or
economic and community development projects that
support or sustain an affordable housing project funded
by a grant under this section whose aggregate costs
total [at least 10 times the grant amount] at least 10
times the grant amount or such other amount (including
none) that the Secretary may require.
------
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUICIARY, AND RELATED
AGENCICES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998, PUBLIC LAW 105-119
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
General Provisions--Department of Justice
Sec. 122. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject
to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized
to establish, for a period of [11 years] 12 years from date of
enactment of this provision, a personnel management
demonstration project providing for the compensation and
performance management of not more than a combined total of 950
employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering,
intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical
positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
------
UNIVERSAL SERVICE ANTIDEFICIENCY TEMPORARY SUSPENSION ACT, PUBLIC LAW
108-494
TITLE III--UNIVERSAL SERVICE
SEC. 302. APPLICATION OF CERTAIN TITLE 31 PROVISIONS TO UNIVERSAL
SERVICE FUND.
(a) In General.--During the period beginning on the date of
enactment of this Act and ending on [December 31, 2009]
December 31, 2010, section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15
of title 31, United States Code, do not apply--
* * * * * * *
(b) Post-2005 Fulfillment of Protected Obligations.--
Section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31,
United States Code, do not apply after [December 31, 2009]
December 31, 2010, to an expenditure or obligation described in
subsection (a)(2) made or authorized during the period
described in subsection (a).
------
OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009, PUBLIC LAW
111-8
DIVISION D--FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS
ACT, 2009
TITLE VII
GENERAL PROVISIONS--GOVERNMENT-WIDE
Departments, Agencies, and Corporations
[Sec. 748. Executive Order 13423 (72 Fed. Reg. 3919; Jan.
24, 2007) shall remain in effect hereafter except as otherwise
provided by law after the date of the enactment of this Act.]
------
BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
---------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount of Committee Amount of
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
for 2010: Subcommittee on Financial Services and General
Government:
Mandatory............................................... 20,702 20,702 20,699 \1\20,699
Discretionary........................................... 23,510 24,400 25,049 \1\25,857
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
2010.................................................... ........... ........... ........... \2\39,749
2011.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,618
2012.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 689
2013.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 301
2014 and future years................................... ........... ........... ........... 258
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 711 NA 505
2009.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.
NOTE: Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for tax enforcement and in accordance with section
401(c)(2)(B) of Senate Concurrent Resolution 13 (111th Congress), the Committee anticipates that the Budget
Committee will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an
upward adjustment of $890,000,000 in budget authority and associated outlays.
DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the
purse. The Committee believes strongly that Congress should
make the decisions on how to allocate the people's money.
As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the
Senate, the term ``congressionally directed spending item''
means a provision or report language included primarily at the
request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a
specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit
authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan,
loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure
with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality
or congressional district, other than through a statutory or
administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process.
For each item, a Member is required to provide a
certification that neither the Member nor the Senator's
immediate family has a pecuniary interest in such
congressionally directed spending item. Such certifications are
available to the public on the website of the Senate Committee
on Appropriations (www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm).
Following is a list of congressionally directed spending
items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this
report, along with the name of each Senator who submitted a
request to the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so
identified. Neither the Committee recommendation nor this
report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff
benefits as defined in rule XLIV.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account Project Funding Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC....................................... Children's National Medical Center............................................................................................ $1,000,000 Senators Thad Cochran, Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership for the AMBIT Youth Entrepreneurship Curriculum, Anchorage, AK..................... $200,000 Senator Lisa Murkowski
SBA...................................... Alcorn State University for the Systems Research Institute, MS................................................................ $250,000 Senator Thad Cochran
SBA...................................... Amoskeag Business Incubator, Manchester, NH................................................................................... $120,000 Senator Jeanne Shaheen
SBA...................................... Bennett College for Women, The Center for Women's Entrepreneurship, Greensboro, NC............................................ $100,000 Senator Kay Hagan
SBA...................................... Boise State University for a research, economic development and entrepreneurial initiative, ID................................ $200,000 Senators Mike Crapo, James Risch
SBA...................................... Brewer Business and Commerce Park, Brewer, ME................................................................................. $1,050,000 Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA...................................... Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY.......................................................... $117,500 Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
Schumer
SBA...................................... Central Connecticut State University, for a manufacturing workforce initiative and technical assistance program, New Britain, $100,000 Senator Christopher Dodd
CT.
SBA...................................... Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf's Community Kitchen Expansion Project, $100,000 Senator Bernard Sanders
Burlington, VT.
SBA...................................... City of Buffalo, Buffalo clean energy incubator, Buffalo, NY.................................................................. $117,500 Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
Schumer
SBA...................................... City of Jal, renovation of Burke Junior High School to house business ventures, Jal, NM....................................... $85,000 Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA...................................... City of Los Angeles, Port of Los Angeles Technology Advancement Program and Clean Technology Development Center, Los Angeles, $250,000 Senator Dianne Feinstein
CA.
SBA...................................... City of Providence, Department of Planning and Development, Rhode Island Center for Life Sciences, research, development and $300,000 Senators Jack Reed, Sheldon Whitehouse
commercialization, Providence, RI.
SBA...................................... City of Salem, downtown revitalization ``toolbox'' program, Salem, OR......................................................... $200,000 Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden
SBA...................................... City of Santa Rosa, Ilfeld Warehouse business incubator, Santa Rosa, NM....................................................... $170,000 Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA...................................... College of Notre Dame of Maryland, for lab facilities, Baltimore, MD.......................................................... $100,000 Senator Benjamin Cardin
SBA...................................... Colorado State University, Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO.......................................... $200,000 Senator Mark Udall
SBA...................................... Community College of Philadelphia, Northeast Regional Center for small business education, growth, and training, Philadelphia, $100,000 Senator Robert Casey
PA.
SBA...................................... Community Economic Development Fund Foundation, Small Business Institute, for training and technical assistance to stabilize $100,000 Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
small business operations, Meriden, CT.
SBA...................................... Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation Park, Oahu, HI.......................... $250,000 Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
SBA...................................... Community Service Society of New York, financial education project, New York, NY.............................................. $117,500 Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
Schumer
SBA...................................... Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Entrepreneurial Development and Government Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI.......... $300,000 Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
SBA...................................... Cuyahoga Community College, veterans outreach and business development program, Cleveland, OH................................. $200,000 Senators Sherrod Brown, George Voinovich
SBA...................................... Delaware Valley Industrial Resource Center [DVIRC] for small business succession planning services, Philadelphia, PA.......... $175,000 Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA...................................... Department of Community Affairs, Division on Women, New Jersey Women's Microbusiness Credit Program, for training and $100,000 Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
mentoring activities, Trenton, NJ.
SBA...................................... Detroit Renaissance, Detroit Creative Corridor Center, Detroit, MI............................................................ $200,000 Senators Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow
SBA...................................... Eastern Washington University for accelerating economic development in rural and underserved communities of the Inland Pacific $200,000 Senators Maria Cantwell, Patty Murray
Northwest, Spokane, WA.
SBA...................................... Entrepreneurial Development Center Program, College Park, GA.................................................................. $125,000 Senators Saxby Chambliss, Johnny Isakson
SBA...................................... Fitzsimons Redevelopment Authority, Colorado Drug, Device, and Diagnostic Development Institute, Aurora, CO................... $220,000 Senator Michael Bennet
SBA...................................... Florida Institute of Technology, Florida Advanced Combustion Center, Brevard County, FL....................................... $200,000 Senator Bill Nelson
SBA...................................... Great Falls Development Authority, to support the administrative costs of the Central Montana Growth Fund, Great Falls, MT.... $137,500 Senators Max Baucus, Jon Tester
SBA...................................... Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce, Space Alliance Technology Outreach Program [SATOP], Syracuse, NY........................ $117,500 Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
Schumer
SBA...................................... Hannah Grimes Center, business incubator renovation and expansion, Keene, NH.................................................. $80,000 Senator Jeanne Shaheen
SBA...................................... Haymarket Center for a workforce development initiative, Chicago, IL.......................................................... $700,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... HOPE Community Development Corporation for an economic development initiative, Charleston, WV................................. $137,500 Senator Robert Byrd
SBA...................................... Illinois Eastern Community Colleges for the Small Business Development Center, Olney, IL...................................... $200,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Illinois Institute of Technology for University Technology Park, Chicago, IL.................................................. $600,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Illinois State Library to expand access to Illinois public libraries, Springfield, IL......................................... $300,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Illinois State University for the McLean County Business Incubator, Normal, IL................................................ $500,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Jackson State University for Economic and Community Development through Heritage Tourism, MS.................................. $500,000 Senator Thad Cochran
SBA...................................... Kansas World Trade Center for the Wichita EcoPartnership, Wichita, KS......................................................... $400,000 Senators Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts
SBA...................................... Kelley Road Business Park, Orono, ME.......................................................................................... $200,000 Senator Susan Collins
SBA...................................... Latin Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Leadership Program, Las Vegas, NV......................................................... $213,333 Senator Harry Reid
SBA...................................... Lawrence CommunityWorks, Union Crossing Mill Redevelopment, Lawrence, MA...................................................... $200,000 Senators Edward Kennedy, John Kerry
SBA...................................... Leavenworth Technology and Research Park, Leavenworth, KS..................................................................... $300,000 Senator Sam Brownback
SBA...................................... Loring Commerce Centre Infrastructure Development for the Loring Development Authority, Limestone, ME......................... $975,700 Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA...................................... Louisiana Office of Social Entrepreneurship for administrative costs of a business planning initiative, Baton Rouge, LA....... $137,500 Senator Mary Landrieu
SBA...................................... Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota, Credit Counseling Capacity Building, St. Paul, MN....................................... $200,000 Senators Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar
SBA...................................... McNeese State University, Southwest Louisiana Entrepreneurial and Economic Development Center [SEED], Lake Charles, LA........ $137,500 Senator Mary Landrieu
SBA...................................... Minot State University-Bottineau, Entrepreneurial Center for Horticulture, Bottineau, ND...................................... $250,000 Senators Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan
SBA...................................... Mississippi Biotechnology Association for Capacity Building for the Mississippi Biotechnology Industry, Ridgeland, MS......... $250,000 Senator Thad Cochran
SBA...................................... Mississippi State University for the Entrepreneurship Center to Develop New Entity Creation [ECDEC], MS....................... $500,000 Senators Thad Cochran, Roger Wicker
SBA...................................... Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, MS........................................ $850,000 Senators Thad Cochran, Roger Wicker
SBA...................................... Missouri Chamber Education Foundation to develop a small business technology, training and outreach center, Jefferson City, MO $1,000,000 Senator Christopher Bond
SBA...................................... Montana Technology Venture Center, for expansion and operations of the TechRanch next step program, Bozeman, MT............... $137,500 Senators Max Baucus, Jon Tester
SBA...................................... Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE.......................................................... $275,000 Senator Ben Nelson
SBA...................................... Neighborhood Development Center, Midtown Global Market business technical assistance, St. Paul, MN............................ $200,000 Senators Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar
SBA...................................... Nevada Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology [NCET], small business and entrepreneurship development, NV................. $213,333 Senator Harry Reid
SBA...................................... Nevada Small Business Development Center, for Imagine 2012, an Hispanic business development initiative, Reno, NV............. $213,334 Senator Harry Reid
SBA...................................... North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center for a Rural Business Finance Program, Raleigh, NC............................ $250,000 Senators Richard Burr, Kay Hagan
SBA...................................... North Carolina School of the Arts/Winston-Salem State University, The Center for Design Innovation, Winston-Salem, NC......... $100,000 Senator Kay Hagan
SBA...................................... Northern Virginia Community College for retraining displaced workers in Geographic Information Systems, Richmond, VA.......... $200,000 Senators Mark Warner, James Webb
SBA...................................... Northwest Pennsylvania Incubator Association for an incubator project, Erie County, PA........................................ $100,000 Senator Robert Casey
SBA...................................... Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN.............................................................. $750,000 Senators Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker
SBA...................................... Phillips County Economic Development for a Entrepreneur Business Enhancement Program [EBEP], Phillips County, KS.............. $300,000 Senator Sam Brownback
SBA...................................... Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse for the Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA.................................. $50,000 Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA...................................... Port of Clarkston, Asotin County Industrial Park infrastructure completion, Asotin County, WA................................. $300,000 Senator Patty Murray
SBA...................................... Portland Community College, sustainable careers for a green economic recovery, Portland, OR................................... $200,000 Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden
SBA...................................... Prospera (Gallatin Valley Development Corporation), Accelerated Entrepreneur Program, Bozeman, MT............................. $200,000 Senator Max Baucus
SBA...................................... Rhode Island School of Design and Brown University, Partnership for Sustainable Development/Rhode Island Center for Innovation $150,000 Senators Jack Reed, Sheldon Whitehouse
and Entrepreneurship [RI-CIE], for technical assistance to small businesses on green product design and marketing and on
developing and commercializing innovative products and services, Providence, RI.
SBA...................................... Rural Business Energizer Program, Milbridge, ME............................................................................... $150,000 Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA...................................... Rural Enterprises of Oklahoma, Inc, for a Women and Veteran's Business Resource Center at Seminole State College, Durant, OK.. $200,000 Senator James Inhofe
SBA...................................... Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Jersey urban entrepreneurship development initiative, New Brunswick, NJ...... $271,050 Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
SBA...................................... Shawnee Community College for the Small Business Development Center, Ullin, IL................................................ $200,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Souris Basin Regional Planning Center, North Dakota REAP Zones, ND............................................................ $250,000 Senators Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan
SBA...................................... South Dakota Rural Enterprise, Dakota Rising for an entrepreneur development system, SD....................................... $250,000 Senator Tim Johnson
SBA...................................... The Cuban American National Council [CNC] New Jersey Regional Office, Latino financial education, foreclosure prevention, and $100,000 Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
home ownership program, Union City, NJ.
SBA...................................... The University of Mississippi for the Technology Commercialization Initiative, Oxford, MS..................................... $250,000 Senator Thad Cochran
SBA...................................... The University of Southern Mississippi for the Early Stage Entrepreneur and Commercialization Development, Hattiesburg, MS.... $500,000 Senator Thad Cochran
SBA...................................... Uhlich Children's Advantage Network for job training, placement and retention services, Chicago, IL........................... $400,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for business development related to clean water technologies, Milwaukee, WI................. $250,000 Senator Herb Kohl
SBA...................................... University of Alabama for a Business Development Research Project, Tuscaloosa, AL............................................. $1,000,000 Senators Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby
SBA...................................... University of Alaska, Small Business Development Center, Ketchikan, AK........................................................ $300,000 Senators Mark Begich, Lisa Murkowski
SBA...................................... University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Small Business Innovation Center, Little Rock, AR...................................... $225,000 Senators Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor
SBA...................................... University of Arkansas Technology Development Foundation, Arkansas Research and Technology Park, Fayetteville, AR............. $225,000 Senators Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor
SBA...................................... University of Connecticut for the Avery Point Technology Center, Groton, CT................................................... $200,000 Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
SBA...................................... University of Delaware, Delaware Small Business and Technology Development Center, Newark, DE................................. $350,000 Senators Thomas Carper, Edward Kaufman
SBA...................................... University of Maryland-Baltimore BioPark, Baltimore, MD....................................................................... $100,000 Senator Benjamin Cardin
SBA...................................... University of Northern Iowa for MyEntreNet, a national rural entrepreneurship development system, IA.......................... $250,000 Senators Charles Grassley, Tom Harkin
SBA...................................... University of Southern Maine for the Science Technology Research Center, Portland, ME......................................... $850,000 Senator Susan Collins
SBA...................................... Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, economic development center expansion, Boston, MA...................................... $200,000 Senators Edward Kennedy, John Kerry
SBA...................................... Urban League of Philadelphia Entrepreneurship Center, Philadelphia, PA........................................................ $50,000 Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA...................................... Valencia County IT program, upgrade and training, Valencia County, NM......................................................... $145,000 Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA...................................... Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, the 50 for 25 Demonstration Project, Burlington, VT............................. $50,000 Senator Bernard Sanders
SBA...................................... Vermont Farms Association for an agritourism best practices and standards project, Rochester, VT.............................. $50,000 Senator Bernard Sanders
SBA...................................... Vermont Small Business Development Center, technical assistance to high-tech small businesses and emerging businesses, $250,000 Senator Patrick Leahy
Randolph, VT.
SBA...................................... Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication improvements, Herndon, VA............... $200,000 Senators Mark Warner, James Webb
SBA...................................... Wayne State University for the Law School's Small Business Clinic, Detroit, MI................................................ $200,000 Senators Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow
SBA...................................... West Virginia Northern Community College, Center for Economic and Workforce Advancement, Weirton, WV.......................... $137,500 Senator Robert Byrd
SBA...................................... Western Illinois University for the Small Business Development Center, Macomb, IL............................................. $400,000 Senator Richard Durbin
SBA...................................... Western Kentucky University Bowling Green Data Center, Bowling Green, KY...................................................... $1,100,000 Senator Mitch McConnell
SBA...................................... Women's Business Development Center, for entrepreneurial small business training & assistance, Stamford, CT................... $100,000 Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
SBA...................................... World Trade Center Institute Delaware, for the export assistance webinar series for business education, Wilmington, DE........ $50,000 Senators Thomas Carper, Edward Kaufman
Treasury................................. Financial Education and Pre-home Ownership Counseling Demonstration Project, HI............................................... $3,150,000 Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDICIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account Project Funding Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA...................................... Georgia, Savannah, United States Courthouse................................................................................... $7,900,000 The Judiciary, Senator Saxby Chambliss
GSA...................................... Texas, San Antonio, United States Courthouse.................................................................................. $4,000,000 The Judiciary, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
GSA...................................... Utah, Salt Lake City, United States Courthouse................................................................................ $211,000,000 The Judiciary, Senators Robert Bennett,
Orrin Hatch
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account Project Funding Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA...................................... California, Calexico, West Land Port of Entry................................................................................. $9,437,000 The President
GSA...................................... Colorado, Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation......................................................................... $9,962,000 The President
GSA...................................... District of Columbia, Southeast Federal Center Remediation.................................................................... $15,000,000 The President
GSA...................................... Florida, Miami, Federal Bureau of Investigation Field Office Consolidation.................................................... $190,675,000 The President
GSA...................................... Maine, Madawaska, Land Port of Entry.......................................................................................... $50,127,000 The President
GSA...................................... Maryland, White Oak, Food and Drug Administration Consolidation............................................................... $137,871,000 The President, Senators Barbara Mikulski,
Benjamin Cardin, Orrin Hatch
GSA...................................... Pennsylvania, Lancaster United States Courthouse.............................................................................. $6,500,000 The President, Senator Arlen Specter
GSA...................................... Texas, El Paso, Tornillo-Guadalupe, Land Port of Entry........................................................................ $91,565,000 The President, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
GSA...................................... District of Columbia, East Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement............................................................ $114,500,000 The President
GSA...................................... District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Building Courtyard Replacement.............................................. $10,000,000 The President
GSA...................................... District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Building Roof Replacement................................................... $15,000,000 The President
GSA...................................... District of Columbia, New Executive Office Building........................................................................... $30,276,000 The President
NARA..................................... FDR Presidential Library and Museum Renovation................................................................................ $17,500,000 The President, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
ONDCP.................................... National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws................................................................................... $1,250,000 The President
ONDCP.................................... National Drug Court Institute................................................................................................. $1,000,000 The President
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2010
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2009 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2009
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 278,870 302,388 305,712 +26,842 +3,324
Executive direction............................................ (21,619) (22,383) (22,383) (+764) ...............
Economic policies and programs................................. (45,910) (44,749) (47,249) (+1,339) (+2,500)
Financial policies and programs................................ (36,039) (47,580) (48,580) (+12,541) (+1,000)
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence........................... (62,098) (64,611) (64,611) (+2,513) ...............
Treasury-wide management....................................... (21,600) (22,779) (22,779) (+1,179) ...............
Administration................................................. (91,604) (100,286) (100,110) (+8,506) (-176)
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs........... 26,975 9,544 9,544 -17,431 ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................ 26,125 26,700 29,700 +3,575 +3,000
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.................. 146,083 149,000 152,000 +5,917 +3,000
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 153,083 149,000 152,000 -1,083 +3,000
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network............................... 91,465 102,760 104,260 +12,795 +1,500
Treasury forfeiture fund (rescission).............................. -30,000 -50,000 -50,000 -20,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental Offices.................................. 546,518 540,392 551,216 +4,698 +10,824
Non-emergency............................................ (569,518) (590,392) (601,216) (+31,698) (+10,824)
Emergency................................................ (7,000) ............... ............... (-7,000) ...............
Financial Management Service....................................... 239,785 244,132 244,132 +4,347 ...............
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 99,065 105,000 103,000 +3,935 -2,000
Offsetting collections......................................... ............... -75,000 ............... ............... +75,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct appropriation......................................... 99,065 30,000 103,000 +3,935 +73,000
Bureau of the Public Debt.......................................... 177,352 182,244 182,244 +4,892 ...............
Community development financial institutions fund program account.. 107,000 243,600 246,750 +139,750 +3,150
Capital Magnet Fund............................................ ............... (80,000) (80,000) (+80,000) ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 100,000 ............... ............... -100,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 207,000 243,600 246,750 +39,750 +3,150
Payment of Government losses in shipment........................... 2,000 2,000 2,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Department of the Treasury, non-IRS................... 1,271,720 1,242,368 1,329,342 +57,622 +86,974
Non-emergency............................................ (1,194,720) (1,292,368) (1,379,342) (+184,622) (+86,974)
Emergency................................................ (107,000) ............... ............... (-107,000) ...............
Internal Revenue Service
Taxpayer services.................................................. 2,293,000 2,269,830 2,275,830 -17,170 +6,000
Enforcement........................................................ 5,117,267 4,904,000 5,504,000 +386,733 +600,000
Enhanced tax enforcement activities................................ ............... 600,000 ............... ............... -600,000
Operations support................................................. 3,867,011 4,082,984 4,082,984 +215,973 ...............
Business systems modernization..................................... 229,914 253,674 274,119 +44,205 +20,445
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration......................... 15,406 15,512 15,512 +106 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 80,000 ............... ............... -80,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 95,406 15,512 15,512 -79,894 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Internal Revenue Service.............................. 11,602,598 12,126,000 12,152,445 +549,847 +26,445
====================================================================================
Total, title I, Department of the Treasury................... 12,874,318 13,368,368 13,481,787 +607,469 +113,419
Appropriations........................................... (12,717,318) (13,418,368) (13,531,787) (+814,469) (+113,419)
Rescissions.............................................. (-30,000) (-50,000) (-50,000) (-20,000) ...............
Emergency appropriations................................. (187,000) ............... ............... (-187,000) ...............
(Mandatory).................................................. (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) ............... ...............
(Discretionary less emergencies)............................. (12,685,318) (13,366,368) (13,479,787) (+794,469) (+113,419)
====================================================================================
TITLE II--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED
TO THE PRESIDENT
The White House
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 53,899 59,319 59,319 +5,420 ...............
Compensation of the President.................................. 450 450 450 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses................................. 54,349 59,769 59,769 +5,420 ...............
Executive Residence at the White House:
Operating expenses............................................. 13,363 13,838 13,838 +475 ...............
White House repair and restoration............................. 1,600 2,500 2,500 +900 ...............
Council of Economic Advisers....................................... 4,118 4,200 4,200 +82 ...............
Office of Policy Development....................................... 3,550 ............... ............... -3,550 ...............
National Security Council.......................................... 9,029 12,231 12,231 +3,202 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)................... 2,936 ............... ............... -2,936 ...............
Office of Administration........................................... 101,333 115,280 115,280 +13,947 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, The White House....................................... 190,278 207,818 207,818 +17,540 ...............
Office of Management and Budget.................................... 87,972 92,687 92,687 +4,715 ...............
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 27,200 27,575 28,575 +1,375 +1,000
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center........................... 3,000 1,000 1,000 -2,000 ...............
High intensity drug trafficking areas program...................... 234,000 220,000 234,000 ............... +14,000
Other Federal drug control programs................................ 174,700 174,000 174,750 +50 +750
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy................ 438,900 422,575 438,325 -575 +15,750
Unanticipated needs................................................ 1,000 1,000 1,000 ............... ...............
Partnership fund for program integrity innovation.................. ............... 175,000 40,000 +40,000 -135,000
Presidential transition administrative support..................... 8,000 ............... ............... -8,000 ...............
Special Assistance to the President and Official Residence of the
Vice President:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 4,496 4,604 4,604 +108 ...............
Operating expenses............................................. 323 330 330 +7 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, title II, Executive Office of the President and Funds 730,969 904,014 784,764 +53,795 -119,250
Appropriated to the President...............................
Appropriations........................................... (730,969) (904,014) (784,764) (+53,795) (-119,250)
(Mandatory).......................................... (450) (450) (450) ............... ...............
(Discretionary)...................................... (730,519) (903,564) (784,314) (+53,795) (-119,250)
====================================================================================
TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY
Supreme Court of the United States
Salaries and expenses:
Salaries of justices........................................... 2,119 2,166 2,166 +47 ...............
Other salaries and expenses.................................... 67,658 72,574 71,915 +4,257 -659
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 69,777 74,740 74,081 +4,304 -659
Care of the building and grounds................................... 18,447 14,568 14,525 -3,922 -43
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Supreme Court of the United States.................... 88,224 89,308 88,606 +382 -702
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Salaries and expenses:
Salaries of judges............................................. 2,356 2,491 2,491 +135 ...............
Other salaries and expenses.................................... 28,028 34,490 29,809 +1,781 -4,681
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 30,384 36,981 32,300 +1,916 -4,681
United States Court of International Trade
Salaries and expenses:
Salaries of judges............................................. 1,696 1,715 1,715 +19 ...............
Other salaries and expenses.................................... 17,909 19,802 19,659 +1,750 -143
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, United States Court of International Trade............ 19,605 21,517 21,374 +1,769 -143
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services
Salaries and expenses:
Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges....................... 323,911 340,000 340,000 +16,089 ...............
Judges COLA.................................................... 6,000 7,000 7,000 +1,000 ...............
Other salaries and expenses.................................... 4,471,458 4,815,252 4,729,845 +258,387 -85,407
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)............... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and expenses.......................... 4,811,369 5,162,252 5,076,845 +265,476 -85,407
Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund............................. 4,253 5,428 5,428 +1,175 ...............
Defender services.................................................. 849,400 982,646 975,504 +126,104 -7,142
Fees of jurors and commissioners................................... 62,206 63,401 62,275 +69 -1,126
Court security..................................................... 428,858 463,642 457,353 +28,495 -6,289
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial 6,156,086 6,677,369 6,577,405 +421,319 -99,964
Services....................................................
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 79,049 83,963 83,075 +4,026 -888
Federal Judicial Center
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 25,725 27,486 27,328 +1,603 -158
Judicial Retirement Funds
Payment to judiciary trust funds................................... 76,140 82,374 82,374 +6,234 ...............
United States Sentencing Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 16,225 17,056 16,837 +612 -219
====================================================================================
Total, title III, the Judiciary.............................. 6,491,438 7,036,054 6,929,299 +437,861 -106,755
Appropriations........................................... (6,481,438) (7,036,054) (6,929,299) (+447,861) (-106,755)
(Mandatory).......................................... (406,222) (428,746) (428,746) (+22,524) ...............
(Discretionary)...................................... (6,075,216) (6,607,308) (6,500,553) (+425,337) (-106,755)
====================================================================================
TITLE IV--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FEDERAL FUNDS
Federal payment for Resident Tuition Support....................... 35,100 35,100 35,100 ............... ...............
Federal payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 39,177 15,000 15,350 -23,827 +350
District of Columbia..............................................
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts................. 248,409 248,952 258,517 +10,108 +9,565
Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts................... 52,475 52,475 55,000 +2,525 +2,525
Federal payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision 203,490 212,408 212,408 +8,918 ...............
Agency for the District of Columbia...............................
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service 35,659 37,316 37,316 +1,657 ...............
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer 16,000 20,000 20,000 +4,000 ...............
Authority.........................................................
Federal payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council....... 1,774 1,774 1,774 ............... ...............
Federal payment for Judicial Commissions........................... ............... 500 500 +500 ...............
Federal payment to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the 4,888 ............... 1,000 -3,888 +1,000
District of Columbia..............................................
Federal payment for School Improvement............................. 54,000 74,400 75,400 +21,400 +1,000
Federal payment to jump start public school reform................. 20,000 ............... ............... -20,000 ...............
Federal payment for consolidated laboratory facility............... 21,000 15,000 15,000 -6,000 ...............
Federal payment for the D.C. National Guard........................ ............... 2,000 ............... ............... -2,000
Federal payment for permanent supportive housing................... ............... 19,200 ............... ............... -19,200
Federal payment for reconnecting disconnected youth................ ............... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000
Federal payment for Central Library/branch locations............... 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
Federal payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor............... 3,388 ............... ............... -3,388 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, title IV, District of Columbia........................ 742,360 739,125 727,365 -14,995 -11,760
====================================================================================
TITLE V--OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Administrative Conference of the United States..................... 1,500 2,625 1,500 ............... -1,125
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation......................... 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
Commodity Futures Trading Commission............................... 146,000 160,600 177,000 +31,000 +16,400
Consumer Product Safety Commission................................. 105,404 107,000 115,000 +9,596 +8,000
Election Assistance Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 17,959 16,530 16,530 -1,429 ...............
Election reform programs........................................... 106,000 52,000 52,000 -54,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Election Assistance Commission........................ 123,959 68,530 68,530 -55,429 ...............
Federal Communications Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 341,875 335,794 335,794 -6,081 ...............
Transfer from USF for OIG audits................................... (25,480) ............... ............... (-25,480) ...............
Offsetting fee collections--current year........................... -341,875 -334,794 -335,794 +6,081 -1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct appropriation......................................... ............... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General (27,495) (37,942) (37,942) (+10,447) ...............
(by transfer).....................................................
Federal Election Commission........................................ 63,618 64,000 67,000 +3,382 +3,000
Federal Labor Relations Authority.................................. 22,674 24,773 24,773 +2,099 ...............
Federal Trade Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 259,200 287,200 289,300 +30,100 +2,100
Offsetting fee collections--current year........................... -168,000 -102,000 -102,000 +66,000 ...............
Offsetting fee collections, telephone database..................... -21,000 -19,000 -21,000 ............... -2,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct appropriation......................................... 70,200 166,200 166,300 +96,100 +100
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)....................... 8,000 ............... ............... -8,000 ...............
General Services Administration
Federal Buildings Fund
Appropriations..................................................... (651,198) (525,000) (482,900) (-168,298) (-42,100)
Limitations on availability of revenue:
Construction and acquisition of facilities..................... 746,317 657,637 734,037 -12,280 +76,400
Repairs and alterations........................................ 692,374 496,276 453,776 -238,598 -42,500
Installment acquisition payments............................... 149,570 140,525 140,525 -9,045 ...............
Rental of space................................................ 4,642,156 4,879,871 4,829,871 +187,715 -50,000
Building operations............................................ 2,197,354 2,356,376 2,330,376 +133,022 -26,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Limitations on availability of revenue............. 8,427,771 8,530,685 8,488,585 +60,814 -42,100
Repayment of debt.................................................. 56,865 66,360 66,360 +9,495 ...............
Rental income to fund.............................................. -8,134,239 -8,223,000 -8,223,000 -88,761 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)........................ 5,550,000 ............... ............... -5,550,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Buildings Fund................................ 5,900,397 374,045 331,945 -5,568,452 -42,100
Non-emergency............................................ (350,397) (374,045) (331,945) (-18,452) (-42,100)
Emergency................................................ (5,550,000) ............... ............... (-5,550,000) ...............
Energy-efficient Federal motor vehicle fleet procurement 300,000 ............... ............... -300,000 ...............
(emergency) (Public Law 111-5)....................................
Government-wide policy............................................. 54,578 65,165 61,165 +6,587 -4,000
Operating expenses................................................. 70,645 71,881 71,881 +1,236 ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................ 54,000 60,080 58,000 +4,000 -2,080
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 61,000 60,080 58,000 -3,000 -2,080
Electronic Government Fund......................................... ............... 33,000 35,000 +35,000 +2,000
Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents.................. 2,934 3,756 3,756 +822 ...............
Expenses, Presidential transition.................................. 8,520 ............... ............... -8,520 ...............
Federal Citizen Services Fund...................................... 36,096 36,515 36,515 +419 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, General Services Administration....................... 6,434,170 644,442 598,262 -5,835,908 -46,180
Non-emergency............................................ (577,170) (644,442) (598,262) (+21,092) (-46,180)
Emergency................................................ (5,857,000) ............... ............... (-5,857,000) ...............
Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation.............................. 500 ............... 660 +160 +660
Merit Systems Protection Board
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 38,811 40,339 40,339 +1,528 ...............
Limitation on administrative expenses.............................. 2,579 2,579 2,579 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Merit Systems Protection Board........................ 41,390 42,918 42,918 +1,528 ...............
Morris K. Udall Foundation
Morris K. Udall Trust Fund......................................... 3,750 2,200 3,850 +100 +1,650
Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund.............................. 2,100 3,800 3,000 +900 -800
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Morris K. Udall Foundation............................ 5,850 6,000 6,850 +1,000 +850
National Archives and Records Administration
Operating expenses................................................. 330,308 339,770 339,770 +9,462 ...............
Reduction of debt.............................................. -11,842 -13,000 -13,000 -1,158 ...............
Office of the Inspector General.................................... ............... 4,100 4,100 +4,100 ...............
Electronic records archive......................................... 67,008 85,500 85,500 +18,492 ...............
Repairs and restoration............................................ 50,711 27,500 27,500 -23,211 ...............
National Historical Publications and Records Commission: Grants 11,250 10,000 12,000 +750 +2,000
program...........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Archives and Records Administration.......... 447,435 453,870 455,870 +8,435 +2,000
National Credit Union Administration
Central liquidity facility:
(Limitation on admin expenses, corporate funds)................ (1,250) (1,250) (1,250) ............... ...............
Community development credit union revolving loan fund............. 1,000 1,000 1,000 ............... ...............
Office of Government Ethics........................................ 13,000 13,665 13,665 +665 ...............
Office of Personnel Management
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 92,829 94,970 94,970 +2,141 ...............
Limitation on administrative expenses.......................... 118,082 113,238 112,738 -5,344 -500
Office of Inspector General........................................ 1,828 2,136 2,136 +308 ...............
Limitation on administrative expenses.......................... 18,755 20,428 20,428 +1,673 ...............
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits............. 9,533,000 9,814,000 9,814,000 +281,000 ...............
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance............... 46,000 48,000 48,000 +2,000 ...............
Payment to Civil Svc Retirement and Disability Fund................ 10,550,000 10,276,000 10,276,000 -274,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of Personnel Management........................ 20,360,494 20,368,772 20,368,272 +7,778 -500
Mandatory................................................ (20,129,000) (20,138,000) (20,138,000) (+9,000) ...............
Discretionary............................................ (231,494) (230,772) (230,272) (-1,222) (-500)
Office of Special Counsel.......................................... 17,468 18,495 18,495 +1,027 ...............
Postal Regulatory Commission....................................... 14,043 14,333 14,333 +290 ...............
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board........................ 1,500 2,000 1,500 ............... -500
Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board (emergency 84,000 ............... ............... -84,000 ...............
appropriations Public Law 111-5)..................................
Securities and Exchange Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 960,000 1,026,000 1,126,000 +166,000 +100,000
Prior year unobligated balances.................................... -65,644 -10,220 -10,220 +55,424 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)................... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct appropriation......................................... 904,356 1,015,780 1,115,780 +211,424 +100,000
Selective Service System........................................... 22,000 24,400 24,400 +2,400 ...............
Small Business Administration
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 386,896 422,000 444,000 +57,104 +22,000
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 69,000 ............... ............... -69,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 455,896 422,000 444,000 -11,896 +22,000
Office of Inspector General........................................ 16,750 16,300 16,300 -450 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 26,750 16,300 16,300 -10,450 ...............
Surety bond guarantees revolving fund.............................. 2,000 1,000 1,000 -1,000 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5).................... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 17,000 1,000 1,000 -16,000 ...............
Business Loans Program Account:
Direct loans subsidy........................................... 2,500 3,000 3,000 +500 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)................ 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 8,500 3,000 3,000 -5,500 ...............
Guaranteed loans subsidy....................................... ............... 80,000 80,000 +80,000 ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)................ 630,000 ............... ............... -630,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 630,000 80,000 80,000 -550,000 ...............
Administrative expenses........................................ 138,480 153,000 153,000 +14,520 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Business loans program account........................ 776,980 236,000 236,000 -540,980 ...............
Non-emergency............................................ (140,980) (236,000) (236,000) (+95,020) ...............
Emergency................................................ (636,000) ............... ............... (-636,000) ...............
Disaster Loans Program Account:
Guaranteed loans subsidy....................................... ............... 1,690 1,690 +1,690 ...............
Administrative expenses........................................ ............... 102,310 102,310 +102,310 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Disaster loans program account........................ ............... 104,000 104,000 +104,000 ...............
Sec. 525. Salaries and expenses.................................... 65,654 ............... 59,604 -6,050 +59,604
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Small Business Administration......................... 1,342,280 779,300 860,904 -481,376 +81,604
Non-emergency............................................ (612,280) (779,300) (860,904) (+248,624) (+81,604)
Emergency................................................ (730,000) ............... ............... (-730,000) ...............
United States Postal Service
Payment to the Postal Service Fund................................. 29,000 29,000 29,000 ............... ...............
Advance appropriations......................................... 82,831 89,328 89,328 +6,497 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Payment to the Postal Service Fund.................... 111,831 118,328 118,328 +6,497 ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................ 239,356 244,397 244,397 +5,041 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, United States Postal Service.......................... 351,187 362,725 362,725 +11,538 ...............
United States Tax Court............................................ 48,463 49,241 49,241 +778 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, title V, Independent Agencies......................... 30,631,491 24,391,669 24,555,978 -6,075,513 +164,309
Appropriations........................................... (23,859,660) (24,302,341) (24,466,650) (+606,990) (+164,309)
Emergency appropriations................................. (6,689,000) ............... ............... (-6,689,000) ...............
Advances................................................. (82,831) (89,328) (89,328) (+6,497) ...............
(by transfer)............................................ (52,975) (37,942) (37,942) (-15,033) ...............
(Mandatory).................................................. (20,129,000) (20,138,000) (20,138,000) (+9,000) ...............
(Discretionary less emergencies)............................. (3,813,491) (4,253,669) (4,417,978) (+604,487) (+164,309)
====================================================================================
Grand total.................................................. 51,470,576 46,439,230 46,479,193 -4,991,383 +39,963
Appropriations........................................... (44,528,809) (46,399,902) (46,439,865) (+1,911,056) (+39,963)
Rescissions.............................................. (-30,000) (-50,000) (-50,000) (-20,000) ...............
Emergency appropriations................................. (6,888,936) ............... ............... (-6,888,936) ...............
Advances................................................. (82,831) (89,328) (89,328) (+6,497) ...............
(by transfer)............................................ (52,975) (117,942) (117,942) (+64,967) ...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------