Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 282
110th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                    110-134

======================================================================



 
   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008
                                _______
                                

                 July 24, 2007.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

            Mr. Kohl, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                    [To accompany S. 1859]

    The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 0000) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural 
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for 
other purposes, reports the same with an amendment and 
recommends that the bill as amended do pass. deg.
    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1859) 
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, 
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.



Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2008

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $90,605,092,000
Amount of 2007 appropriations...........................  97,425,472,000
Amount of 2008 budget estimate..........................  89,736,689,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2007 appropriations.................................  -6,820,380,000
    2008 budget estimate................................    +868,403,000


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Summary of the Bill:
    Overview and Summary of the Bill.............................     5
    Reports to Congress..........................................     5
    Transparency in Congressional Directives.....................     5
Title I:
    Agricultural Programs:
        Production, Processing, and Marketing:
            Office of the Secretary..............................     7
            Executive Operations.................................     8
            Office of the Chief Information Officer..............    10
            Common Computing Environment.........................    11
            Office of the Chief Financial Officer................    11
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights...    12
            Office of Civil Rights...............................    12
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.    12
            Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
              Payments...........................................    13
            Hazardous Materials Management.......................    13
            Departmental Administration..........................    14
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
              Relations..........................................    14
            Office of Communications.............................    15
            Office of Inspector General..........................    15
            Office of the General Counsel........................    16
            Office of the Under Secretary for Research, 
              Education, and Economics...........................    16
            Economic Research Service............................    16
            National Agricultural Statistics Service.............    17
            Agricultural Research Service........................    17
            Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
              Service............................................    22
            Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
              Regulatory Programs................................    49
            Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service...........    50
            Agricultural Marketing Service.......................    63
            Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards 
              Administration.....................................    67
            Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety........    68
            Food Safety and Inspection Service...................    68
            Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
              Agricultural Services..............................    71
            Farm Service Agency..................................    72
            Risk Management Agency...............................    75
        Corporations:
            Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund..............    76
            Commodity Credit Corporation Fund....................    77
Title II:
    Conservation Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
          Environment............................................    80
        Natural Resources Conservation Service...................    80
Title III:
    Rural Development Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development......    92
        Rural Community Advancement Program......................    93
        Rural Housing Service....................................    94
        Rural Business--Cooperative Service......................   102
        Rural Utilities Service..................................   107
Title IV:
    Domestic Food Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and 
          Consumer Services......................................   114
        Food and Nutrition Service...............................   114
Title V:
    Foreign Assistance and Related Programs: Foreign Agricultural 
      Service....................................................   125
Title VI:
    Related Agencies and Food and Drug Administration:
        Food and Drug Administration.............................   130
        Independent Agencies:
            Farm Credit Administration...........................   142
Title VII: General Provisions....................................   143
Program, Project, and Activity...................................   146
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Sen- 
  ate............................................................   146
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   147
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   147
Budgetary Impact of Bill.........................................   151

                           BREAKDOWN BY TITLE

    The amounts of obligational authority for each of the seven 
titles are shown in the following table. A detailed tabulation, 
showing comparisons, appears at the end of this report. 
Recommendations for individual appropriation items, projects 
and activities are carried in this report under the appropriate 
item headings.


                             [In thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2008 Committee
                                           2007          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs....         34,030,339         24,590,017
Title II: Conservation programs...            852,555            972,853
Title III: Rural economic and               2,499,975          2,358,007
 community development programs...
Title IV: Domestic food programs..         57,029,981         59,743,619
Title V: Foreign assistance and             1,477,080          1,494,874
 related programs.................
Title VI: Related agencies........          1,574,194          1,760,085
Title VII: General provisions.....            -38,652           -314,363
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, new budget                    97,425,472         90,605,092
       (obligational) authority...
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

    The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill 
provides funding for a wide array of Federal programs, mostly 
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]. These programs 
include agricultural research, education, and extension 
activities; natural resources conservation programs; farm 
income and support programs; marketing and inspection 
activities; domestic food assistance programs; rural housing, 
economic and community development, and telecommunication and 
electrification assistance; and various export and 
international activities of the USDA.
    The bill also provides funding for the Food and Drug 
Administration [FDA] and allows the use of collected fees for 
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
[FCA].
    Given the budgetary constraints that the Committee faces, 
the bill as reported provides the proper amount of emphasis on 
agricultural and rural development programs and on other 
programs and activities funded by the bill. It is within the 
subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2008.
    All accounts in the bill have been closely examined to 
ensure that an appropriate level of funding is provided to 
carry out the programs of USDA, FDA, and FCA. Details on each 
of the accounts, the funding level, and the Committee's 
justifications for the funding levels are included in the 
report.
    The Committee has encouraged the consideration of grant and 
loan applications from various entities. The Committee expects 
the Department only to approve those applications judged 
meritorious when subjected to the established review process.

                          Reports to Congress

    The Committee has, throughout this report, requested 
agencies to provide studies and reports on various issues. The 
Committee utilizes these reports to evaluate program 
performance and make decisions on future appropriations. The 
Committee requests that all studies and reports be provided as 
one document per Department in an agreed upon format within 120 
days after the date of enactment, unless an alternative 
submission schedule is specifically stated in the report 
request.

                Transparency in Congressional Directives

    On January 18, 2007, the Senate passed S. 1, The 
Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007, by a 
vote of 96-2. While the Committee awaits final action on this 
legislation, the chairman and ranking member of the Committee 
issued interim requirements to ensure that the goals of S. 1 
are in place for the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2008.
    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. In 
order to improve transparency and accountability in the process 
of approving earmarks (as defined in S. 1) in appropriations 
measures, each Committee report includes, for each earmark:
  --(1) the name of the Member(s) making the request, and where 
        appropriate, the President;
  --(2) the name and location of the intended recipient or, if 
        there is no specifically intended recipient, the 
        intended location of the activity; and
  --(3) the purpose of such earmark.
    The term ``congressional earmark'' 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 earmark, a Member is required to provide a 
certification that neither the Member (nor his or her spouse) 
has a pecuniary interest in such earmark, consistent with 
Senate Rule XXXVII(4). Such certifications are available to the 
public at http://appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm or go 
to appropriations.senate.gov and click on ``Members''.

                                TITLE I

                         AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

                        Office of the Secretary

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $5,097,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      18,355,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,309,000

    The Secretary of Agriculture, assisted by the Deputy 
Secretary, Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, Chief 
Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of 
their immediate staffs, directs and coordinates the work of the 
Department. This includes developing policy, maintaining 
relationships with agricultural organizations and others in the 
development of farm programs, and maintaining liaison with the 
Executive Office of the President and Members of Congress on 
all matters pertaining to agricultural policy.
    The general authority of the Secretary to supervise and 
control the work of the Department is contained in the Organic 
Act (7 U.S.C. 2201-2202). The delegation of regulatory 
functions to Department employees and authorization of 
appropriations to carry out these functions is contained in 7 
U.S.C. 450c-450g.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,309,000 for 
the Office of the Secretary.
    Animal Fighting.--The Committee is very concerned about 
reports of illegal animal fighting activities and directs the 
Secretary to work with relevant agencies on the most effective 
and proper means for investigating and enforcing laws and 
regulations regarding these activities.
    Budget Execution Report.--The Committee directs the 
Department to submit quarterly budget execution reports showing 
the status of obligations for all components of the Department. 
The report should include the total obligational authority 
appropriated (new budget authority plus unobligated carryover), 
amount allotted to date, current year obligations, unobligated 
authority (the difference between total obligational authority 
and current year obligations), expenditures to date, and 
unexpended obligations. This budget execution information is to 
be provided at the account level of detail. The report shall be 
submitted no later than 30 days after the close of each 
quarter.
    Greenbook Charges.--The Committee is concerned that charges 
assessed to agencies by the USDA, known as greenbook charges, 
have grown excessively over the last few years. The disclosure 
of these charges to Congress is limited and may impact program 
delivery. The Committee directs the Government Accountability 
Office to review greenbook charges at USDA for all agencies 
funded through the act accompanying this report. Additionally, 
the Committee directs the USDA to explicitly present greenbook 
charge information in future budget justifications, including 
previous and current fiscal year charges and a description of 
how the charges are assessed.
    International Humanitarian Food Assistance.--The Committee 
strongly supports programs that provide emergency food 
assistance throughout the world and that also work to achieve 
sustainable food security. Because of the differing nutritional 
needs of populations, especially in areas with high incidents 
of HIV/AIDS and other diseases, the composition and quality of 
foods available through programs such as Public Law 480 and the 
McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program have become 
increasingly important. The Secretary is directed to consult 
with the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International 
Development and to provide a report to the Committee by March 
1, 2008, on steps taken and plans formulated to improve the 
quality of items provided through USDA food assistance 
programs. In addition, the Secretary is encouraged to work 
cooperatively with organizations that recognize leadership and 
promote international anti-hunger education and related 
efforts.
    Service-disabled Veteran-owned Small Businesses.--The 
Committee strongly supports the Secretary's service-disabled 
veteran-owned small business strategic initiative that supports 
Executive Order 13360, signed by the President on October 21, 
2004. The Committee directs the Secretary to work toward 
attaining or exceeding the mandated 3 percent goal for 
contracts awarded to service-disabled veteran-owned small 
businesses. The Committee encourages the Secretary to take 
appropriate steps necessary to increase the participation of 
service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses in all USDA 
contracting efforts, including Natural Resources Conservation 
Service and Farm Service Agency contracting for environmental 
assessments and environmental impact statements, preparation of 
reviews for Conservation Reserve Enhancement Programs, on-going 
National Environmental Policy Act training, and other 
environmental programs. Additionally, the Committee encourages 
the Secretary to review all applicable Information Technology 
planned contract requirements to establish a goal of an 
aggregate of 5 percent of the dollar value of these contracts 
toward the participation of service-disabled veteran-owned 
small businesses. The Secretary is to report to the Committee 
no later than 120 days after the enactment of this act on the 
steps taken to increase participation of service-disabled 
veteran-owned small businesses in contracts at USDA.

                          Executive Operations

    Executive operations were established as a result of the 
reorganization of the Department to provide a support team for 
USDA policy officials and selected departmentwide services. 
Activities under the executive operations include the Office of 
the Chief Economist, the National Appeals Division, the Office 
of Budget and Program Analysis, and the Homeland Security 
Staff.

                            CHIEF ECONOMIST

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $10,487,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      11,347,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,847,000

    The Office of the Chief Economist advises the Secretary of 
Agriculture on the economic implications of Department policies 
and programs. The Office serves as the single focal point for 
the Nation's economic intelligence and analysis, risk 
assessment, energy and new uses, and cost-benefit analysis 
related to domestic and international food and agriculture 
issues, and is responsible for coordination and review of all 
commodity and aggregate agricultural and food-related data used 
to develop outlook and situation material within the 
Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,847,000 
for the Office of the Chief Economist. The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,500,000 for preferred procurement 
and labeling for biobased products.

                       NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $14,466,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      15,056,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,056,000

    The National Appeals Division conducts administrative 
hearings and reviews of adverse program decisions made by the 
Rural Development mission area, the Farm Service Agency, the 
Risk Management Agency, and the Natural Resources Conservation 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,056,000 
for the National Appeals Division.

                 OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $8,270,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       9,035,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,035,000

    The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides 
direction and administration of the Department's budgetary 
functions including development, presentation, and execution of 
the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for 
program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program and 
resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries of 
pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental policy 
officials and agency program managers in the decisionmaking 
process; and provides departmentwide coordination for and 
participation in the presentation of budget-related matters to 
the committees of the Congress, the media, and interested 
public. The Office also provides departmentwide coordination of 
the preparation and processing of regulations and legislative 
programs and reports.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,035,000 for 
the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.

                        HOMELAND SECURITY STAFF

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $931,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       2,412,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,252,000

    The Homeland Security Staff formulates emergency 
preparedness policies and objectives for the Department of 
Agriculture [USDA]. The Staff directs and coordinates all of 
the Department's program activities that support USDA emergency 
programs and liaison functions with the Congress, the 
Department of Homeland Security, and other Federal departments 
and agencies involving homeland security, natural disasters, 
other emergencies, and agriculture-related international civil 
emergency planning and related activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,252,000 for 
the Homeland Security Staff.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $16,361,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      17,024,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,723,000

    The Office of the Chief Information Officer was established 
in August 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), pursuant to the 
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which required the establishment of 
a Chief Information Officer for major Federal agencies. This 
office provides policy guidance, leadership, coordination, and 
direction to the Department's information management and 
information technology investment activities in support of USDA 
program delivery, and is the lead office in USDA e-gov efforts. 
The Office provides long-range planning guidance, implements 
measures to ensure that technology investments are economical 
and effective, coordinates interagency information resources 
management projects, and implements standards to promote 
information exchange and technical interoperability. In 
addition, the Office of the Chief Information Officer is 
responsible for certain activities financed under the 
Department's Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235). The Office 
also provides telecommunication and automated data processing 
[ADP] services to USDA agencies through the National 
Information Technology Center with locations in Fort Collins, 
Colorado, and Kansas City, Missouri. Direct ADP operational 
services are also provided to the Office of the General 
Counsel, Office of Communications, the Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer, and Executive Operations.
    On November 28, 2004, the information technology staffs of 
the Service Center Agencies [SCA] were converged into one IT 
organization within the office of the Chief Information 
Officer; this converged organization is named Information 
Technology Services and replaces a network of cross-agency 
teams used to coordinate IT infrastructure investment within 
the SCA and allows for unified management of the IT 
infrastructure.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,723,000 
for the Office of the Chief Information Officer.

                      Common Computing Environment

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $107,971,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 
U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) requires the Secretary of Agriculture to 
procure and use computer systems in a manner that enhances 
efficiency, productivity, and client services, and that 
promotes computer information sharing among agencies of the 
Department. The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 requires USDA to 
maximize the value of information technology acquisitions to 
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of USDA programs. 
Since its beginning in 1996, the USDA Service Center 
Modernization initiative has been working to restructure county 
field offices, modernize and integrate business approaches and 
replace the current, aging information systems with a modern 
Common Computing Environment that optimizes information 
sharing, customer service, and staff efficiencies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the 
Common Computing Environment. The Committee recommendation 
includes funding for Common Computing Environment activities in 
the appropriate agency accounts.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $5,850,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      30,863,000
Committee recommendation................................       6,076,000

    The Office of the Chief Financial Officer is responsible 
for the dual roles of chief financial management policy officer 
and chief financial management advisor to the Secretary and 
mission area heads. The Office provides leadership for all 
financial management, accounting, travel, Federal assistance, 
and performance measurement activities within the Department. 
The Office is also responsible for the management and operation 
of the National Finance Center and the Departmental Working 
Capital Fund. In addition, the Office provides budget, 
accounting, and fiscal services to the Office of the Secretary, 
Departmental staff offices, Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, Office of Communications, and Executive Operations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,076,000 for 
the Chief Financial Officer.

           Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $818,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         897,000
Committee recommendation................................         861,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 
established by Section 10704 of the Farm Security and Rural 
Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171), provides oversight 
of civil rights and related functions. This includes 
coordination of the administration of civil rights laws and 
regulations for employees of the Department of Agriculture and 
participants in programs of the Department, and ensuring 
compliance with civil rights laws.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $861,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.

                         Office of Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $20,020,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      23,147,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,706,000

    The Office of Civil Rights provides overall leadership 
responsibility for all departmentwide civil rights activities. 
These activities include employment opportunity as well as 
program non-discrimination policy development, analysis, 
coordination, and compliance. The Office is responsible for 
providing leadership in facilitating the fair and equitable 
treatment of Department of Agriculture [USDA] employees, and 
for monitoring program activities to ensure that all USDA 
programs are delivered in a non-discriminatory manner. The 
Office's outreach functions provide leadership, coordination, 
facilitation, and expertise to internal and external partners 
to ensure equal and timely access to USDA programs for all 
constituents, with emphasis on the underserved, through 
information sharing, technical assistance, and training.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,706,000 
for the Office of Civil Rights.

          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $673,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         739,000
Committee recommendation................................         709,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration 
directs and coordinates the work of the departmental staff in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress relating to real 
and personal property management, personnel management, ethics, 
and other general administrative functions. In addition, the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration is 
responsible for certain activities financed under the 
Department's Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235).

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $709,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $185,919,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     216,837,000
Committee recommendation................................     199,016,000

    Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments.--
Department headquarters presently operates in a four-building 
Government-owned complex in downtown Washington, DC, and in 
leased buildings in the Metropolitan Washington, DC, area. 
Annual appropriations finance payments to the General Services 
Administration [GSA] for leased space and related services. 
Under this arrangement USDA operates, maintains, and repairs 
D.C. complex buildings, while GSA remains responsible for major 
nonrecurring repairs. GSA charges commercial rent rates 
pursuant to the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972, and 
agencies may review rate procedures and exercise rights to 
appeal. For the last several years the Department has 
implemented a strategic space plan to locate staff more 
efficiently, renovate its buildings, and eliminate safety 
hazards, particularly in the Agriculture South Building.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,016,000 
for Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments.
    The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
recommendations for this account as compared to the fiscal year 
2007 and budget request levels:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    2008 budget      Committee
                                                                   2007 enacted       request     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rental Payments.................................................         146,257         156,590         156,590
Building Operations.............................................          39,662          60,247          42,426
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
  Total.........................................................         185,919         216,837         199,016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Hazardous Materials Management

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $11,887,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      12,200,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,200,000

    Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to meet 
the same standards regarding the storage and disposition of 
hazardous materials as private businesses. The Department is 
required to contain, clean up, monitor, and inspect for 
hazardous materials in areas under the Department's 
jurisdiction.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,200,000 for 
Hazardous Materials Management.

                      Departmental Administration

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $23,008,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      24,608,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,913,000

    Departmental Administration is comprised of activities that 
provide staff support to top policy officials and overall 
direction and coordination of administrative functions of the 
Department. These activities include departmentwide programs 
for human resource management, ethics, occupational safety and 
health management, real and personal property management, 
procurement, contracting, motor vehicle and aircraft 
management, supply management, emergency preparedness, small 
and disadvantaged business utilization, and the regulatory 
hearing and administrative proceedings conducted by the 
Administrative Law Judges and Judicial Officer.
    Departmental Administration is also responsible for 
representing USDA in the development of Governmentwide policies 
and initiatives; and analyzing the impact of Governmentwide 
trends and developing appropriate USDA principles, policies, 
and standards. In addition, Departmental Administration engages 
in strategic planning and evaluates programs to ensure USDA-
wide compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations 
pertaining to administrative matters for the Secretary and 
general officers of the Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,913,000 
for Departmental Administration.

     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $3,795,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       4,099,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,936,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations maintains a liaison with the Congress and White House 
on legislative matters. It also provides for overall direction 
and coordination in the development and implementation of 
policies and procedures applicable to the Department's intra- 
and inter-governmental relations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,936,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations.
    The Committee allows these funds to be transferred to 
support congressional relations' activities at the agency 
level. Within 30 days from the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on the allocation of these funds by USDA agency, 
along with an explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution 
of the funds as well as the staff years funded by these 
transfers.

                        Office of Communications

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $9,474,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       9,720,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,720,000

    The Office of Communications provides direction, 
leadership, and coordination in the development and delivery of 
useful information through all media to the public on USDA 
programs. The Office serves as the liaison between the 
Department and the many associations and organizations with an 
interest in USDA's mission areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,720,000 for 
the Office of Communications.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $80,052,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      83,998,000
Committee recommendation................................      81,627,000

    The Office of the Inspector General was established October 
12, 1978 (Public Law 95-452), by the Inspector General Act of 
1978. This Act expanded and provided specific authorities for 
the activities of the Office of the Inspector General which had 
previously been carried out under the general authorities of 
the Secretary of Agriculture.
    The Office is administered by an inspector general who 
reports directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. Functions and 
responsibilities of this Office include direction and control 
of audit and investigative activities within the Department, 
formulation of audit and investigative policies and procedures 
regarding Department programs and operations, and analysis and 
coordination of program-related audit and investigation 
activities performed by other Department agencies.
    The activities of this Office are designed to assure 
compliance with existing laws, policies, regulations, and 
programs of the Department's agencies, and to provide 
appropriate officials with the means for prompt corrective 
action where deviations have occurred. The scope of audit and 
investigative activities is large and includes administrative, 
program, and criminal matters. These activities are 
coordinated, when appropriate, with various audit and 
investigative agencies of the executive and legislative 
branches of the government.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $81,627,000 
for the Office of the Inspector General. The Committee 
recommendation includes the fiscal year 2007 level for OIG to 
continue to address violations of section 26 of the Animal 
Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) and to coordinate with State and 
local law enforcement personnel in this effort.

                     Office of the General Counsel

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $39,227,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      41,721,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,764,000

    The Office of the General Counsel provides all legal 
advice, counsel, and services to the Secretary and to all 
agencies, offices, and corporations of the Department. The 
Office represents the Department in administrative proceedings; 
non-litigation debt collection proceedings; State water rights 
adjudications; proceedings before the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Maritime 
Administration, and International Trade Commission; and, in 
conjunction with the Department of Justice, in judicial 
proceedings and litigation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,764,000 
for the Office of the General Counsel.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $596,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         654,000
Committee recommendation................................         626,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, 
and Economics provides direction and coordination in carrying 
out the laws enacted by the Congress for food and agricultural 
research, education, extension, and economic and statistical 
information. The Office has oversight and management 
responsibilities for the Agricultural Research Service; 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service; 
Economic Research Service; and National Agricultural Statistics 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $626,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and 
Economics.

                       Economic Research Service

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $75,193,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      82,544,000
Committee recommendation................................      76,532,000

    The Economic Research Service [ERS] provides economic and 
other social science information and analysis for public and 
private decisions on agriculture, natural resources, food, and 
rural America. The information ERS produces is for use by the 
general public and to help the executive and legislative 
branches develop, administer, and evaluate agricultural and 
rural policies and programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,532,000 
for the Economic Research Service. The Committee directs that 
no less than the fiscal year 2007 level be used to implement 
the ``Organic Production and Market Data Initiative'' included 
in section 7407 of Public Law 107-171.
    Canned Fruits and Vegetables.--The Committee requests the 
Economic Research Service to prepare and publish a report 
regarding consumer perceptions and consumption of canned fruits 
and vegetables.

                National Agricultural Statistics Service

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $147,253,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     167,699,000
Committee recommendation................................     167,699,000

    The National Agricultural Statistics Service [NASS] 
administers the Department's program of collecting and 
publishing current national, State, and county agricultural 
statistics. These statistics provide accurate and timely 
projections of current agricultural production and measures of 
the economic and environmental welfare of the agricultural 
sector which are essential for making effective policy, 
production, and marketing decisions. NASS also furnishes 
statistical services to other USDA and Federal agencies in 
support of their missions, and provides consulting, technical 
assistance, and training to developing countries.
    The Service is also responsible for administration of the 
Census of Agriculture, which is taken every 5 years and 
provides comprehensive data on the agricultural economy 
including: data on the number of farms, land use, production 
expenses, farm product values, value of land and buildings, 
farm size and characteristics of farm operators, market value 
of agricultural production sold, acreage of major crops, 
inventory of livestock and poultry, and farm irrigation 
practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $167,699,000 
for the National Agricultural Statistics Service. Included in 
this amount is $54,325,000 for the Census of Agriculture.
    Organic Data Collection.--The Committee is pleased that 
NASS is working to expand the quantity of organic questions 
included in the Census of Agriculture, and is aware that there 
has been interest expressed in the need for a follow-up survey. 
Therefore, the Committee encourages NASS to take all necessary 
steps, including a follow-up survey, to collect in-depth 
coverage on acreage, yield, production, inventory, production 
practices, sales and expenses, marketing channels, and 
demographics of the organics industry.
    Potato Objective Yield Survey.--The Committee expects NASS 
to continue the potato objective yield survey.

                     Agricultural Research Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2007....................................  $1,128,943,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................   1,021,517,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,154,174,000

    The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for 
conducting basic, applied, and developmental research on: soil, 
water, and air sciences; plant and animal productivity; 
commodity conversion and delivery; human nutrition; and the 
integration of agricultural systems. The research applies to a 
wide range of goals; commodities; natural resources; fields of 
science; and geographic, climatic, and environmental 
conditions.
    ARS is also responsible for the Abraham Lincoln National 
Agricultural Library which provides agricultural information 
and library services through traditional library functions and 
modern electronic dissemination to agencies of the USDA, public 
and private organizations, and individuals.
    As the U.S. Department of Agriculture's in-house 
agricultural research unit, ARS has major responsibilities for 
conducting and leading the national agricultural research 
effort. It provides initiative and leadership in five areas: 
research on broad regional and national problems, research to 
support Federal action and regulatory agencies, expertise to 
meet national emergencies, research support for international 
programs, and scientific resources to the executive branch and 
Congress.
    The mission of ARS research is to develop new knowledge and 
technology which will ensure an abundance of high-quality 
agricultural commodities and products at reasonable prices to 
meet the increasing needs of an expanding economy and to 
provide for the continued improvement in the standard of living 
of all Americans. This mission focuses on the development of 
technical information and technical products which bear 
directly on the need to: (1) manage and use the Nation's soil, 
water, air, and climate resources, and improve the Nation's 
environment; (2) provide an adequate supply of agricultural 
products by observing practices that will maintain a 
sustainable and effective agriculture sector; (3) improve the 
nutrition and well-being of the American people; (4) improve 
living in rural America; and (5) strengthen the Nation's 
balance of payments.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,154,174,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research Service.
    The Committee recognizes the successful history of ARS, the 
premier in-house USDA research agency, and strongly supports 
ongoing research activities vital to protecting this Nation's 
food supply, environment, rural communities, and to work toward 
energy independence. The Committee is aware of the redirection 
and modification of program resources implemented by the agency 
during fiscal year 2007 and has no objection to such action 
with the following exceptions.
    The Committee does not agree with proposed redirection of 
the following research activities and instead recommends 
funding for specific items as described below:
    Agricultural Law.--The laws and regulations impacting 
agriculture are changing rapidly and farmers need access to 
thoughtful analysis of the changing legal requirements they 
face. The Committee recommendation includes $701,034 for 
agricultural law (Harkin, Lincoln, Pryor/Iowa, Arkansas);
    Agroforestry.--The goals of the Center for Agroforestry are 
to create new income opportunities and markets for farm and 
forest landowners; to protect the environment by reducing non-
point source pollution; to create and improve natural habitats 
for wildlife; and to mitigate the impacts of periodic flooding 
in rural and urban areas. The Committee recommendation includes 
$707,706 for agroforestry (Bond/Arkansas);
    Animal Health.--The Animal Health Consortium uses 
stakeholder input to administer and fund investigations of a 
wide range of livestock diseases important to the livestock 
industry and homeland security. The Committee recommendation 
includes $879,430 for animal health (Durbin/Illinois);
    Aquaculture Research.--The mission of the Aquaculture 
Systems Research Unit is to evaluate and develop new components 
of aquaculture production systems to improve the efficiency of 
freshwater fish farming including cultural and processing 
methods to enhance and sustain product quality. The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,048,000 for aquaculture research 
(Lincoln, Pryor/Arkansas);
    Biotechnology Research and Development Center.--There is a 
need to facilitate the transfer and development of technologies 
to the private sector that have been generated with public 
funds. The Committee recommendation includes $2,684,737 for the 
Biotechnology Research and Development Center (Durbin/
Illinois);
    Delta Nutrition.--Further research is needed to understand 
the linkage between food security, environmental factors, and 
overall nutritional health. Continued research and intervention 
mechanisms are especially critical to the Delta Region of the 
Mid-South. The Committee recommendation includes $4,222,502 for 
delta nutrition (Cochran, Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor/Mississippi, 
Louisiana, Arkansas);
    National Corn to Ethanol.--A state-of-the-art pilot ethanol 
plant is necessary to provide researchers the ability to 
develop more efficient production of ethanol and to decrease 
the cost of feedstock conversion. The Committee recommendation 
includes $385,522 for national corn to ethanol (Durbin, Obama/
Illinois);
    Tropical Aquaculture.--Research is needed to define 
nutritional requirements and optimal feed management, 
ingredients, and processing methods for cost-effective, 
sustainable, and environmentally sound tropical aquaculture. 
The Committee recommendation includes $1,541,561 for tropical 
aquaculture (Inouye, Akaka/Hawaii).
    In addition, the Committee does not agree with proposed 
redirection of the following research activities and instead 
does not recommend funding for specific items as described 
below:
    The Committee does not agree with funding for Chloroplast 
Genetic Engineering Research; Medicinal and Bioactive Crops; 
Lyme Disease 4 Poster Project; or Salmonella, Listeria, E coli 
and other Food Pathogens.
    The Committee also recommends the following amounts, 
consistent with the President's budget, for increased funding 
in fiscal year 2008:
    Crop Protection.--U.S. agriculture is faced with 
increasingly diverse and severe exotic emerging plant diseases 
which, in many cases, can move swiftly, completely destroy 
crops, and pose risks to a stable food supply. The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,500,000 for increased research in 
this area.
    Food Safety.--Accidental or intentional introduction of a 
small number of contaminants into some part of the food chain 
could seriously affect public confidence and harm the Nation's 
economy. Regulatory agencies have identified areas of critical 
importance for investigation relating to food safety that 
include detection, prevention, response, and recovery. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,750,000 for increased 
research in this area.
    Human Nutrition.--Obesity is the Nation's fastest growing 
public health problem, affecting every segment of the American 
population. Two of three adults are overweight and the number 
of overweight children has doubled in the past 20 years. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 for increased 
research in this area.
    Livestock Protection.--Exotic and transmissible animal 
diseases, such as Foot-and-Mouth Disease and Avian Influenza 
hold potential for significant animal and human health risks 
and economic disruption. The Committee recommendation includes 
$2,250,000 for increased funding in this area and to work 
toward meeting the 2015 goals outlined in a January 2005 
Department of Homeland Security report.
    Pollinator Recovery.--The Committee is extremely concerned 
by widespread reports of Colony Collapse Disorder [CCD] and 
other threats to bee colonies and other pollinators that could 
seriously disrupt food production with implications for 
national security. While the President's budget did not 
expressly request funding for this research, the Committee 
believes that such oversight was due to the recent development 
of CCD and related threats. The Committee does believe that 
this research is consistent with the ARS goal of protecting the 
Nation's food supply and natural resources. The Committee also 
believes that the Department is aware of this serious threat 
and would have included funds in the budget if it had been 
aware of the problem in advance of formulation of the fiscal 
year 2008 budget. Therefore, the Committee recommends 
$1,500,000 for CCD and related pollinator threats to be 
directed to the best suited locations. In addition, due to the 
seriousness posed by CCD, the Committee directs the Secretary 
to provide a report within 30 days of enactment regarding the 
use of these funds and an overall strategy by the Department 
for protecting pollinator species in this country.
    Renewable Energy.--America's dependence of foreign oil for 
energy and chemical substances is a threat to the Nation's 
security and adversely affects the country's economy. Research 
is needed to identify feedstocks that can be produced 
domestically to help offset the rising demand and costs of 
energy. The Committee recommendation includes $1,750,000 to 
increase research in this area.
    Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia [VHS].--The Committee is aware 
of the presence of VHS in the Great Lakes and the threat it 
poses to aquatic species and to interstate and international 
commerce. The Secretary is directed to provide a report on 
steps taken by ARS to control and eradicate this disease from 
American and international waters.
    In complying with the Committee's directives, ARS is 
expected not to redirect support for programs from one State to 
another without prior notification to and approval by the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance with the 
reprogramming procedures specified in this act. Unless 
otherwise directed, the Agricultural Research Service shall 
implement appropriations by programs, projects, commodities, 
and activities as specified by the Appropriations Committees. 
Unspecified reductions necessary to carry out the provisions of 
this act are to be implemented in accordance with the 
definitions contained in the ``Program, Project, and Activity'' 
section of this report.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

Appropriations, 2007....................................................
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     $16,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,100,000

    The ARS ``Buildings and Facilities'' account was 
established for the acquisition of land, construction, repair, 
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed 
equipment or facilities of, or used by, the Agricultural 
Research Service. Routine construction or replacement items 
continue to be funded under the limitations contained in the 
regular account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,100,000 
for buildings and facilities of the Agricultural Research 
Service.
    Modern research facilities are an important part of the 
ability of ARS to meet the objectives of its mission purpose, 
and the Committee recommends funding to ensure that 
modernization and upgrades of facilities are achieved.
    Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee is unable to 
recommend full funding to complete the construction of all 
ongoing projects. The Committee recommends funds for the 
following projects in fiscal year 2008:
    Agriculture Research Center, Pullman, Washington.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,600,000 toward 
construction of this center. (Murray, Cantwell)
    Alcorn State University Biotechnology Laboratory, Alcorn 
State, Mississippi.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$2,000,000 toward construction of this facility. (Cochran)
    Animal Bioscience Facility, Bozeman, Montana.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,600,000 toward 
construction of this facility. (Baucus, Tester)
    Animal Waste Management Research Laboratory, Bowling Green, 
Kentucky.--The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 
toward construction of this facility. (McConnell)
    Appalachian Fruit Laboratory, Kearneysville, West 
Virginia.--The Committee recommendation includes $2,200,000 for 
facility renovations at this location. (Byrd)
    ARS Agricultural Research Center, Logan, Utah.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $8,000,000 for planning, 
design, and construction of this center. (Bennett)
    Dairy Forage Agriculture Research Center, Prairie du Sac, 
Wisconsin.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,600,000 
for planning and design of this center. (Kohl)
    Forage-Animal Production Research Facility, Lexington, 
Kentucky.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 
toward construction of this facility. (McConnell)
    Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, Hagerman, 
Idaho.--The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 toward 
construction of this station. (Craig, Crapo)
    Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Stoneville, 
Mississippi.--The Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000 
toward the major modernization phase of this center. (Cochran)
    National Plant and Genetics Security Center, Columbia, 
Missouri.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 
toward construction of this facility. (Bond)
    Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, Hilo, Hawaii.--
The Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 toward 
construction of this center. (Inouye, Akaka)
    Poultry Science Research Facility, Starkville, 
Mississippi.--The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 
toward construction of this replacement facility. (Cochran)
    Sugarcane Research Laboratory, Houma, Louisiana.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,600,000 toward 
construction of this center. (Landrieu, Vitter)
    Systems Biology Research Facility, Lincoln, Nebraska.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 for planning and 
design of this facility. (Nelson, Ben; Hagel)

      Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

    The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service was established by the Secretary of Agriculture on 
October 1, 1994, under the authority of the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6912). The 
mission is to work with university partners and customers to 
advance research, extension, and higher education in the food 
and agricultural sciences and related environmental and human 
sciences to benefit people, communities, and the Nation.

                   RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $671,419,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     562,518,000
Committee recommendation................................     700,849,000

    The research and education programs administered by the 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
[CSREES] are the U.S. Department of Agriculture's principal 
entree to the university system of the United States to support 
higher education in food and agricultural sciences and to 
conduct agricultural research as authorized by the Hatch Act of 
1887 (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the Cooperative Forestry Research 
Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 582a-7); Public Law 89-106, section (2) 
(7 U.S.C. 450i); the National Agricultural Research, Extension, 
and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.); the 
Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 
301); the Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform 
Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.); and the Farm Security and 
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171). Through 
these authorities, the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
participates with State and other cooperators to encourage and 
assist the State institutions to conduct agricultural research 
and education through the State agricultural experiment 
stations of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the 
territories; by approved schools of forestry; by the 1890 land-
grant institutions, Tuskegee University, and West Virginia 
State University; by colleges of veterinary medicine; and by 
other eligible institutions.
    The research and education programs participate in a 
nationwide system of agricultural research program planning and 
coordination among the State institutions, U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, and the agricultural industry of America.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $700,849,000 
for research and education activities of the Cooperative State 
Research, Education, and Extension Service.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for research and education activities:

 COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE [CSREES]--
                    RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payments under Hatch Act...............................          214,924
Cooperative forestry research (McIntire-Stennis).......           30,008
Payments to 1890 Institutions..........................           40,680
Special research grants (Public Law 89-106)............           67,734
                                                        ================
Improved pest control:
    Expert IPM decision support system.................              155
    Integrated pest management.........................            2,396
    IR-4 minor crop pest management....................           10,896
    Pest management alternatives.......................            1,422
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Improved pest control.....................           14,869
                                                        ================
1994 institutions research program.....................            1,544
Agriculture and Rural Policy Research..................            2,780
Alaska Native-serving and Native Hawaiian-serving                  3,218
 institutions education grants.........................
Alternative crops......................................              825
Animal health and disease (sec. 1433)..................            5,006
Aquaculture centers (sec. 1475)........................            3,928
Capacity building grants (1890 institutions)...........           12,375
Critical Agricultural Materials Act....................            1,091
Graduate fellowships grants............................            3,701
Hispanic education partnership grants..................            5,940
Institution challenge grants...........................            5,423
Joe Skeen Institute for Rangeland Management (NM, TX,                990
 MT)...................................................
Multicultural scholars program.........................              988
National Research Initiative...........................          244,000
Payments to the 1994 institutions......................            3,342
Secondary agriculture education........................              990
Sustainable agriculture research and education.........           15,000
Veterinary Medical Services Act........................              750
Federal administration:................................           20,843
                                                        ----------------
      Total, CSREES Research and Education Activities..          700,849
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.--The Committee 
remains determined to see that quality research and enhanced 
human resources development in the agricultural and related 
sciences be a nationwide commitment. Therefore, the Committee 
continues its direction that not less than 10 percent of the 
competitive research grant funds be used for USDA's 
agricultural research enhancement awards program (including 
USDA-EPSCoR), in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 450i.
    Agriculture and Rural Policy Research.--The Secretary is 
authorized to make grants and take other actions under 7 U.S.C. 
3155 for research and related activities concerning public 
policy and trade agreements and their effect on the farm and 
agricultural sector; the environment; rural families, 
households, and economies; and consumers, food, and nutrition. 
The Committee recommends $2,780,000 for activities under this 
authority.
    Of the amount available for Agriculture and Rural Policy 
Research [ARPR], $1,600,000 is provided for the Food and 
Agriculture Policy Institute [FAPRI]. Of the amount made 
available for FAPRI, $240,000 shall be provided to continue a 
cooperative agreement with the University of Wisconsin relating 
to dairy policy and $200,000 shall be provided to the 
University of Nevada at Reno relating to the marketing of 
commodities produced in the Western United States. (Kohl, 
Harkin, Bond, Reid, Grassley/University of Wisconsin, Iowa 
State University, University of Missouri, University of Nevada 
at Reno)
    In addition, of the amount available for ARPR, $1,180,000 
shall be available for the Rural Policies Research Institute. 
(Harkin, Nelson, Ben, Hagel/Iowa State University, University 
of Nebraska, University of Missouri)
    Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving 
Institutions Education Grants.--The Committee recommends 
$3,218,000 for grants to individual eligible institutions or 
consortia of eligible institutions in Alaska and in Hawaii, 
with grant funds to be awarded equally between Alaska and 
Hawaii to carry out the programs authorized in 7 U.S.C. 3242 
(section 759 of Public Law 106-78). The Committee directs the 
agency to fully comply with the use of grant funds as 
authorized.
    Alternative Crops.--The Committee recommends $825,000 for 
alternative crop research to continue and strengthen research 
efforts on canola. The Committee understands that the United 
States does not produce enough canola to meet its consumption 
needs and encourages the Department to provide funds in a 
manner that reaches those areas most likely to see expansions 
in canola production.
    Enhancing the Prosperity of Small Farms and Rural 
Agricultural Communities.--The Committee is pleased to see that 
the Department issued a request for proposals in the areas of 
small and mid-sized farm profitability and rural economic 
development pursuant to section 401 of the Agricultural 
Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 
7621). The Committee encourages the Department to request 
proposals specific to critical emerging issues related to farm 
income, rural economic and business and community development 
and farm efficiency and profitability, including the viability 
and competitiveness of small and medium-sized dairy, livestock, 
crop and other commodity operations.
    Forestry and Related Natural Resource Research.--The 
Committee recognizes that forestry and related natural resource 
research were an integral part of NRI at its inception. As NRI 
funding has grown, however, the allocation of NRI funds by 
CSREES for research on forestry and related natural resource 
topics has fallen behind. In the future, the Committee directs 
the NRI program administrator to put a greater emphasis on NRI 
funding for forestry and natural resources topics with a goal 
of eventually providing at least 10 percent of the total funds 
provided for NRI for forestry and natural resources related 
research on topics including: woody plant systems, including 
large scale efforts to sequence the genome for several 
economically important tree species, technologies for enhanced 
pest and disease resistance, and increased tree growth rates; 
management of complex forest ecosystems, including issues of 
forest health, productivity, economic sustainability, and 
restoration; assessing alternative management strategies, with 
emphasis on risk analysis, geospatial analysis including 
landscape implications, consideration of ecological services, 
providing decision support systems; and development of 
nanotechnology and biorefining technologies for the forest 
products sector as critical to enhancing global competitiveness 
and energy security.
    National Research Initiative.--The Committee recommends 
$244,000,000 for the National Research Initiative [NRI] and 
directs that specific programs previously funded under 
Integrated Activities [IA] be included under the NRI for fiscal 
year 2008, as proposed in the budget. The Committee notes that 
the indirect cost limitations for programs funded under IA are 
the same as under the NRI and expects that extension-led 
activities will continue to be a central element once such 
programs are incorporated into the NRI. The Committee further 
expects that water quality activities should benefit from the 
enhanced pool of funds made possible by these transfers.
    National Veterinary Medical Services Act.--The Committee 
remains concerned by the growing demand for large animal 
veterinarians in many parts of the country and the vital role 
they play in maintaining animal health and rural security. The 
Committee continues to support the goals of the National 
Veterinary Medical Services Act but is disappointed in the lack 
of progress by the Department in implementing a program under 
this authority. The Committee directs the Secretary to provide 
a report on the status of and a timetable for implementation of 
the act.
    Special Research Grants.--The Committee recognizes the 
vital relationships between Federal research activities and 
land grant institutions and firmly supports the importance of 
congressionally-recognized research priorities. The Special 
Research Grants program was authorized by the Congress to 
promote research among these partners in specific areas of need 
to meet emerging and long-term national and regional 
challenges.
    The Secretary is authorized to make grants to eligible 
institutions under 7 U.S.C. 450i(c), commonly referred to as 
Special Research Grants. These grants are authorized for the 
purpose of conducting research and related activities to 
facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of the 
food and agricultural sciences of the United States. The 
authorizing statute directs that these grants be provided 
through State-Federal partnerships to promote excellence of 
such activities on a regional or national level, to promote the 
development of regional research centers, and to generally 
support these activities among the States, the regions, and the 
Nation. In addition, the law requires that these grants can 
only be awarded if it the proposed activity has undergone 
scientific peer review and that the grantee submit an annual 
report to the Secretary describing the results of the research 
or related activity and the merits of the results.
    Over the past few years, the Committee has made clear its 
intentions to employ a heightened level of scrutiny to grants 
awarded under 7 U.S.C. 450i(c). These indications have included 
requirements of detailed reports by grantees, in-depth 
explanations of prospective research objectives, and an 
understanding that grantees should not expect indefinite fiscal 
assistance from the Committee under this authority. In 
addition, the Committee has previously expressed concern that 
ongoing, long-term Federal commitments to specific research 
projects may reduce the opportunity to focus on emerging 
important research priorities and result in a less efficient 
Federal investment in agricultural and related research.
    For fiscal year 2008, the Committee continues its 
responsibility of expressing congressional interest and 
intervention in setting research priorities through the 
investment of Federal funds. As the Committee has expressed in 
previous years, specific problems require specific objectives 
and specific attention. Therefore, the individual research 
activities described in this report are intended to accomplish 
the objectives set forth in this report and are not intended to 
extend into ongoing, long-term, indefinite research endeavors. 
The Secretary is encouraged to work with grantees to ensure 
that research conducted with these funds is set to achieve 
specific objectives and to refrain from undertaking research of 
an indefinite nature. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
provide a report by March 1, 2008 regarding the status of grant 
awards for fiscal year 2008 and the specific objectives to be 
sought in each case.
    The following identifies and describes the Committee 
recommendations:
    Advanced Genetic Technologies.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $645,000 to support high throughput 
genetic research and to improve capacity for competitively 
awarded grants related to genome sciences. (McConnell/
University of Kentucky)
    Advancing Biofuel Production.--While production of ethanol 
from corn is well understood, additional research is needed to 
develop optimal cellulosic biofuel production technologies for 
sorghum. The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 to 
investigate the use of sorghum in production of cellulosic 
biofuel. (Hutchison/Baylor University)
    Aegilops Cylindrica/Biomass.--Aegilops cylindrica is a 
grassy plant with potential as an alternative crop and a 
suitable renewable fuel feedstock for biomass production, 
especially in the Western region. The Committee recommendation 
includes $200,000 to develop the potential of this feedstock 
which would require low inputs, be efficient in water usage, 
and be resistant to pests and disease. (Murray, Cantwell/
Washington State University)
    Agricultural Diversity.--The Northern Great Plains region 
of North Dakota and Minnesota requires economic development and 
diversity tied to its agricultural base to slow the trend of 
out-migration and other economic and social conditions harmful 
to the region. The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 
to be used through the Red River Valley Research Corridor to 
develop the region's capacity to produce and transmit renewable 
energy to other markets, to improve the region's capacity to 
meet the Nation's growing demand for organic products, and to 
enhance the region's overall research and development 
capabilities. (Dorgan, Conrad/University of Minnesota-
Crookston)
    Agricultural Entrepreneurial Alternatives for Small 
Farmers.--The goal of the Entrepreneurial Alternatives program 
is to help agricultural producers evaluate and implement new 
business plans for existing business ventures or to transition 
to new agriculture-related business opportunities. The 
Committee recommendation includes $333,000 for this program. 
(Specter, Casey/Penn State University)
    Agricultural Marketing.--Lucrative niche markets may be 
promising opportunities, but limited access to markets, the 
high cost of market intelligence, and scale-related 
inefficiencies are inherent barriers to entry for small to mid-
sized value-added food enterprises. The Committee 
recommendation includes $250,000 to develop and disseminate 
marketing information technology for food and agricultural 
entrepreneurs to identify and develop new and profitable 
markets and improve the efficiency and profitability of food 
systems in the United States and globally. (Durbin/University 
of Illinois)
    Air Quality.--Concentrated animal feeding operations in the 
Southern Great Plains States currently face air quality 
challenges and concerns related to odor, dust/particulate 
matter, and gaseous emissions such as ammonia, hydrogen 
sulfide, volatile organic compounds, including reactive, non-
reactive, and greenhouse gases. The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 to carry out this research and to provide 
science-based estimates and assessments by public agencies and 
the private sector. (Hutchison, Roberts, Cornyn/Texas 
Agricultural Experiment Station, Kansas State University)
    Alliance for Food Protection.--Changing trends in food 
production and processing require advanced testing protocols to 
ensure food safety. The Committee recommendation includes 
$175,000 for research to support the development of new, highly 
sensitive tests for allergens in food and enhanced grains and 
to provide risk assessments of crops and livestock produced 
through agricultural biotechnology. (Nelson, Ben; Hagel/
University of Nebraska, University of Georgia)
    Alternative Salmon Products.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,099,000 for the development of alternative salmon 
products, including nutritional supplements. (Stevens/
University of Alaska)
    Animal and Poultry Waste Management.--Disposal of animal 
wastes from concentrated animal agriculture production areas 
poses serious challenges. Currently, implemented technologies 
for animal waste management have drawbacks including odors, 
acreage needed for disposal, air pollution, pathogens, and 
potential water contamination due to rainfall and flooding. The 
Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for the development, 
evaluation and testing of technologies that are environmentally 
superior and more cost effective than current animal waste 
management practices. Co-production of energy will also be 
evaluated, as well as improving the cost and efficiency of 
technologies currently available. (Burr, Dole/North Carolina 
State University)
    Animal Health.--Animal disease prevention and control is 
crucial to the marketing of agricultural animals and the 
protection of public health on local, State, national, and 
global levels. The Committee recommendation includes $390,000 
to develop electronic submission methodologies for animal 
health events submitted to veterinary diagnostic laboratories. 
(McConnell/University of Kentucky)
    Animal Science Food Safety Consortium.--There is a serious 
need to develop technology for faster identification of 
infectious agents and toxins to achieve ``real time'' detection 
of food-borne threats to the meat animal food supply. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to develop 
statistical tools necessary to prioritize potential health 
risks and provide economic information for implementation of 
intervention strategies relating to microbiological or chemical 
hazards; potential hazards in the distribution chain, and 
develop better technology to reduce the hazards and improve the 
quality of animal food products, which will complement the 
development of HACCP programs by USDA. (Harkin, Grassley, 
Roberts, Lincoln, Pryor/University of Arkansas, Iowa State 
University, Kansas State University)
    Apple Fire Blight.--Fire blight is a serious bacterial 
disease of apples and pears and is one of the most damaging 
diseases affecting apple trees across the Nation, with crop and 
tree losses and related costs exceeding $100,000,000 annually. 
The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 to understand 
and manage the apple fire blight disease by investigating the 
molecular basis of disease resistance in apples and developing 
disease resistant apple varieties and rootstocks. (Clinton, 
Levin, Schumer, Stabenow/Cornell University, Michigan State 
University)
    Aquaculture, Louisiana.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $200,000 for research to improve production 
efficiencies, fish health, water quality, and other aspects of 
aquaculture production in Louisiana. (Landrieu, Vitter/
Louisiana State University)
    Aquaculture, Mississippi.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $517,000 for research into optimum protein and vitamin 
levels in practical fish feeds, identifying substitutes for 
fishmeal in catfish feeds, enhancing phosphorus retention by 
fish, and identifying cost-effective feeding strategies. 
(Cochran/Mississippi State University)
    Aquaculture, North Carolina.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $325,000 to improve commercial aquaculture techniques 
and introduce new species into the commercial aquaculture 
sector in the Southeast. (Burr, Dole/North Carolina State 
University)
    Aquaculture Product and Marketing Development.--Areas of 
Appalachia have great potential for aquaculture production. 
There is a need to identify efficient production and delivery 
systems and to develop effective marketing strategies. The 
Committee recommendation includes $700,000 for research in this 
area. (Byrd/West Virginia University)
    Armillaria Root Rot.--Armillaria root rot permanently 
renders orchards unsuitable for cherry production resulting in 
reduced farm profitability, farmland conversion to non-
agricultural uses, and has the potential to devastate the fruit 
industry of Michigan and other States. The Committee 
recommendation includes $140,000 to conduct field tests and 
research to speed detection of the fungus, and evaluate new 
biological and chemical controls. (Levin, Stabenow/Michigan 
State University)
    Asparagus Technology and Production.--Half of the current 
asparagus production costs are composed of labor costs 
associated with the harvesting of the product. The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for research and development 
of technologies to reduce the cost of asparagus production. 
(Murray, Cantwell/Washington State University)
    Avian Influenza.--The Delmarva Peninsula is an area of 
significant poultry production and an area where avian 
influenza outbreaks have occurred in the past. Work is needed 
for the development of information systems and other mechanisms 
to check any future outbreaks and to learn more about ways to 
manage and control this serious disease. The Committee 
recommendation includes $100,000 to carry out these activities. 
(Biden, Carper/University of Delaware)
    Barley Research.--Development of specialty barley varieties 
for use in the human diet and animal feed will expand marketing 
potential for producers. The Committee recommendation includes 
$735,000 to produce specialty barley varieties. (Craig, Crapo/
University of Idaho)
    Berry Research.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,300,000 for research into best crop management techniques, 
basic biology and chemistry of berries, as well as basic berry 
processing information. The Committee encourages the University 
to partner with entities to train and educate rural areas on 
efforts to create a viable and sustainable berry industry. 
(Stevens/University of Alaska)
    Biodesign and Bioprocessing Research Center.--The Biodesign 
and Bioprocessing Research Center [BBRC] will enhance the 
capabilities and economic viability of farmers by conducting 
basic and applied research on the design, production, and 
recovery of industrial enzymes, pharmaceuticals, and biofuels 
from transgenic and alternative specialty crops, and for 
conversion of agricultural wastes to value-added products. The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for the BBRC. 
(Warner, Webb/Virginia Tech)
    Bioenergy.--The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 
to conduct an inventory of potential bioenergy feedstocks, 
including plant species and industrial byproducts, in the State 
of Connecticut. (Lieberman/University of Connecticut)
    Botanical Research Center.--The Utah Botanical Center 
serves as a regional learning center and supports production 
and integration of low water-use plants in sustainable home 
landscapes for high-desert environments. The Center conducts 
research by collecting native plant seeds, conducing trials of 
promising species, including rare and endangered species, and 
advancing nursery production methods. The Committee 
recommendation includes $900,000 for this initiative. (Bennett/
Utah State University)
    CAST.--The Council for Agricultural Science and Technology 
[CAST] develops a variety of food and agricultural publications 
that are important for policy makers and the agricultural 
sector. The Committee recommendation includes $150,000 to 
continue these activities. (Harkin/Iowa State University)
    Cataloging Genes Associated With Drought and Disease 
Resistance.--Drought episodes are increasing around the globe 
and the availability of water is decreasing with increasing 
human populations and development. The development of drought 
resistant crops is necessary to ensure sufficient food 
supplies. The Committee recommendation includes $250,000 for 
the discovery of genetic markers for use in breeding plants for 
drought and disease resistance and for the characterization of 
drought-adaptive mechanisms found in wild relatives of 
cultivated plants. (Domenici, Bingaman/New Mexico State 
University)
    Center for North American Studies.--The growth in North 
American trade and associated economic integration has created 
the need and opportunity for cooperation to address pressing 
agricultural trade and food issues. Examples include economic 
and trade relationships for food and agricultural products, 
international trade policies, assessing impacts of food and 
agricultural bio-terrorism, natural resource and environmental 
problems, food safety and nutrition, food marketing and 
distribution, plant and animal production technology, and 
potentially conflicting domestic farm policies. The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for research performed by the 
Center for North American Studies. (Hutchison/Texas 
Agricultural Experiment Station)
    Center for Public Lands and Rural Economies.--The Center 
for Public Lands and Rural Economies conducts research related 
to the effects that public lands have on rural communities. 
Research in the past has centered on the presence of public 
land and its effect on services that rural communities provide 
such as health care, education, and social services. The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 to continue this 
research. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Center for Rural Studies.--The sustainability of rural 
communities requires information to assist regional planning 
through the identification and prioritization of needs and for 
improved application of resources. The Committee recommendation 
includes $350,000 for research and data development related to 
demographic changes in rural areas. (Leahy/University of 
Vermont)
    Childhood Obesity and Nutrition.--Rising national childhood 
obesity rates result in significant illness and disabilities 
for children. The Committee recommendation includes $150,000 to 
develop intervention strategies for use in day care centers 
through a combination of basic research, health care, public 
health, and educational initiatives focused on children, 
families, and communities. (Leahy/University of Vermont)
    Citrus Disease.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$200,000 to develop methods to control and manage citrus canker 
and citrus greening in the State of Florida. (Martinez; Nelson, 
Bill/University of Florida)
    Competitiveness of Agriculture Products.--Agriculture is 
increasingly dependent on global markets, and improving the 
competiveness of U.S. exports in the global marketplace is 
important to the long-term health of the agricultural sector. 
The Committee recommendation includes $350,000 for research to 
better understand the changing global agricultural trade 
environment. (Murray, Cantwell/Washington State University)
    Cool Season Legume Research.--This research project focuses 
on the genetic identification of superior characteristics in 
legumes; nematode, insect, and disease management; soil erosion 
and water quality; and market and product development. The 
Committee recommendation includes $250,000 for legume research. 
(Dorgan, Murray, Craig, Johnson, Cantwell, Conrad, Crapo/
University of Idaho, Washington Sate University, North Dakota 
State University)
    Cotton Insect Management and Fiber Quality.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $494,000 for research that seeks to 
reduce the impacts of cotton pests on cotton fiber quality. 
(Chambliss, Isakson/University of Georgia)
    Cranberry Research.--New methods for pest control in 
cranberry bogs need to be developed to maintain production 
levels and to maintain protection of the environment. The 
Committee recommendation includes $150,000 for research for 
this purpose. (Kennedy, Kerry/University of Massachusetts)
    Cranberry/Blueberry Disease and Breeding.--Compounds in 
blueberries and cranberries provide significant human health 
benefits and have potential in treatments to help prevent 
cancer, coronary heart disease and arthritis. The Committee 
recommendation includes $550,000 for research to develop new 
cultivars, identify health attributes, investigate new and 
value-added uses, and provide new and improved blueberry and 
cranberry varieties. (Lautenberg/Rutgers University)
    Crop Integration and Production.--There is a need in the 
upper plains States to develop production systems that allow 
farmers to diversify the crops they produce and, thereby, 
reduce production input costs. The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 to develop best management practices and 
examine the feed value of pulse crops. (Johnson, Thune/South 
Dakota State University)
    Dairy and Meat Goat Research.--The primary objective of 
this project is to generate and disseminate technical 
information to improve the quantity of products derived from 
goats. The program enables small goat producers to increase 
their profitability through genetic mapping, conservation, 
maintenance, enhancements and access to genetic resources. The 
Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for dairy and meat 
goat research. (Hutchison/Prairie View A&M; University)
    Dairy Farm Profitability.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 for research to develop and disseminate 
knowledge and technologies that increase efficiency and 
profitability of dairy production. (Specter, Casey/Penn State 
University)
    Delta Revitalization Project.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 to create and implement innovative strategies 
that will help advance the long-term economic and sustainable 
development of the Mississippi Delta Region. (Cochran/
Mississippi State University)
    Designing Foods for Health.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 to research the prevention of diseases 
through fruits and vegetables by optimizing bioactive compounds 
and conducting studies in cell cultures, animal studies, and 
clinical trials. (Hutchison/Texas Agricultural Experiment 
Station)
    Detection and Food Safety.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $2,500,000 to research new technologies for real-time 
bacterial, chemical, and surface contamination detection and 
information technologies for traceability and inventory 
control. (Shelby/Auburn University)
    Displacing Imported Petroleum With Renewables.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $200,000 for research into 
the conversion of renewable biomass into fuels. (Martinez; 
Nelson, Bill/University of Florida)
    Drought Management Initiative.--Utah and the Intermountain 
West experience periodic drought that has severely limited 
water supplies, damaged agriculture, and threatens future 
economic growth. This initiative seeks to develop accurate 
prediction of water yield, improved agricultural irrigation, 
better management of urban water demand, and innovative water 
policies. The Committee recommendation includes $900,000 for 
this initiative. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Efficient Irrigation for Water Conservation.--The surface 
flows of the Rio Grande are inadequate to meet growing demands 
of agriculture, development growth, drought cycles, and compact 
agreements. Agriculture is a major industry in most areas of 
the Rio Grande basin, particularly the irrigated valleys. 
Voluntary measures based on scientific knowledge will help 
secure the agricultural economy and heritage of the basin. The 
Committee recommendation includes $475,000 for New Mexico State 
University and $100,000 for Texas A&M; University for research 
and education activities that improve irrigation efficiency and 
water conservation throughout the Rio Grande basin. (Domenici, 
Hutchison, Bingaman, Cornyn/New Mexico State University, Texas 
A&M; University)
    Environmentally Safe Products.--Research is needed to 
develop agriculturally-based products that have both economic 
and environmental values. The Committee recommendation includes 
$450,000 to carry out this activity. (Leahy/University of 
Vermont)
    Farmland Preservation.--Ohio is losing farm acreage to 
development at a high rate. The Committee recommendation 
includes $150,000 for research to determine the best policy 
mechanisms to slow this trend. (Brown, Voinovich/Ohio State 
University)
    Floriculture.--The Hawaii tropical cut flower and foliage 
industry is a major contributor to the State and national 
economies and it faces many challenges from rising costs of 
production, new invasive pests, and increased foreign 
competition. The Committee recommendation includes $300,000 to 
carry out a competitive grants program to maintain and further 
develop new anthurium, orchid and protea germplasm. (Inouye, 
Akaka/University of Hawaii)
    Food and Fuel Initiative.--An important element of the 
biofuels industry is to find ways to make biofuel co-products a 
preferred feed for livestock. The Committee recommendation 
includes $400,000 for research to ensure feed and food safety 
by removing potential accumulation of toxins, and protecting 
the environment. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa State University)
    Food Safety.--Irradiation is currently being used to 
destroy pathogens in food and destroy insect and pests in 
fruits and vegetables. The Committee recommendation includes 
$100,000 to continue the advancement of science and technology 
in irradiation technologies. (Hutchison/Texas Agricultural 
Experiment Station)
    Fresh Produce Food Safety.--Recent incidents of E. coli 
O157:H7 and other microbial contaminants in spinach and leafy 
greens resulted in serious illnesses and several deaths, and 
have shaken consumer confidence and cost growers millions of 
dollars. The Committee recommendation includes $700,000 to 
establish a competitive grants program to research the effects 
of the recent E. coli outbreak, sources and channels of 
contamination by pathogenic microbes, and other concerns 
related to food safety. (Feinstein, Boxer/University of 
California)
    Functional Genomics in Nature.--This program expands the 
study of functional genomics to determine genome regulation, 
protein interaction, and metabolite flow as organisms interact 
in the environment. The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,600,000 for this research. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Future Foods.--Research is needed to promote optimal human 
health by studying bioactive attributes of food. The Committee 
recommendation includes $450,000 to determine the relationships 
between functional compounds in foods and reduced incidence of 
chronic diseases in humans. Outcomes will provide insight into 
properties to serve as anticancer agents and to guard against 
obesity. This research also has a significant global outreach 
component, focused on food, nutrition, and health education in 
developing countries and will assist in the fight against HIV/
AIDS. (Durbin/University of Illinois)
    Genomics for Southern Crop Stress and Disease.--This 
research focuses on the use of genomics for the identification 
of pathogens and stress resistance in Southern corn and soybean 
crops. In particular for corn and soybeans, genetic stocks are 
predominantly tested under Midwestern conditions and many 
perform poorly in the South due to differing environmental 
stresses and pathogens. The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,140,000 for this research. (Cochran/Mississippi State 
University)
    Global Change/Ultraviolet Radiation.--High levels of 
ultraviolet radiation from the Sun are known to have harmful 
effects on agricultural crops, forest ecosystems, humans and 
livestock. The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 to 
measure ultraviolet and visible radiation across the entire 
United States to help research that assesses the potential crop 
and forests impacts from increasing levels of ultraviolet 
radiation. (Johnson, Salazar/Colorado State University)
    Grass Seed Cropping Systems.--The grass seed industry is 
based in rural communities and contributes to the economic well 
being of those communities, but the industry is facing some 
critical environmental and economic challenges including: 
public pressure to phase out open-field burning; and 
alleviation of smoke, dust, and chemical trespass from crop 
production areas. The Committee recommendation includes 
$150,000 to develop new grass seed cropping systems that meet 
environmental regulations and are economically viable for 
farmers. (Murray, Craig, Cantwell, Smith, Wyden, Crapo/
University of Idaho, Oregon State University, Washington State 
University)
    Great Plains Sorghum Improvement and Utilization Center.--
The Committee recommendation includes $736,000 to conduct 
research on improving the yields, quality, and uses of grain 
sorghum. (Brownback, Hutchison, Roberts/Kansas State 
University, Texas A&M; University, Texas Tech University)
    Hardwood Scanning Center.--The sustainability of the 
hardwood lumber industry depends on further improvements in 
efficiency, primarily in terms of the volume of higher grades 
of lumber produced from a given volume of logs. The next 
technology needed to improve lumber-grade yield is log 
scanning. This would help the ability of sawyers to ``see'' the 
defects inside a log and convert logs into lumber, based on 
knowing where the defects are located. Past studies indicate a 
potential 30-40 percent increase in lumber-grade yield in the 
conversion of tree trunks into logs and up to 30 percent in the 
conversion of logs into lumber. The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 to develop and commercialize scanning 
technology needed to improve hardwood lumber-grade yield. 
(Lugar/Purdue University)
    High Performance Computing.--This program will assist the 
USDA with expanded capabilities in high performance computing 
and numerical methods for agricultural and natural resources 
management. The Committee recommendation includes $750,000 for 
this project. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Human Nutrition.--This research project tests the 
hypothesis that individuals with a predisposition to becoming 
obese have altered metabolic and genetic patterns of response 
to diets high in fat or high in calories. The current research 
objective is to characterize baseline biochemical, endocrine 
and anthropometric predictors for fat storage in healthy men 
and women eating diets altered in percent fat. The Committee 
recommendation includes $706,000 to carry out this research. 
(Landrieu, Vitter/Pennington Biomedical Research Center)
    Improving Safety and Shelf Life of Agricultural 
Commodities.--Bioelectronic detectors have the potential to be 
highly sensitive, easy to use and manufacture, while also 
providing near real-time diagnosis of food contamination. These 
features will allow for the quick detection of microorganisms 
thereby allowing for the development of new methods of shelf-
life preservation as well as preventing distribution of 
contaminated food products. The Committee recommendation 
includes $863,000 for the development of bioelectronic 
detectors that can quickly detect the presence of microbial 
pathogens in foods and food products. (Craig, Crapo/University 
of Idaho)
    Joint U.S.-China Biotechnology Research and Extension.--In 
collaboration with the Ministry of Science and Technology 
[MOST] of the People's Republic of China, Utah State University 
[USU] and Xiamen University have agreed to develop joint 
research programs in animal models for the study of infectious 
diseases, natural bioactive compound development, and cellular 
communication networks. Also, MOST, USU, and the Northwest Sci-
Tech University of Agriculture and Forestry have agreed to 
develop joint research programs in the biotechnology of forages 
(especially alfalfa), livestock cloning and genetics, crop 
production, and water resources and irrigation. Funding would 
be used for professional exchanges, joint research programs, 
intensive short courses, graduate training, and internships. 
The Committee recommendation includes $600,000 for this 
project. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Leopold Center Hypoxia.--One of the most effective ways to 
reduce the hypoxia zone in the Gulf of Mexico is to increase 
the acreage of perennial grasses in the Midwest. The Committee 
recommendation includes $150,000 to investigate land use issues 
that may have an impact of reducing the hypoxia zone. (Harkin/
Iowa State University)
    Livestock and Dairy Policy.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $200,000 for economic and policy analyses of programs 
relating to dairy, beef cattle, sheep, and goat raisers. 
(Hutchison/Texas Agricultural Experiment Station)
    Livestock Waste.--Research is needed to investigate air 
quality impairments from livestock and poultry operations in 
order to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation strategies. 
The Committee recommendation includes $250,000 to carry out 
these activities. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa State University)
    Low Bush Wild Blueberry.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $246,000 for the development of integrated crop 
management programs; research into the potential health 
benefits of wild low-bush blueberries; determination of low 
bush blueberry water requirements; and the improvement of 
processed product quality and value-added food processing. 
(Collins, Snowe/Wild Blueberry Commission of Maine)
    Maple Research.--The process of making maple requires 
research to avoid product contamination that either affects the 
flavor or renders it unsafe for human consumption. The 
Committee recommendation includes $130,000 to conduct research 
for equipment and processing techniques to reduce exposure of 
sap and syrup to contaminants. (Leahy/University of Vermont)
    Midwest Advanced Food Manufacturing.--Research is needed to 
improve food processes, safety, quality, and health benefits. 
The Committee recommendation includes $490,000 for a 
competitive grants program to carry out this research. (Nelson, 
Ben; Hagel/University of Nebraska)
    Midwest Poultry.--The recent price impacts on grain due to 
increased renewable fuels production has negatively impacted 
the profit margins for poultry producers. The Committee 
recommends $250,000 for research to improve the sustainability, 
efficiency, and profitability of poultry production. (Harkin, 
Klobuchar, Grassley/Iowa State University)
    Milk Safety.--This project focuses on enhancing the safety 
of the dairy food supply. The Committee recommendation includes 
$788,000 for peer reviewed research into milk and dairy 
products safety. (Specter, Casey/Penn State University)
    Missouri River Sedimentation.--Research is needed to 
measure the effect of erosion along the Missouri River which is 
affecting riparian properties. The Committee recommendation 
includes $450,000 for this effort. (Johnson/South Dakota State 
University)
    Montana Sheep Institute.--Research is needed to develop a 
ranging strategy whereby small ruminants such as sheep can be 
used to control noxious weeds and return a profit to the 
producer. The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 for 
this research. (Baucus, Tester/Montana State University)
    National Beef Cattle Evaluation Consortium [NBCEC].--The 
NBCEC is comprised of researchers from Colorado State 
University, Cornell University, and the University of Georgia 
who focus on the genetics of beef cattle. The Committee 
recommendation includes $880,000 for the NBCEC to continue its 
collection, interpretation, and distribution of genetic data to 
beef cattle breeders to develop and enhance sound and 
economically viable beef production systems. (Allard, Salazar, 
Chambliss/Colorado State University, University of Georgia)
    National Center for Soybean Biotechnology.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $987,000 to better understand the 
genetic control of yield, seed composition, environmental 
stress tolerance, and disease resistance in soybeans. Funds 
will also be used for the development of value-added soybeans 
such as improved oil content/quality, enhanced nutritional 
values, and biofuel uses. (Bond/University of Missouri-
Columbia)
    National Drought Mitigation Center [NDMC].--The NDMC 
conducts research and outreach activities on drought mitigation 
and preparedness technologies; works to improve coordination of 
drought-related activities between levels of government; and 
assists in the development, dissemination, and implementation 
of appropriate mitigation and preparedness technologies in the 
public and private sectors. The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 for the NDMC to continue drought monitoring, 
mitigation and planning. (Nelson, Ben; Hagel/University of 
Nebraska-Lincoln)
    Nematode Resistance Genetic Engineering.--Development of 
more efficient and less environmentally damaging methods for 
controlling pests and diseases is essential for maintaining 
agricultural production levels necessary to support the future 
food and trade needs of the United States. The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 to limit agricultural 
production losses caused by pests and disease through the 
application of biotechnology. (Domenici, Bingaman/New Mexico 
State University)
    Nevada Arid Rangelands.--Nevada has a higher percentage of 
arid rangeland than any other State and in recent years has 
experienced severe wildfire, invasive species, prolonged 
drought, and habitat decline. The Committee recommendation 
includes $490,000 for rangelands restoration and protection 
research. (Reid/University of Nevada Reno)
    New Century Farm.--Corn alone cannot support all the 
renewable energy requirements of the country. A variety of 
annual and perennial cellulosic crops must be grown to 
complement corn and soybean production. The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 for research into integrated 
and sustainable biofuel feedstock production, including: crop 
production; germplasm development; environmental impact; 
harvest, transport, and storage; and processing. (Harkin, 
Grassley/Iowa State University)
    New Crop Opportunities, Alaska.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $443,000 for the development of new 
opportunities and uses for Alaska grown crops and livestock. 
(Stevens/University of Alaska)
    New Crop Opportunities, Kentucky.--Agricultural production 
is an important part of Kentucky's economy, and tobacco has 
played a major role. With the termination of the Federal 
tobacco program, there is a need for research to help Kentucky 
farmers diversify their operations in order to survive. The 
Committee recommendation includes $750,000 to accelerate the 
transition from a tobacco-based farm economy through crop 
diversification. The project provides production and marketing 
information on new crops and value-added versions of current 
crops. (McConnell/University of Kentucky)
    New Satellite and Computer-Based Technology for 
Agriculture.--Significant progress has been made in numerous 
areas of spatial technology and precision agriculture. Variable 
rate technology research has shown the ability to significantly 
reduce the volume of pesticides utilized, apply fertilizer 
within highly variable fields to achieve maximum benefits, and 
identify potential insect, disease, and environmental stress 
problems well in advance of traditional scouting methods. The 
Committee recommendation includes $936,000 for spatial 
technology research. (Cochran/Mississippi State University)
    Northwest Center for Small Fruit Research [NCSFR].--The 
primary goal of the NCSFR is to enhance the profitability and 
sustainability of the small fruits industry in the Pacific 
Northwest. The Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for 
peer reviewed and competitively awarded small fruits research. 
(Craig, Murray, Smith, Wyden, Crapo/Northwest Center for Small 
Fruit Research)
    Oil Resources from Desert Plants.--New Mexico State 
University will conduct basic research to identify and 
characterize plant genes involved in the synthesis of high 
molecular weight oils and waxes. The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 to carry out this research. (Domenici, 
Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Organic Cropping, Oregon.--Research is needed to assist 
producers in Oregon with information necessary for optimal 
production of organic crops. The Committee recommendation 
includes $200,000 for that purpose. (Wyden, Smith/Oregon State 
University)
    Organic Cropping, Washington.--There is a rising demand for 
organic products, but foreign competitors with lower labor 
costs are putting organic producers at risk. The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 for research, development and 
dissemination of organic best management practices in the 
Northwest and other steps to retain the U.S. competitive 
advantage in this marketplace. (Murray, Cantwell/Washington 
State University)
    Organic Waste Utilization.--Heavy land applications of 
dairy manure can cause significant problems, including 
contamination of ground and surface water, spread of enteric 
pathogens and weeds, noxious odors, and increased soil 
salinity. The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 to 
develop new ways of co-composting dairy waste with other 
organic materials that may alleviate many potential problems 
associated with land application of raw dairy waste. (Domenici, 
Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Pasture and Forage Research.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 to enhance private irrigated pasture land and 
provide an alternative feed base to traditional public land 
grazing. (Bennett/Utah State University)
    Peach Tree Short Life Research.--The disease syndrome of 
peach, nectarine, and plum trees in the southeastern United 
States known as Peach Tree Short Life is characterized by 
sudden collapse of otherwise apparently healthy trees just 
before, during, or just after flowering. The Committee 
recommendation includes $278,000 to further the understanding 
and control of peach tree short life in southeastern peach 
orchards. (Graham/Clemson University)
    Peanut Research.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$591,000 for research into soil fertility issues caused by 
intensive tillage practices in the peanut growing regions of 
Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. (Shelby/Auburn University)
    Phytosensors for Crop Security and Precision Agriculture.--
There are immediate needs for new technology and innovations 
for monitoring crop diseases. This project seeks to combine 
technologies in biotechnology and photonics to produce crop 
plants that can be used directly as early warning sentinels for 
the detection of plant diseases. The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,000,000 to support this research. (Alexander/
University of Tennessee)
    Pierce's Disease.--Pierce's Disease, spread by the Glassy-
Winged Sharpshooter, threatens the grape industry. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for a competitive 
grants program to eliminate this disease. (Feinstein, Boxer/
University of California)
    Policy Analyses for a National Secure and Sustainable Food, 
Fiber, Forestry, and Energy Program.--Currently, there is an 
unbalanced approach to alternative fuels, which is leading to 
food shortages, increased food costs, and negative 
environmental impacts. The Committee recommendation includes 
$200,000 to better understand the impacts renewable energy 
feedstocks have on cropping patterns, balance of trade, 
commodity prices, and economic activity. (Hutchison/Texas A&M; 
University)
    Potato Cyst Nematode.--The potato cyst nematode [PCN] was 
recently discovered in Idaho, the first time for the United 
States. The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for 
research related to PCN, including population dynamics, 
management, eradication, efficacy of pesticides, resistance of 
potato varieties, and other critical issues. (Craig, Crapo/
University of Idaho)
    Potato Research.--This research focuses on the development 
of new potato varieties with better disease resistance, 
enhanced nutrition, higher yields, and other improvements. The 
Committee recommendation includes $750,000 for competitively 
awarded potato research. (Craig, Murray, Cantwell, Wyden, 
Collins, Crapo, Smith, Snowe/USDA CSREES]
    Precision Agriculture.--Geospatial technologies developed 
by the military and aerospace industries have the potential to 
improve the profitability and efficiency of production 
agriculture and forestry. The Committee recommendation includes 
$599,000 for the development of geospatial tools to allow more 
site-specific management of agriculture, forests, and other 
natural resources at Auburn University and $675,000 at the 
University of Kentucky to develop and assess precision 
agriculture and natural resource management methods and 
technologies. (McConnell/University of Kentucky, Shelby/Auburn 
University)
    Preharvest Food Safety.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $202,000 for research into the identification and 
mitigation of food-borne pathogens such as E. coli and 
Salmonella, antibiotic resistance and food-borne disease, and 
identification and tracking of food-borne and zoonotic 
diseases. (Brownback, Roberts/Kansas State University)
    Program for Economically Important Infectious Animal 
Diseases.--Infectious animal diseases can have a substantial 
impact on the economy and international trade. The Committee 
recommendation includes $817,000 for research and outreach 
activities into economically-critical infectious animal 
diseases with the goal of preventing the introduction and 
spread of such diseases. (Allard, Salazar/Colorado State 
University)
    Protein Utilization.--Soybeans, as an alternative feedstock 
for renewable fuels, require additional research to expand 
beyond bio-diesel to a broader range of bio-fuel options. The 
Committee recommendation includes $600,000 to carry out this 
research. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa State University)
    Regionalized Implications of Farm Programs.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $100,000 for economic and policy 
analyses of commodity programs. (Hutchison/Texas Agricultural 
Experiment Station)
    Renewable Energy Products.--Research is needed to identify 
perennial grasses that can thrive in cool conditions yet 
produce materials usable in the renewable fuels industry. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to conduct this 
research. (Dorgan, Conrad/North Dakota State University)
    Ruminant Nutrition.--Research is needed to develop value-
added feeds for certain livestock that would have profitability 
and environmental benefits. The Committee recommendation 
includes $625,000 for a competitive grants program to carry out 
this activity. (Johnson, Thune/South Dakota State University)
    Rural Development.--Demographics and geography pose unique 
challenges for rural development activities in States like 
North Dakota. The Committee recommendation includes $115,000 
for research to develop strategies that best respond to that 
unique environment. (Dorgan, Conrad/North Dakota State 
University)
    Russian Wheat Aphid.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$306,000 to incorporate resistance to the new biotype of 
Russian wheat aphid, which re-emerged in southeastern Colorado 
as a virulent biotype; to improve tolerance for heat and 
drought stress; and to reverse recent trends in declining hard 
red winter wheat exports. (Allard, Salazar/Colorado State 
University)
    Seed Technology.--There is a growing void in the public 
research sector for seed trait technologies. The Committee 
recommendation includes $350,000 for research on seed traits 
that can be made available publicly to producers. (Johnson, 
Thune/South Dakota State University)
    Shrimp Aquaculture.--New lines of shrimp promise faster 
growth, greater harvest size, enhanced disease resistance, and 
more rapid crop turnover. These, together with the fruition of 
super-intensive shrimp farming systems, provide the tools 
necessary to accelerate the expansion of the domestic shrimp 
farming industry. The Committee recommendation includes 
$300,000 for shrimp aquaculture research. (Cochran/University 
of Southern Mississippi)
    Soil-Borne Disease Prevention in Irrigated Agriculture.--
Phytophthora diseases are limiting factors to sustainable chile 
production in the irrigated Southwest. The Committee 
recommendation includes $250,000 for genetic improvement of 
cultivars and research into the molecular basis of disease 
resistance. (Domenici, Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Southeast Bioenergy Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 for the development of 
technology to produce alternative fuels from regionally 
available biomass; feedstock sustainability; harvesting and 
transport; and conversion technologies and efficiency. 
(Sessions/Auburn University)
    Soybean Research.--Diseases and threats such as soybean 
rust and soybean cyst nematode are serious problems for 
continued soybean production levels. The Committee 
recommendation includes $750,000 for genomic and genetic 
research to protect and improve soybean production. (Durbin, 
Obama/University of Illinois)
    Specialty Crops.--Producers need information to improve 
production and processing systems for specialty crops, 
especially producers who operate as small family-sized 
operations. The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for 
research in this area. (Lincoln, Pryor/University of Arkansas)
    Sustainable Agriculture.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $190,000 to support research focused on farm 
profitability balanced by environmental responsibility. 
(Specter, Casey/Penn State University)
    Sustainable Beef Supply.--Research is needed to develop 
sound supply chain management of beef producers, taking into 
account factors such as consumer preference, consumer 
confidence, quality assurance, and international trade. The 
Committee recommendation includes $200,000 to conduct this 
research. (Baucus, Tester/Montana State University)
    Sweet Sorghum for Energy Production.--Sweet sorghum holds 
great potential as a biofuels feedstock. The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for research to improve 
production of this commodity on marginal lands and to develop 
more efficient methods to convert biomass to ethanol. (Nelson, 
Ben; Hagel/University of Nebraska)
    Tick Borne Disease Prevention.--Tick-borne diseases poses a 
serious health risk to Americans, especially to vulnerable 
populations. The Committee recommendation includes $400,000 to 
develop information, which can be useful to the general public 
and to develop strategies to combat the spread of these 
diseases. (Reed, Whitehouse/University of Rhode Island)
    Tillage, Silviculture, and Waste Management.--To address 
critical environmental concerns in Louisiana, alternatives to 
traditional tillage are needed to improve the quality of 
floodwaters, reduce soil erosion, and to reduce production 
costs. The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 to 
develop best management practices to achieve these goals. 
(Landrieu, Vitter/Louisiana State University)
    Tropical and Subtropical Research.--Much of the Nation's 
agricultural research resources are directed toward activities 
in temperate zones and has little applicability to tropical and 
subtropical regions where climatic differences require entirely 
different strategies. The Committee recommendation includes 
$800,000 for research this activity. (Inouye, Akaka/University 
of Hawaii, University of Guam)
    Uniform Farm Management.--Benchmarking databases are a new 
and innovative management tool that farmers can use to measure 
their financial success. This project has created the Nation's 
largest and most comprehensive public database of actual farm 
financial data. The Committee recommendation includes $295,000 
to continue the development and improvement of benchmarking 
databases. (Coleman, Klobuchar/University of Minnesota)
    University Center for Biomass Based Energy.--Mississippi 
State University and Oklahoma State University are developing a 
unique gasification-fermentation process that utilizes all of 
the plant biomass, including the lignin, to produce liquid 
fuel. The Committee recommendation includes $1,200,000 
bioenergy research. (Cochran, Inhofe/Mississippi State 
University, Oklahoma State University)
    Virtual Plant Database Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $840,000 to improve access, analysis, 
and management of critical botanical information for botanists, 
other scientists and users of plant data and to enhance access 
to the data that can be used for conservation programs, 
ecosystem monitoring, sustainable development projects, and law 
enforcement. (Bond/ University of Missouri-Columbia)
    Viticulture.--The Viticulture Consortium works on a wide 
range of problems affecting grape growers on both the east and 
west coast. The Committee recommendation includes $1,200,000 
for a competitive grants program to carry out this work. 
(Feinstein, Specter, Boxer, Clinton, Schumer/University of 
California, Cornell University)
    Water Conservation.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$100,000 for water conservation research in the Ogallala region 
of Kansas. Research will specifically focus on improvements to 
irrigation management; transition to dryland cropping systems 
based on alternative crops and/or new uses for crops; and 
improvements to rainfall harvesting and water recycling at 
confined livestock feeding operations. (Brownback, Roberts/
Kansas State University)
    Water Use Efficiency and Water Quality Enhancement Through 
Advanced Technologies.--Integration of sensors and wireless 
technologies into variable rate irrigation systems will allow 
for automation and greatly increased efficiency. New 
technologies will allow variable rate irrigation systems to 
save billions of gallons of irrigation water each year, while 
increasing agricultural productivity and improving water 
quality. The Committee recommendation includes $494,000 for 
research into the development of the next generation of 
precision irrigation application technologies for large scale 
irrigation users. (Chambliss, Isakson/University of Georgia)
    Wetland Plants.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$200,000 for the development of plant species to stabilize and 
maintain Louisiana coastal wetlands. (Landrieu, Vitter/
Louisiana State University)
    Wheat Genetic Research.--The free availability of 
germplasm, genetic and genomic resources, and knowledge for 
sustainable and profitable wheat crop production is crucial for 
producers of one of the staple crops of the world. The 
Committee recommendation includes $344,000 to collect, 
conserve, and distribute wheat genetic and genomic resources; 
develop improved germplasm; develop genetic stocks; and to 
develop genomic resources. (Brownback, Roberts/Kansas State 
University)
    Wildlife/Livestock Disease Research Partnership.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for research on 
diseases that affect both livestock and wildlife in Wyoming of 
economic concern. These diseases include brucellosis, chronic 
wasting disease and pasteurellosis. (Enzi, Thomas/University of 
Wyoming)
    Wine Grape Foundation Block.--For national and 
international markets it is critical that vineyards are virus 
free. The Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for 
research to reduce the likelihood of virus transmission within 
the industry. (Murray, Cantwell/Washington State University)
    Wood Utilization.--This program includes research regarding 
harvesting, wood properties, manufacturing and processing, 
products and testing, and economics and marketing. The 
Committee recommends $6,500,000 to address these needs on a 
national scale. (Byrd, Cochran, Craig, Landrieu, Stevens, 
Klobuchar, Levin, Stabenow, Wyden, Alexander, Coleman, Collins, 
Crapo, Smith, Snowe, Vitter/West Virginia University, 
Mississippi State Univesity, University of Idaho, Louisiana 
State University, University of Alasaka, University of 
Minnesota, Michigan State University, University of Tennessee, 
University of Maine, Oregon State University)
    Wool Research.--Research with wool and other animal fibers 
is needed to increase profitability of domestic sheep, goat, 
and camelid industries while providing manufacturers, 
consumers, and the military with high quality animal fibers. 
The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for wool 
research. (Hutchison/Texas Agricultural Experiment Station)
    The following identifies and describes the Committee 
recommendations for Federal Administration:
    Agriculture Development in the American Pacific.--The 
location of research universities in the American Pacific 
provides an opportunity to study the movement of infectious 
disease, invasive pests, and other items related to the 
shipment of materials from the Asia toward the U.S. mainland. 
The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to conduct this 
research. (Inouye/University of Hawaii)
    Agriculture-based Industrial Lubricants.--The bio-based 
lubricants industry is an area with the potential to add 
enormous growth to depressed rural economies. The Committee 
recommendation includes $480,000 for further research needed 
for the development of bio-based products and marketing 
opportunities. (Harkin, Grassley/University of Northern Iowa)
    Agriculture Waste Utilization.--Conversion of livestock 
wastes into usable fertilizers and other measures to better 
utilize wastes would reduce their threat to the environment. 
The Committee recommendation includes $650,000 to conduct 
research on technologies to reduce or eliminate harmful 
nutrients and pathogens. (Byrd/West Virginia State University)
    Agricultural Literacy.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 to enhance agricultural understanding among 
educators, K-12 students, and consumers utilizing teacher 
created learning units that infuse accurate agricultural 
concepts into the curriculum and enhance technology skills. 
(Bond/ Missouri Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture)
    Applied Agriculture and Environment Research.--Food safety 
concerns can cause economic disruption and unclear signals in 
the marketplace. The Committee recommendation includes $250,000 
to identify and develop new technologies and best management 
practices that will result in higher consumer confidence in 
food safety. (Feinstein/California State University)
    Aquaculture Research.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $220,000 for urban aquaculture, aquaponics, and fish 
nutrition/physiology research. (Specter/Cheyney University of 
Pennsylvania)
    Aquatic Veterinary Pathology.--Resources are needed in the 
State of Rhode Island to keep up with the growing demand for 
disease screening and other tests so that the State's aquatic 
production can move freely in interstate commerce. The 
Committee recommendation includes $800,000 to provide the State 
of Rhode Island the capability of providing veterinary 
expertise for aquatic species. ( Reed/Roger Williams 
University)
    Biotechnology.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$687,000 for research on genetic marker identification and 
mapping of sweet potatoes; genetic modification of starch in 
sweet potato storage roots; genetic transformation and 
development of sweet potato cultivars with enhanced disease 
resistance; and related plant breeding research to support 
small and disadvantaged farmers. (Cochran/Alcorn State 
University)
    Center for Dairy Excellence.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $100,000 to help dairy producers improve productivity 
and profitability. (Specter, Casey/Penn State University)
    Cotton Research.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$300,000 for the research and development of new technologies 
to increase cotton and textile production. (Hutchison, Cornyn/
Texas Tech, Texas A&M; University)
    Ethnobotanical Studies.--The gathering of wild herbs and 
plants in the Appalachian region has long been a source of 
income throughout the region. However, many plants look similar 
and gatherers and consumers lack a reliable source of 
information to differentiate potentially useful herbs from 
poisonous plants. The Committee recommendation includes 
$500,000 for research in this area. (Mikulski, Cardin/Frostburg 
State University)
    Feed Efficiency.--There is a need for research on feed 
efficiency in bulls to improve genetics in the cattle industry 
and lower the cost of production. The Committee recommendation 
includes $150,000 for research to enhance the efficient 
production of lean meat from beef cattle. (Byrd/West Virginia 
Department of Agriculture)
    MATRIC.--Research is necessary to improve the 
competitiveness and marketability of Midwest agricultural 
products. The Committee recommendation includes $250,000 to 
carry out these activities through the Midwest Agribusiness 
Trade and Information Center [MATRIC]. (Harkin/Iowa State 
University)
    Medicinal and Bioactive Crops.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $400,000 for bioactive/pharmaceutical 
crop research and the identification of novel anti-cancer and 
antiviral agents. (Hutchison/Stephen F. Austin University)
    Mississippi Valley State University.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,433,000 to promote research and 
education at the university. (Cochran/Mississippi Valley State 
University)
    PM-10 Air Quality.--Air quality impairments related to 
agriculture can result in health risks for individuals and 
economic hardships for producers. Soils in the Columbia Plateau 
have considerable quantities of very small particles that may 
become suspended in air, making the air quality issues more 
severe. The Committee recommendation includes $150,000 to help 
develop farming systems to reduce the threat of these 
particles. (Murray, Cantwell/Washington State University)
    Polymer Research.--The Kansas Polymer Research Center 
conducts research on bio-based polymeric material which have 
the potential to replace 3,300,000 barrels of oil per year in 
the U.S. market alone. The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,500,000 for polymer research. (Brownback/Pittsburg State 
University)
    Rural Systems.--The primary purpose of this project is the 
early detection of significant human and animal health events, 
especially those arising in rural America, through basic and 
applied research. The Committee recommendation includes 
$308,000 to carry out this project. (Cochran/Jackson State 
University)
    Shellfish Research, Rhode Island.--Research is needed to 
evaluate the environmental impacts of shellfish planting and 
harvesting, develop rapid bacteria tests, and evaluate mercury 
and cadmium levels in shellfish tissues. The Committee 
recommendation includes $350,000 to carry out this work. (Reed/
East Coast Shellfish Research Institute)
    Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia [VHS].--VHS is a new strain of 
virus responsible for massive fish kills in the Great Lakes and 
threatens the region's aquaculture sector. The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 for research on this deadly 
disease. (Brown, Voinovich/University of Toledo)
    Water Pollutants.--An extensive database of DNA profiles is 
needed to identify sources of bacteria in waters. The Committee 
recommendation includes $550,000 for idenfication of particular 
sources of fecal pollution that can then be eliminated or 
reduced as a pollution source. (Byrd/Marshall University)
    Water Quality.--Climate change and other factors are 
putting more pressure on water resources and the need to 
develop sound and wide-ranging watershed planning strategies. 
The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to carry out 
these activities. (Dorgan, Conrad/Energy and Environmental 
Research Center; Grand Forks, North Dakota)

              NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $12,000,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      11,880,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,880,000

    The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized 
by Public Law 103-382 provides an endowment for the 1994 land-
grant institutions (33 tribally controlled colleges). This 
program will enhance educational opportunity for Native 
Americans by building educational capacity at these 
institutions in the areas of student recruitment and retention, 
curricula development, faculty preparation, instruction 
delivery systems, and scientific instrumentation for teaching. 
Income funds are also available for facility renovation, 
repair, construction, and maintenance. On the termination of 
each fiscal year, the Secretary shall withdraw the income from 
the endowment fund for the fiscal year, and after making 
adjustments for the cost of administering the endowment fund, 
distribute the adjusted income as follows: 60 percent of the 
adjusted income from these funds shall be distributed among the 
1994 land-grant institutions on a pro rata basis, the 
proportionate share being based on the Indian student count; 
and 40 percent of the adjusted income shall be distributed in 
equal shares to the 1994 land-grant institutions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,880,000 
for the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund.

                          EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $450,346,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     431,125,000
Committee recommendation................................     458,537,000

    Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
Lever Act of May 8, 1914. The Department of Agriculture is 
authorized to provide, through the land-grant colleges, 
cooperative extension work that consists of the development of 
practical applications of research knowledge and the giving of 
instruction and practical demonstrations of existing or 
improved practices or technologies in agriculture, uses of 
solar energy with respect to agriculture, home economics, 
related subjects, and to encourage the application of such 
information by demonstrations, publications, through 4-H clubs, 
and other means to persons not in attendance or resident at the 
colleges.
    To fulfill the requirements of the Smith-Lever Act, State 
and county extension offices in each State, the District of 
Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa, the Northern Marianas, and Micronesia conduct 
educational programs to improve American agriculture and 
strengthen the Nation's families and communities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $458,537,000 
for extension activities of the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for extension activities:

 COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE [CSREES]--
                          EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever sections 3(b) and 3(c).....................          285,762
Smith-Lever section 3(d):
    Farm safety........................................            4,517
    Food and nutrition education (EFNEP)...............           63,538
    Indian reservation agents..........................            3,000
    New technologies for extension.....................            1,485
    Pest management....................................            9,860
    Sustainable agriculture............................            5,000
    Youth at risk......................................            7,651
    Youth farm safety education and certification......              440
1890 colleges, Tuskegee University, and West Virginia             35,205
 State University Colleges.............................
1890 facilities grants.................................           16,777
Extension services at the 1994 institutions............            3,321
Renewable Resources Extension Act (RREA)...............            4,019
Rural health and safety education......................            1,946
Federal administration:................................           15,916
                                                        ----------------
      Total, CSREES Extension Activities...............          458,537
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ag in the Classroom.--The Committee recommends $700,000 for 
Ag in the Classroom.
    Childhood Farm Safety.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $100,000 for outreach activities to reduce the 
incidence of childhood injury. (Harkin/Farm Safety Just 4 Kids; 
Ames, Iowa)
    Conservation Technology Transfer.--Resources are needed to 
conduct demonstrations on working farms to encourage more sound 
conservation practices and reduce environmental harm. The 
Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for this purpose. 
(Kohl/University of Wisconsin--Extension)
    Dairy Education.--The national demand for milk and dairy 
products continues to rise. The Committee recommendation 
includes $225,000 for education, applied research, and 
demonstration to help new and veteran dairy producers. (Harkin, 
Grassley/Iowa State University, Northeast Iowa Community 
College)
    Disseminating Priority Programs Through New Technologies.--
The Committee recommendation includes $300,000 to expand access 
to information technologies and the training needed for 
citizens in small rural communities. (Cochran, Inhofe/
Mississippi State University, Oklahoma State University)
    Efficient Irrigation for Water Conservation.--The surface 
flows of the Rio Grande are inadequate to meet growing demands 
of agriculture, development growth, drought cycles, and compact 
agreements. Agriculture is a major industry in most areas of 
the Rio Grande basin, particularly the irrigated valleys. 
Voluntary measures, based on scientific knowledge will help 
secure the agricultural economy and heritage of the basin. The 
Committee recommendation includes $475,000 for extension 
activities that improve irrigation efficiency and water 
conservation throughout the Rio Grande basin. (Domenici, 
Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Extension Specialist.-- Agricultural weather data is needed 
by producers, researchers, and policy makers to make decisions. 
Producers utilize the data for critical management decisions 
about tillage, planting, crop protection applications, 
irrigation, fertilization, and harvesting. The Committee 
recommendation includes $132,000 to provide basic weather data, 
products, and expertise to the Mississippi Delta. (Cochran/
Mississippi State University)
    Farm Safety.--Of the funds recommended for farm safety, the 
Committee recommends a funding level of $4,517,000 for the 
AgrAbility project.
    Health Education Through Extension Leadership.--This 
project links the access of the cooperative extension service 
to the expertise of the health professions and effectively 
delivers programs. The Committee recommendation includes 
$843,000 to support extension activities that improve health 
outcomes and reduce the burden of chronic disease. (McConnell/
University of Kentucky)
    Iowa Vitality Center.--There is a growing trend of wealth 
transfers from rural into urban areas, with serious 
consequences for the economies of rural communities. The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 to develop 
strategies to help sustain critical community assets. (Harkin, 
Grassley/Community Vitality Center; Ames, Iowa)
    National Center for Farm Safety.--Farm-related accidents 
are responsible each year for an alarming number of deaths and 
serious injuries. The Committee recommendation includes 
$225,000 to carry out training and educational activities to 
improve safety for members of the farming profession. (Harkin, 
Grassley/Northeast Iowa Community College)
    Nutrition Enhancement.--Wisconsin has among the lowest 
school breakfast participation rates in the Nation. The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to assist in 
supporting childhood nutrition. (Kohl/University of Wisconsin--
Extension, Wisconsin Department of Public Institutions)
    Ohio-Israel Agricultural Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $665,000 to improve agricultural ties 
between Ohio and Israel. To date, this project has resulted in 
exports of Ohio-bred beef calves to Israel, export of Ohio beef 
genetics, sharing of agricultural bio-security expertise, 
soybean purchases, drip irrigation improvement, greenhouse 
development, and scientific exchanges in a variety of 
agriculture and aquaculture disciplines. (Voinovich/Negev 
Foundation; Cleveland, Ohio)
    Pesticide Reduction on Vegetables.--More information is 
needed for producers of vegetable crops to understand the 
optimum rate of pesticide use in order to prevent public health 
issues or environmental problems. The Committee recommendation 
includes $400,000 for this purpose. (Kohl/University of 
Wisconsin--Extension)
    Potato Integrated Pest Management--Late Blight.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $400,000 to track potential 
pest outbreaks, including potato blight, and provide potato 
growers and industry professionals with current information on 
specific and timely treatments, which can be used to minimize 
pesticide applications and maximize potato yield and quality. 
(Collins, Snowe/University of Maine)
    Range Improvement.--Concerns about the condition and health 
of range resources have been heightened in recent years. Local 
governments, management agencies, and policy makers require 
accurate estimates of range conditions in a timely manner. The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 to continuously 
update, compile pertinent data and information, and identify 
and perform the needed research to provide comprehensive and 
cumulative impact assessments of Federal land management 
actions and regulations upon the rural economic communities of 
New Mexico. (Domenici, Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Rural E-Commerce.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$331,000 to help small, micro, and entrepreneurial businesses 
learn and adopt the effective use of e-commerce strategies. 
(Cochran/Mississippi State University)
    Rural Health and Safety Education.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,946,000 for rural health and safety 
education. The Committee directs the Secretary to carry out 
this program in a manner similar to fiscal year 2006.
    Rural Technologies.--Rural and cultural barriers have in 
some circumstances, limited opportunities for certain people to 
enter careers in science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics. The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for 
activities to make those opportunities more available. (Inouye/
Maui Economic Development Board)
    Urban Horticulture.--The development of urban horticulture 
can provide fresh produce for people in non-rural areas through 
the use of urban gardens. The Committee recommendation includes 
$465,000 to carry out these activities. (Kohl/University of 
Wisconsin--Extension, Growing Power; Milwaukee, Wisconsin)
    Urban Horticulture and Marketing.--The development of an 
urban horticulture and marketing program, with an emphasis on 
raising organic crops and the wholesale/retail sale of crops, 
can provide job training and jobs. The Committee recommendation 
includes $100,000 to carry out this program. (Durbin/Windy City 
Harvest; Chicago, Illinois)

                         INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $55,234,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      20,120,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,948,000

    Section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
Education Reform Act of 1998 authorizes an integrated research, 
education, and extension competitive grants program.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,948,000 
for integrated activities of the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for integrated activities:

 COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE [CSREES]--
                          INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical issues.........................................             737
Homeland security.......................................           9,900
International science and education grants..............             990
Regional rural development centers......................           1,321
                                                         ---------------
      Total.............................................          12,948
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              OUTREACH FOR SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FARMERS

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $5,940,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       6,930,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,940,000

    This program is authorized under section 2501 of title XXV 
of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 
(7 U.S.C. 2279). Grants are made to eligible community-based 
organizations with demonstrated experience in providing 
education on other agriculturally-related services to socially 
disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in their area of influence. 
Also eligible are the 1890 land-grant colleges, Tuskegee 
University, West Virginia State University, Indian tribal 
community colleges, and Hispanic-serving postsecondary 
education facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,940,000 for 
Outreach for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $721,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         792,000
Committee recommendation................................         759,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out laws enacted by the Congress with respect to the 
Department's marketing, grading, and standardization activities 
related to grain; competitive marketing practices of livestock, 
marketing orders, and various programs; veterinary services; 
and plant protection and quarantine. The Office has oversight 
and management responsibilities for the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service; Agricultural Marketing Service; and Grain 
Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $759,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
Programs.

               Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $846,230,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     945,550,000
Committee recommendation................................     911,742,000

    The Secretary of Agriculture established the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] on April 2, 1972, under 
the authority of reorganization plan No. 2 of 1953, and other 
authorities. The major objectives of APHIS are to protect the 
animal and plant resources of the Nation from diseases and 
pests. These objectives are carried out under the major areas 
of activity, as follows:
    Pest and Disease Exclusion.--The agency conducts inspection 
and quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests. The 
Agency also participates in inspection, survey, and control 
activities in foreign countries to reinforce its domestic 
activities.
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection [AQI].--The agency 
collects user fees to cover the cost of inspection and 
quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests.
    Plant and Animal Health Monitoring.--The agency conducts 
programs to assess animal and plant health and to detect 
endemic and exotic diseases and pests.
    Pest and Disease Management Programs.--The agency carries 
out programs to control and eradicate pest infestations and 
animal diseases that threaten the United States; reduce 
agricultural losses caused by predatory animals, birds, and 
rodents; provide technical assistance to other cooperators such 
as States, counties, farmer or rancher groups, and foundations; 
and ensure compliance with interstate movement and other 
disease control regulations within the jurisdiction of the 
agency.
    Animal Care.--The agency conducts regulatory activities 
that ensure the humane care and treatment of animals and horses 
as the Animal Welfare and Horse Protection Acts require. These 
activities include inspection of certain establishments that 
handle animals intended for research, exhibition, and as pets, 
and monitoring certain horse shows.
    Scientific and Technical Services.--The agency performs 
other regulatory activities, including the development of 
standards for the licensing and testing of veterinary 
biologicals to ensure their safety and effectiveness; 
diagnostic activities to support the control and eradication 
programs in other functional components; applied research to 
reduce economic damage from vertebrate animals; development of 
new pest and animal damage control methods and tools; and 
regulatory oversight of genetically engineered products.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $911,742,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service.
    The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
recommendations for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service:

                                   ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Fiscal year
                                                                 Fiscal year      2008 budget       Committee
                                                                 2007 enacted       request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PEST AND DISEASE EXCLUSION:
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (AQI).................           27,531           26,548           28,557
    Cattle Fever Ticks.......................................            7,653            9,674            8,416
    Foreign Animal Disease/Foot and Mouth Disease............            8,695           13,306            9,637
    Fruit Fly Exclusion & Detection..........................           59,723           74,734           62,616
    Import/Export............................................           11,697           11,771           11,867
    Screwworm................................................           27,753           30,721           27,839
    Trade Issues Resolution & Management.....................           12,505           14,841           13,480
    Tropical Bont Tick.......................................              424              431              429
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pest and Disease Exclusion...................          155,981          182,026          162,841
                                                              ==================================================
PLANT AND ANIMAL HEALTH MONITORING:
    Animal Health Monitoring & Surveillance..................          143,211          154,822          136,808
    Animal & Plant Health Reg. Enforcement...................           10,396           12,728           12,728
    Biosurveillance..........................................            1,991            2,541            2,001
    Emergency Management Systems.............................           13,623           21,611           15,834
    Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza........................           47,200           57,044           47,514
    Pest Detection...........................................           26,471           41,212           31,437
    Select Agents............................................            3,501            6,666            4,544
    Wildlife Disease Monitoring & Surveillance...............  ...............            1,950  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Plant and Animal Health Monitoring...........          246,393          298,574          250,866
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
PEST AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT:
    Aquaculture..............................................            1,255            1,274            3,069
    Biological Control.......................................            9,581            9,935            9,833
    Boll Weevil..............................................           38,619  ...............  ...............
    Brucellosis..............................................            8,909            9,092            9,874
    Chronic Wasting Disease..................................           16,645           12,320           18,268
    Contingency Funds........................................            4,113            4,163            4,149
    Cotton Pests.............................................  ...............           16,098           43,807
    Emerging Plant Pests.....................................           98,541          124,003          126,514
    Golden Nematode..........................................              807              830              824
    Grasshopper..............................................            5,531            4,505            7,474
    Gypsy Moth...............................................            4,803            4,920            4,887
    Imported Fire Ant........................................            1,898            2,150            1,908
    Johne's Disease..........................................           12,080            3,266           13,140
    Low Pathogen Avian Influenza.............................           13,721           16,800           13,807
    Noxious Weeds............................................            1,441            1,146            1,908
    Pink Bollworm............................................            5,188  ...............  ...............
    Plum Pox.................................................            2,199            3,214            2,710
    Pseudorabies.............................................            4,374            2,471            4,443
    Scrapie..................................................           18,487           17,320           18,676
    Tuberculosis.............................................           14,897           16,844           16,050
    Wildlife Services Operations.............................           74,852           76,950           76,762
    Witchweed................................................            1,515            1,526            1,523
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pest and Disease Management..................          339,456          328,827          379,626
                                                              ==================================================
ANIMAL CARE:
    Animal Welfare...........................................           17,473           21,126           21,126
    Horse Protection.........................................              497              496              501
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Animal Care..................................           17,970           21,622           21,627
                                                              ==================================================
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES:
    Biosecurity..............................................            1,952            3,452            1,952
    Biotechnology Regulatory Services........................           10,533           14,141           13,122
    Environmental Compliance.................................            2,645            2,712            2,693
    Plant Methods Development Labs...........................            8,550           11,932            9,828
    Veterinary Biologics.....................................           15,658           19,867           18,156
    Veterinary Diagnostics...................................           22,496           32,944           23,556
    Wildlife Services Methods Development....................           15,900           17,932           18,279
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Scientific and Technical Services............           77,734          102,980           87,586
                                                              ==================================================
MANAGEMENT:
    APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure..............            4,506            5,029            5,006
    Physical/Operational Security............................            4,190            6,492            4,190
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Management...................................            8,696           11,521            9,196
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, APHIS...........................................          846,230          945,550          911,742
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee is unable to recommend the full increases 
requested in the President's budget for the Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service. However, the Committee does 
recommend increases for a number of specific animal and plant 
health programs. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
continue use of contingency funding from Commodity Credit 
Corporation monies, as in past fiscal years, to cover needs as 
identified in the President's budget and any additional 
emergencies as the Secretary determines necessary.

                       PEST AND DISEASE EXCLUSION

Agricultural Quarantine Inspection [AQI]

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes an appropriation of $28,557,000 for the AQI 
appropriated account to conduct preclearance quarantine 
inspections of persons, baggage, cargo, and other articles 
destined for movement from the State of Hawaii to the 
continental United States, Guam, Puerto Rico, or the United 
States Virgin Islands.
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection Fees.--The Committee is 
concerned by the recent interim final rule to remove the 
exemptions from user fees from commercial conveyances entering 
the United States from Canada. As of June 1, 2007, commercial 
trucks transiting non-stop through Canada from the State of 
Alaska to the continental United States, and vice versa, are 
subject to AQI fees. APHIS does not charge AQI fees for 
commercial trucks that transport goods between the contiguous 
States, putting commercial shippers transiting through Canada 
at a disadvantage. The Committee recommends APHIS address this 
issue and provide regulatory relief for commercial trucks 
transiting non-stop through Canada. The Committee will continue 
to monitor APHIS' progress toward implementing this change and 
requests regular updates on the agency's progress.
    Interline Activities.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $2,772,000 for interline activities in Hawaii. The 
State of Hawaii is currently under a Federal quarantine for 
fruit flies. This quarantine requires the predeparture 
inspection of all airline passengers and luggage departing 
Hawaii for the U.S. mainland. Although APHIS currently provides 
funding to pay for inspections at the Honolulu airport, this 
funding will pay for federally required inspections for flights 
originating at neighbor island airports and connecting in 
Honolulu. (Inouye, Akaka/APHIS Hawaii)
    National Germplasm and Biotechnology Laboratory.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,498,000 for ongoing 
activities at the National Germplasm and Biotechnology 
Laboratory.
    Phytosanitary Standards.--The Committee urges the 
Department to establish protocols that allow shipment of 
untreated fruits and vegetables grown in Hawaii to cold-weather 
States during winter months while maintaining reasonable 
assurances that potential transshipment of such produce will 
not jeopardize the phytosanitary standards of warm weather 
States. The Committee also urges the Department to follow the 
same scientific principles used to justify rules for foreign 
imports in promulgating rules for exports from Hawaii to the 
U.S. mainland.
    Washington Clean Plant Program.--Viruses and virus-like 
agents cause a variety of diseases in perennial fruit crops, 
including tree fruits, nut trees and grape vines. Once the 
plant material is in the field, viral diseases cannot be 
chemically controlled or eliminated from the plants. In order 
to prevent these diseases from ever entering the field, plant 
stocks must be quarantined to ensure they are virus free. The 
Committee recommendation includes $300,000 for the Washington 
Clean Plant Program, to allow the existing quarantine facility 
in Prosser, Washington, to retain the unique personnel 
expertise necessary to stay open and continue to accept plant 
material as it transitions into the National Clean Plant 
Network. (Murray/Washington State University)

Fruit Fly Exclusion and Detection

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $62,616,000 for the fruit fly exclusion and detection 
program, of which no less than the fiscal year 2007 level shall 
be used to enhance activities to prevent Medflies from moving 
into the United States as well as activities at U.S. borders.

                   PLANT AND ANIMAL HEALTH MONITORING

Animal Health Monitoring and Surveillance

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $136,808,000 for the animal health monitoring and 
surveillance program.
    Animal Identification.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $19,827,000 to continue implementation of the National 
Animal Identification System [NAIS]. The Committee notes that 
APHIS carried over $25,697,000 of NAIS funds into fiscal year 
2007, increasing the amount of funds available for NAIS. The 
Committee is aware of the strong interest among livestock 
producers, processors, and the public in the NAIS. Although the 
Department has worked on the development of such a system for a 
number of years, the direction of this system remains unclear. 
The Committee notes that the Government Accountability Office 
[GAO] is currently conducting a review of NAIS. The Committee 
looks forward to reviewing GAO's findings.
    Bio-safety.--The Committee recommendation includes $322,000 
to address bio-safety issues relating to antibiotic resistant 
strains of bacterial pathogens in the State of Vermont. (Leahy/
University of Vermont)
    Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy [BSE].--The Committee 
recommendation includes $17,395,000 to continue the ongoing BSE 
surveillance program. The Committee also includes $2,475,000 
for the Comprehensive Surveillance System which will further 
enhance animal surveillance.
    Conservation Science.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $49,000 for the Conservation Science Department at 
Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago, Illinois. The intent of this 
funding is for the science centers at Lincoln Park Zoo to 
collaborate with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums to 
improve and monitor the techniques, processes, and systems to 
prevent disease transfer and ensure sustainability and 
maintenance of health in zoo populations nationwide, as well as 
in endangered species in managed populations around the world. 
(Durbin/Lincoln Park Zoological Society)
    Disease Surveillance.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,818,000 to work with North Dakota State University 
and Dickinson State University to develop, test, and implement 
the use of RFID tags for animal identification, strengthening 
pathogen diagnostic and identification capabilities and 
pinpointing problem areas in the traceback systems and methods 
to resolve them. (Dorgan, Conrad/North Dakota State University 
and Dickinson State University)
    National Animal Health Laboratory Network.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,498,000 for National Animal Health 
Laboratory Network cooperative agreements.
    National Farm Animal Identification and Records.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to allow additional 
producers to participate in the National Farm Animal 
Identification and Records Project, which electronically 
identifies individual animals and tracks their movements from 
birth to slaughter within 48 hours in order to combat animal 
disease outbreaks. (Leahy/Holstein Association)
    New Mexico Rapid Syndrome Validation Program.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $542,000 for the New Mexico 
Rapid Syndrome Validation Program to develop an early detection 
and reporting system for infectious animal diseases. (Domenici, 
Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,980,000 for a cooperative 
agreement with the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade 
and Consumer Protection to continue work carried out by the 
Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium. The Wisconsin 
Livestock Identification Consortium serves as a national model 
and laboratory for premise registration, a critical first step 
for nationwide animal identification efforts. This work is key 
to national efforts to improve the traceability of livestock 
and manage potential animal diseases thereby protecting public 
health and safety. (Kohl/Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, 
Trade, and Consumer Protection)

Animal and Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $12,728,000 for the animal and plant health regulatory 
enforcement program to support Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 
2131 et seq.) compliance inspections.

Emergency Management Systems

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $15,834,000 for emergency management systems. This 
includes an increase of $1,000,000 to increase emergency 
coordination capacity and to expand emergency response planning 
efforts, and an increase of $1,000,000 to build capacity 
dedicated to planning, coordinating, and effectively responding 
to federally-declared disasters and emergencies that threaten 
the safety and well-being of animals.
    National Veterinary Stockpile.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,977,000 for the National Veterinary 
Stockpile.

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza [HPAI]

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $47,514,000 for highly pathogenic avian influenza. In 
addition, the Committee notes that APHIS carried $28,527,000 of 
the fiscal year 2006 supplemental funds for HPAI into fiscal 
year 2007. Further, the Committee expects the Secretary, if 
appropriate, to transfer additional funds from the Low 
Pathogenic Avian Influenza program making a total of 
$61,321,000 available for avian influenza activities for fiscal 
year 2008. The potential for the introduction and spread of 
HPAI into the United States is taken very seriously by the 
Committee and full recognition is given to the important role 
of USDA in meeting the animal surveillance and health 
responsibilities associated with the threat to both agriculture 
and human health. The Committee encourages the Department to 
consider the need to adequately stockpile supplies necessary to 
stop the spread of the disease and to ensure adequate training, 
outreach and communication resources are in place to maximize 
the efficiency of response capabilities.
    Delmarva Peninsula.--The Committee is aware of the large 
poultry industry on the Delmarva Peninsula and the presence of 
live poultry markets in the Mid-Atlantic region. In preparation 
for a possible introduction of highly pathogenic avian 
influenza into the United States, the location and 
concentration of this industry, and its proximity to high human 
population centers and the Atlantic flyway for migratory birds, 
require serious response capabilities. Accordingly, the 
Committee encourages the Secretary to work with appropriate 
Delaware State officials and with the University of Delaware, 
to develop proper surveillance, diagnostic, and response 
systems.

Pest Detection

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $31,437,000 for pest detection. This includes 
increases of $1,200,000 to enhance survey infrastructure, 
$800,000 for additional Cooperative Agricultural Pest Surveys, 
and $800,000 to expand a formal international information 
collection program. The Committee is concerned about continuing 
threats posed by the accidental or intentional introduction of 
pests, disease, or species into this country which could be 
devastating to our agricultural resources.
    California County Pest Detection Augmentation Program.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $831,000 to continue the 
California County Pest Detection Augmentation Program, which is 
a statewide network of insect traps and other detection tools 
to serve as an early warning system against serious 
agricultural pests in the State of California. (Feinstein, 
Boxer/California Department of Food and Agriculture)
    Import Inspection.--California's agricultural industry is 
highly susceptible to exotic pests due to its international 
border and as home to some of the Nation's busiest seaports. 
The California County Pest Detection Augmentation Program is 
operated at points of entry in California to prevent the 
establishment of serious agricultural and environmental 
invasive pests and diseases. This funding will address the 
growing of interstate shipments from international ports of 
entry in other States, where inspectors are not monitoring for 
the pests that could devastate California agriculture. The 
Committee recommendation includes $990,000 for this program. 
(Feinstein/California Department of Food and Agriculture)

                      PEST AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT

Aquaculture

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $3,069,000 for the aquaculture program.
    Cormorant and Pelican Control.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $573,000 to continue telemetry and 
population dynamics studies and operations to develop 
environmentally and economically sustainable methods to help 
catfish farmers manage cormorant and pelican populations.
    Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia [VHS].--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,800,000 for the control of VHS in 
the Great Lakes States, and to assist with compliance of the 
Federal order issued in October 2006, which stopped the 
interstate movement of more than three dozen species of live 
fish that are susceptible to VHS unless they are certified to 
be free of VHS.

Boll Weevil

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes funding for the boll weevil program under the newly 
established cotton pests program. The amount available for the 
boll weevil program in the cotton pests program is $38,619,000.

Brucellosis Eradication

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $9,874,000 for brucellosis eradication.
    Greater Yellowstone Interagency Brucellosis Committee.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $929,000 for the Greater 
Yellowstone Interagency Brucellosis Committee to continue 
brucellosis prevention, surveillance, control, and eradication. 
The Committee encourages the coordination of Federal, State, 
and private actions to eliminate brucellosis from wildlife in 
the Greater Yellowstone area. This amount shall be equally 
divided between the States of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. 
(Craig, Baucus, Enzi, Thomas/Idaho State Department of 
Agriculture, Montana Department of Livestock, Wyoming Livestock 
Board)

Chronic Wasting Disease [CWD]

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $18,268,000 for the chronic wasting disease 
certification and control program to include additional 
surveillance and disease control activities with free-ranging 
cervids, and to increase State testing capacity for the timely 
identification of the presence of this disease. The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,732,000 for the State of Wisconsin 
(Kohl/Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection), $244,000 for the State of Utah (Bennett/Utah 
Department of Agriculture and Food), and $50,000 for the State 
of Colorado (Allard, Salazar/Colorado Department of 
Agriculture).

Cotton Pests

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $43,807,000 for the cotton pests program, of which 
$38,619,000 is for boll weevil and $5,188,000 is for pink 
bollworm.

Emerging Plant Pests

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $126,514,000 for the emerging plant pests program. The 
Committee expects the Secretary to make funds available from 
the CCC for activities related to plant pests in fiscal year 
2008, as necessary.
    Asian Long Horned Beetle.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $20,007,000 for Asian long horned beetle, including 
$470,000 for Illinois. (Durbin/City of Chicago and Illinois 
Department of Natural Resources)
    Citrus Health Response Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $34,409,000 for the citrus health 
response program.
    Citrus Long Horned Beetle.--The Committee notes that APHIS 
signed a cooperative agreement with the Washington State 
Department of Agriculture to survey and eradicate the citrus 
long horned beetle. The Committee recognizes that the citrus 
long horned beetle presents a severe threat to hardwood trees 
and tree fruit crops, and urges APHIS to direct the resources 
necessary to eradicate the citrus long horned beetle.
    Emerald Ash Borer.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$25,862,000 for emerald ash borer, including $2,000,000 for 
Illinois. (Durbin/Illinois Department of Natural Resources). 
This invasive species has been found in Illinois, Indiana, 
Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The Committee 
recognizes that the emerald ash borer, which poses a 
significant threat to the Nation's population of ash trees, has 
the potential to cause significant economic and ecological 
damage, and that further efforts are required to manage the 
spread of emerald ash borer and develop techniques and 
technologies to eradicate this species.
    Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $23,175,000 for glassy-winged sharpshooter.
    Karnal Bunt.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,507,000 for karnal bunt.
    Light Brown Apple Moth.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,000,000 for Light Brown Apple Moth.
    Potato Cyst Nematode.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $12,800,000 for potato cyst nematode.
    Sudden Oak Death (Phytophthora ramora).--The Committee 
recommendation includes $4,111,000 for sudden oak death. The 
Committee encourages APHIS to use this funding to promote the 
research, development and testing of new systems of nursery 
pest and disease management and programs of inspection and 
regulation to prevent the introduction of and spread of plant 
pests and diseases; for sampling of high risk plant material in 
commercial nurseries outside those states regulated under the 
Emergency Order for P. ramorum; and, for diagnostic tools to 
minimize the problem of false-positive results. The Committee 
requests a report, within 120 days of the enactment of this 
act, that examines the effectiveness of current regulatory and 
inspection efforts; delivers an assessment of the potential 
risk from infected plant material shipped prior to the 
Emergency Order; and the risk posed by the importation into the 
United States of P. ramorum host and associated host plants and 
the interstate movement of such plant material.

Grasshopper

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $7,474,000 for the grasshopper program.
    Mormon Crickets.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,500,000 for grasshopper and Mormon cricket activities in the 
State of Utah (Bennett/APHIS Utah) to prepare necessary 
environmental documents and continue control measures, and 
$1,500,000 for grasshopper and Mormon cricket activities in the 
State of Nevada (Reid/APHIS Nevada), including survey, control, 
and eradication of crickets.

Johne's Disease

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $13,140,000 for Johne's disease to expand APHIS' 
efforts to coordinate State certification programs for herd-
testing, and to provide assistance to States to develop herd 
management plans that comply with APHIS' national standards for 
certification. The Committee expects APHIS to work with the 
Agricultural Research Service to coordinate activities to 
research and develop an effective diagnostic test for Johne's 
disease with appropriate field validation and methods 
development. The Committee recommendation includes $1,244,000 
for Johne's activities in the State of Wisconsin. (Kohl/
Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection)

Low Pathogen Avian Influenza [LPAI]

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $13,807,000 for Low Pathogen Avian Influenza. The 
Committee notes an additional $12,000,000 is available to 
indemnify poultry producers that experienced losses due to 
avian influenza. The Committee also notes that this funding has 
not been obligated and will be available for fiscal year 2008.

Noxious Weeds

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,908,000 for the noxious weeds program.
    Cogongrass Control.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$297,000 for an invasive species program to prevent the spread 
of cogongrass in Mississippi, and requests that the agency take 
necessary steps to address this invasive weed as a regional 
infestation problem. (Cochran/Mississippi Department of 
Agriculture)
    Nevada Weed Management.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $49,000 for a weed management program with the State 
of Nevada to control invasive weeds on rangelands that threaten 
the viability of Nevada's agricultural economy. (Reid/Nevada 
Department of Agriculture)
    Nez Perce Bio-Control Center.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 for the Nez Perce Bio-Control Center to 
increase the availability and distribution of biological 
control organisms used in an integrated weed management system. 
(Craig, Crapo/Nez Perce Tribe)

Pink bollworm

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes funding for the pink bollworm program under the newly 
established cotton pests program. The amount available for the 
pink bollworm program in the cotton pests program is 
$5,188,000.

Tuberculosis

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $16,050,000 for the tuberculosis program, including an 
increase of $1,000,000 to enhance surveillance and testing.
    Bovine Tuberculosis in New Mexico.--The Committee is aware 
of an outbreak of bovine tuberculosis in New Mexico. In 
response, a memorandum of understanding has been executed 
between USDA and the State. The Committee urges the Secretary 
to use authorities and resources of the Department to provide 
testing, monitoring, surveillance, and other services, as 
needed, toward the control and eradication of this disease.
    Tuberculosis Transmission.--The Committee is concerned 
about the potential threats that wildlife poses for 
transmitting tuberculosis to domestic livestock and directs the 
agency to continue technical and operational assistance to 
Michigan producers to prevent or reduce the transmission of 
tuberculosis between wildlife and cattle. The Committee also 
encourages the agency to continue its research for developing 
methods to minimize the interaction between wildlife and 
livestock.

Wildlife Services Operations

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $76,762,000 for wildlife services operations. The 
Committee does not concur with the budget request to reduce 
funding in the wildlife services operations account to allow 
cooperators to assume a larger share of the costs associated 
with preventing and reducing wildlife damage. The Committee 
provides funding to continue cooperating with States to conduct 
wildlife management programs such as livestock protection, 
migratory bird damage to crops, invasive species damage, 
property damage, human health and safety, and threatened and 
endangered species protection.
    Beaver Management and Control.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $633,000 for beaver management and 
control in the state of Mississippi (Cochran/APHIS 
Mississippi). The Committee expects the agency to make the 
fiscal year 2008 level of funding available to all counties in 
the State. The Committee commends the agency's assistance in 
cooperative relationships with local and Federal partners to 
reduce beaver damage to cropland and forests. The Committee 
recommendation also includes $297,000 for beaver management and 
control in the State of North Carolina (Dole/APHIS North 
Carolina).
    Blackbird Management.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $378,000 to conduct methods development and continue 
control measures for minimizing blackbird damage in North and 
South Dakota (Dorgan, Johnson, Conrad/APHIS North and South 
Dakota). The Committee recommendation also includes $134,000 
for blackbird management activities in Louisiana (Landrieu, 
Vitter/APHIS Louisiana) and $170,000 for Kansas (Roberts/APHIS 
Kansas).
    Cooperative Livestock Protection Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $300,000 for the Cooperative Livestock 
Protection Program in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to 
provide technical and operational assistance in identifying, 
controlling, and abating damage, animal health problems, and 
economic losses caused by black vultures, Canadian geese, 
European starlings, coyotes, and other wildlife. (Specter/APHIS 
Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture)
    Cormorant Control.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$664,000 for cormorant management and control, which includes 
$198,000 for the State of Michigan (Levin, Stabenow/APHIS 
Michigan), $148,000 for the Lake Champlain basin (Leahy/APHIS 
Vermont and Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department), and $318,000 
for Delta States' operations. (Cochran/APHIS Mississippi)
    Integrated Predation Management Activities.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $400,000 for integrated predation 
management activities in the State of West Virginia. (Byrd/
APHIS West Virginia)
    Oral Rabies Vaccination.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $23,513,000 for rabies control activities. The 
Committee expects a portion of the program increase to be 
available for rabies activities in the Appalachian region and 
to further progress already made along the Appalachian Ridge to 
control this disease.
    Tri-State Predator Control.--Due to the increase in 
federally listed endangered species and the reintroduction of 
wolf populations in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, State operation 
accounts for wildlife services have suffered financially, 
therefore the Committee recommendation includes $1,324,000 for 
the tri-State predator control program in Idaho, Montana, and 
Wyoming to respond to wolf depredation and monitor wolf 
populations. (Craig, Enzi, Thomas/APHIS Idaho, Montana, and 
Wyoming)
    Western States.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$10,700,000 to continue wildlife control activities in Western 
States.
    Wildlife Services, Hawaii.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $400,000 for the operation of the State Wildlife 
Services office in Hawaii to provide on-site coordination of 
prevention and control activities in Hawaii and the American 
Pacific. The Committee also recommends $940,000 for activities 
in Hawaii and Guam to prevent movement of brown tree snakes 
from Guam to Hawaii, which would be a major ecological disaster 
for Hawaii, and for expanding efforts to control coqui frog 
infestations. (Inouye, Akaka/APHIS Hawaii)
    Wildlife Services South Dakota.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $742,000 for wildlife service 
operations with the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and 
Parks to meet the growing demands of controlling predatory, 
nuisance, and diseased animals. (Johnson/South Dakota 
Department of Game, Fish, and Parks)

                              ANIMAL CARE

Animal Welfare

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $21,126,000 for the animal care unit for enforcement 
of the Animal Welfare Act.

                   SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

Biotechnology Regulatory Services

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $13,122,000 for biotechnology regulatory services.
    Genetically Modified Products.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $371,000 for a national institute at 
Iowa State University devoted to risk assessment, mitigation, 
and communication for genetically modified agricultural 
products. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa State University)

Plant Methods Development Laboratories

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $9,828,000 for the Plant Methods Development 
Laboratories Program. This includes an increase of $1,000,000 
for the development of detection and control tools to contain 
and eradicate the emerald ash borer.
    Sericea Lespedeza.--The Committee recognizes both the 
importance of sericea lespedeza as a field crop in the 
Southeastern United States and the environmental challenges 
sericea lespedeza poses to ecosystems in tallgrass prairielands 
in the Great Plains region. The Committee recommends that APHIS 
provide Federal field crop designations for serices lespedeza 
on a regional basis so that conservation programs in tallgrass 
prairie regions where sericea lespedeza is an invasive species 
can partner with USDA to find economically and ecologically 
appropriate controls.

Veterinary Diagnostics

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $23,556,000 for veterinary diagnostics.
    Disease Prevention.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$100,000 to develop diagnostics, treatment and prevention for 
diseases, including West Nile Virus, infecting farm-raised 
reptiles. Research has confirmed that reptiles are a major 
vector for West Nile Virus, and the spread of this disease 
appears to be escalating, posing a significant human health 
risk and a great economic cost to the farming industry. 
(Landrieu, Vitter/Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 
Fisheries)
    National Agriculture Biosecurity Center.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $371,000 for the National Agriculture 
Biosecurity Center in the State of Kansas to help protect 
agricultural infrastructure and economy from endemic and 
emerging biological threats. (Brownback, Roberts/National 
Agriculture Biosecurity Center Kansas State University)

Wildlife Services Methods Development

    Committee Recommendation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $18,279,000 for wildlife services methods development.
    Berryman Institute.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,500,000 to continue the existing program at the Jack 
Berryman Institute for addressing wildlife damage management 
issues, including wildlife disease threats and wildlife 
economics. This amount includes $664,000 to continue the 
cooperative relationship with the Mississippi Agricultural and 
Forestry Experiment Station and $836,000 for the Jack Berryman 
Institute in Utah. (Bennett, Cochran/Jack Berryman Institute 
and the Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment 
Station)
    National Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $343,000 to continue existing 
research efforts in aquaculture at the National Wildlife 
Research Center field station in the State of Mississippi. 
(Cochran/Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment 
Station and Mississippi State University)
    National Wildlife Research Station, Texas.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $415,000 for the National Wildlife 
Research Station located in the State of Texas for activities 
related to emerging infectious diseases associated with 
wildlife populations and human health. (Hutchison/National 
Wildlife Research Station and Texas A&M;)
    Predator Research Station, Utah.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,386,000 for ongoing activities at 
the Utah Predator Research Station, including research on the 
ecology of wildlife depredation, reproductive intervention 
strategies for managing wildlife depredation, and sensory and 
behavioral methods for managing wildlife depredation on 
livestock. (Bennett/APHIS Utah, Utah State University, Colorado 
State University)
    Rodent Control.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$231,000 to continue the cooperative agreement with the Hawaii 
Agriculture Research Center for rodent control in active 
agricultural areas to contain and prevent the damage caused to 
Hawaii's agriculture. (Inouye, Akaka/APHIS Hawaii) The 
Committee recommendation includes $150,000 for rodent control 
on the Aleutian Islands to restore seabird nesting habitats. 
(Stevens/APHIS Alaska)

                          COMMITTEE DIRECTIVES

    In complying with the Committee's directives, the Committee 
expects APHIS not to redirect support for programs and 
activities without prior notification to and approval by the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance 
with the reprogramming procedures specified in the act. Unless 
otherwise directed, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service shall implement appropriations by programs, projects, 
and activities as specified by the Appropriations Committees. 
Unspecified reductions necessary to carry out the provisions of 
this act are to be implemented in accordance with the 
definitions contained in the program, project, and activity 
section of this report.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $4,946,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       8,931,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,946,000

    The APHIS appropriation for ``Buildings and Facilities'' 
funds major nonrecurring construction projects in support of 
specific program activities and recurring construction, 
alterations, preventive maintenance, and repairs of existing 
APHIS facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,946,000 for 
buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service.

                     Agricultural Marketing Service


                           MARKETING SERVICES

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $74,937,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      74,988,000
Committee recommendation................................      80,145,000

    The Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS] was established by 
the Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972. AMS carries out 
programs authorized by more than 50 different statutory 
authorities, the primary ones being the Agricultural Marketing 
Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627); the U.S. Cotton Standards Act 
(7 U.S.C. 51-65); the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act (7 
U.S.C. 471-476); the Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511-
511q); the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (7 U.S.C. 
499a-499s); the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031-
1056); and section 32 (15 U.S.C. 713c).
    Programs administered by this agency include the market 
news services, payments to States for marketing activities, the 
Plant Variety Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.), the 
Federal administration of marketing agreements and orders, 
standardization, grading, classing, and shell egg surveillance 
services, transportation services, wholesale farmers and 
alternative market development, commodity purchases, Perishable 
Agricultural Commodities Act (7 U.S.C. 499a-499b), and market 
protection and promotion activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $80,145,000 
for marketing services of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
    Farmers' Market Promotion Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,000,000 for the Farmers' Market 
Promotion Program, as requested in the budget.
    Horticulture Marketing.--The Committee is aware of an 
innovative urban horticulture planning, development, and 
marketing project in the State of Illinois. The Committee 
encourages the Department to provide appropriate technical and 
financial assistance to the Windy City Harvest initiative.
    Meat Marketing Program.--The Committee is aware of the 
growing number of goat herds in the Western United States, and 
encourages the Department to provide appropriate technical and 
financial assistance to Eastern Oklahoma State College's Meat 
Goat Management program.
    Organics.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,180,000 
for the National Organic Program [NOP]. The Committee is aware 
that an audit performed by the American National Standards 
Institute [ANSI] in 2004 and by the USDA Office of Inspector 
General [OIG] in 2005 made strong recommendations about changes 
needed in the administration of the NOP, and expects the agency 
to provide a written report to the Committee by December 31, 
2007, regarding the progress in implementing these 
recommendations. In addition, the Committee expects a report 
regarding the complaints that the NOP has received about 
violations of the organic standards, and the progress of the 
agency in investigating and responding to those complaints. The 
Committee further expects the NOP to work closely with the 
National Organic Standards Board to implement the Peer Review 
Panel requirements of Organic Foods Production Act and USDA's 
organic regulations. Finally, the Committee is aware of a 
Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] between the Risk Management 
Agency and AMS regarding the collection of organic price data 
on certain commodities, and supports continuation of this MOU.
    Specialty Crop Block Grants.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $7,000,000 for the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program. 
The Specialty Crop Block Grant Program was authorized in 2004 
to provide state assistance for specialty crops, defined as 
fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery 
crops. According to USDA, to be eligible for a grant, a project 
must enhance the competitiveness of specialty crops, through 
activities including, but not limited to research, promotion, 
marketing, nutrition, trade enhancement, food safety, food 
security, plant health programs, education, ``buy local'' 
programs, increased consumption, increased innovation, improved 
efficiency and reduce costs of distribution systems, 
environmental concerns and conservation, product development, 
and developing cooperatives.

                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Limitation, 2007........................................     $62,211,000
Budget limitation, 2008.................................      61,233,000
Committee recommendation................................      61,233,000

    The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 
97-35) initiated a system of user fees for the cost of grading 
and classing cotton, tobacco, naval stores, and for warehouse 
examination. These activities, authorized under the U.S. Cotton 
Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51 et seq.), the Tobacco Inspection Act 
(7 U.S.C. 511 et seq.), the Naval Stores Act (7 U.S.C. 91 et 
seq.), the U.S. Warehouse Act (7 U.S.C. 241 et seq.), and other 
provisions of law are designed to facilitate commerce and to 
protect participants in the industry.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $61,233,000 on 
administrative expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service.

          FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY

                              (SECTION 32)

                    MARKETING AGREEMENTS AND ORDERS

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $16,425,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      16,798,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,798,000

    Under section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, (7 U.S.C. 
612c), an amount equal to 30 percent of customs receipts 
collected during each preceding calendar year and unused 
balances are available for encouraging the domestic consumption 
and exportation of agricultural commodities. An amount equal to 
30 percent of receipts collected on fishery products is 
transferred to the Department of Commerce. Additional transfers 
to the child nutrition programs of the Food and Nutrition 
Service have been provided in recent appropriations Acts.
    The following table reflects the status of this fund for 
fiscal years 2006-2008:

               ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD--FISCAL YEARS 2006-2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fiscal year 2006  Fiscal year 2007  Fiscal year 2008
                                                                estimate          estimate          estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30 percent of Customs Receipts)............    $6,481,777,400    $7,029,269,059    $7,563,683,777
    Rescission............................................       -37,601,000       -37,601,000       -65,452,000
    Supplemental Appropriation............................  ................  ................  ................
Less Transfers:
    Food and Nutrition Service............................    -5,187,621,000    -5,731,073,000    -6,235,057,000
    Commerce Department...................................       -79,284,400       -82,817,059       -84,594,777
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Transfers....................................    -5,266,905,400    -5,813,890,059    -6,319,651,777
                                                           =====================================================
Budget Authority..........................................     1,177,271,000     1,177,778,000     1,178,580,000
Unobligated Balance Available, Start of Year..............       286,159,865       146,760,123       262,399,000
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations......................        60,039,191       100,000,000  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
Available for Obligation..................................     1,523,470,056     1,424,538,123     1,440,979,000
Less Obligations:
    Commodity Procurement:
        Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commod-            463,792,156       465,000,000       465,000,000
         ities)...........................................
        12 Percent Commodity Floor Requirement............        86,000,000       200,000,000       200,000,000
        State Option Contract.............................  ................         5,000,000         5,000,000
        Removal of Defective Commodities..................  ................         1,000,000         1,000,000
        Emergency Surplus Removal.........................        81,010,295        65,114,820  ................
        Direct Payments...................................       700,000,000       110,000,000  ................
        Disaster Relief...................................         1,900,880        25,000,000         5,000,000
        Estimated Future Needs............................  ................       242,970,303       416,325,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
          Total, Commodity Procurement....................     1,332,703,331     1,114,085,123     1,092,325,000
                                                           =====================================================
    Administrative Funds:
        Commodity Purchase Support........................        28,865,511        31,629,000        21,856,000
        Marketing Agreements and Orders...................        15,141,091        16,425,000        16,798,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
          Total, Administrative Funds.....................        44,006,602        48,054,000        38,654,000
                                                           =====================================================
          Total Obligations...............................     1,376,709,933     1,162,139,123     1,140,979,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
Unobligated Balance Available, End of Year................       146,760,123       262,399,000       310,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds 
of $16,798,000 for the formulation and administration of 
marketing agreements and orders.
    Commodity Purchases.--The Committee is aware that red 
raspberry imports from Chile have displaced domestic red 
raspberry producers, particularly in Washington State, and have 
created a domestic surplus. The Committee encourages the 
Department to use all existing authorities under the section 32 
program and other programs to purchase surplus domestic red 
raspberries.
    Section 32 Authorities.--Under the authority described in 
clause 3 of 7 U.S.C. 612c, the Secretary is able to direct 
funds from the section 32 account to increase the purchasing 
power of producers. This practice has been used on various 
occasions to provide direct assistance to producers when market 
forces or natural conditions adversely affect the financial 
condition of farmers and ranchers. The Committee notes the 
importance in the ability of the Secretary to utilize this 
authority, but believes that communication between the 
Department and the Congress should be improved when this 
practice is used. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
Secretary to provide notification to the Appropriations 
Committee in advance of any public announcement or release of 
section 32 funds under the specific authorities cited above.

                   PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $1,334,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       1,334,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,834,000

    The Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program [FSMIP] is 
authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing Act 
of 1946 and is also funded from appropriations. Payments are 
made to State marketing agencies to: identify and test market 
alternative farm commodities; determine methods of providing 
more reliable market information, and develop better commodity 
grading standards. This program has made possible many types of 
projects, such as electronic marketing and agricultural product 
diversification. Current projects are focused on the 
improvement of marketing efficiency and effectiveness, and 
seeking new outlets for existing farm produced commodities. The 
legislation grants the U.S. Department of Agriculture authority 
to establish cooperative agreements with State departments of 
agriculture or similar State agencies to improve the efficiency 
of the agricultural marketing chain. The States perform the 
work or contract it to others, and must contribute at least 
one-half of the cost of the projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,834,000 for 
payments to States and possessions for Federal-State marketing 
projects and activities. The Committee directs that $2,500,000 
be provided to the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade 
and Consumer Protection for the development of specialty 
markets. This funding is used by the Wisconsin Department of 
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, which provides 
business consulting, market evaluation, and strategic planning 
assistance to cheese makers who are starting out or 
contemplating expansion. Funds are also used to provide 
competitive grants for producer modernization and grazing 
transition, and for value chain and commodity innovation grants 
for dairy processors. Federal funds for these efforts are 
supplemented with an equal dollar match from the State and non-
Federal public and private sponsors. (Kohl/Wisconsin Department 
of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection)

        Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $37,785,000
Budget estimate, 2008x..................................      44,385,000
Committee recommendation................................      39,115,000

    The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
[GIPSA] was established pursuant to the Secretary's 1994 
reorganization. Grain inspection and weighing programs are 
carried out under the U.S. Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71 et 
seq.) and other programs under the authority of the 
Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, including the inspection 
and grading of rice and grain-related products; conducting 
official weighing and grain inspection activities; and grading 
dry beans and peas, and processed grain products. Under the 
Packers and Stockyards Act (7 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), assurance of 
the financial integrity of the livestock, meat, and poultry 
markets is provided. The administration monitors competition in 
order to protect producers, consumers, and industry from 
deceptive and fraudulent practices which affect meat and 
poultry prices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,115,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers and 
Stockyards Administration.
    Marketing of Grain.--The Committee understands that GIPSA 
is assessing how to facilitate the efficient marketing of grain 
by augmenting, not supplanting, existing market mechanisms. The 
Committee encourages the Department to continue the cooperative 
relationship with the Iowa Corn Growers Association and the 
Illinois Corn Growers Association, including the ongoing study 
of process verification systems and protocols.

        LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES

Limitation, 2007........................................     $42,463,000
Budget limitation, 2008.................................      42,463,000
Committee recommendation................................      42,463,000

    The Agency provides an official grain inspection and 
weighing system under the U.S. Grain Standards Act [USGSA], and 
official inspection of rice and grain-related products under 
the Agricultural Marketing Act [AMA] of 1946. The USGSA was 
amended in 1981 to require the collection of user fees to fund 
the costs associated with the operation, supervision, and 
administration of Federal grain inspection and weighing 
activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $42,463,000 on 
inspection and weighing services expenses.

             Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $600,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         659,000
Committee recommendation................................         632,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety provides 
direction and coordination in carrying out the laws enacted by 
the Congress with respect to the Department's inspection of 
meat, poultry, and egg products. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $632,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety.

                   Food Safety and Inspection Service

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $892,136,000
Budget estimate, 2008x..................................     930,120,000
Committee recommendation................................     930,620,000

    The major objectives of the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service are to assure that meat and poultry products are 
wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged, as 
required by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et 
seq.); and to provide continuous in-plant inspection to egg 
processing plants under the Egg Products Inspection Act.
    The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on 
June 17, 1981, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1000-1, issued 
pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.
    The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service provides continuous in-plant inspection of all domestic 
plants preparing meat, poultry or egg products for sale or 
distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and 
establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for export 
to the United States; and provides technical and financial 
assistance to States which maintain meat and poultry inspection 
programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $930,620,000 
for the Food Safety and Inspection Service.
    Baseline Studies.--The nationwide microbiological baseline 
studies of raw beef, pork, chicken, turkey, and ground products 
conducted by FSIS are designed to provide an unbiased and 
representative estimate for the prevalence and levels of select 
foodborne pathogens and process control indicators, important 
in ensuring that any risk-based inspection system is effective. 
Baseline studies, when repeated over time, provide valuable 
information on the effectiveness and progress made as a result 
of FSIS implemented risk based food safety policies and 
initiatives. Therefore, the Committee directs that no less than 
$2,000,000 be used for baseline studies.
    Codex Alimentarius.--Codex Alimentarius is critical for the 
protection of consumer health globally and facilitating 
international trade. Therefore, the Committee recommends 
$3,737,000 exclusively for the activities of the U.S. Codex 
office including international outreach and education.
    Controlled Atmosphere Stunning [CAS].--The Committee is 
aware of a new technology known as Controlled Atmosphere 
Stunning, in which a mixture of gasses can be used to render 
poultry unconscious before slaughter. The Committee understands 
that two major retailers have established a purchasing 
preference for suppliers who utilize CAS, and other industry 
leaders have expressed interest. The Committee directs FSIS to 
investigate the humaneness of this approach as compared to 
other methods of stunning poultry and report back to the 
Committee within 120 days on its evaluation of CAS. The report 
shall also include an analysis of food safety, FDA-regulatory 
issues, international trade issues, estimated costs for full 
scale implementation of CAS in the poultry industry, and 
implementation feasibility.
    Cost of Living.--The Committee recommendation includes an 
increase of $27,331,000 for cost of living increases, as 
requested in the budget. This includes $19,178,000 for pay 
costs, $5,353,000 for two extra work days in 2008, and 
$2,800,000 for Federal employee benefits. The Committee 
understands that 80 percent of the FSIS budget is spent on 
salaries and expenses, and the mandate to provide continuous 
inspection of meat, poultry, and egg products makes salary 
costs inflexible. Further, the Committee provided necessary 
funding in fiscal year 2007 for FSIS to hire an additional 78 
front-line inspectors and an additional 13 investigative staff. 
The Committee understands that the funding level provided is 
sufficient to fully fund all required pay and benefit costs for 
FSIS in fiscal year 2008 at the increased staff level.
    Humane Slaughter.--The Committee is pleased that the budget 
request included $3,000,000 for maintenance of the Humane 
Animal Tracking System [HATS]. The Committee recommendation 
includes full funding, and notes that maintenance of this 
system will include costs such as monthly access fees, hardware 
servicing, remote maintenance charges, and any additional 
personnel costs. The additional personnel costs could include 
staff support required to configure and service equipment, as 
well as personnel to provide technical support via the help 
desk.
    The Committee recommends the amount requested in the budget 
to maintain the 83 full-time equivalent positions which have 
been increased for this purpose above the fiscal year 2002 
level. The Committee strongly feels that a portion of that FTE 
increase should be used to allow additional FSIS personnel to 
continue to work cooperatively with the existing District 
Veterinary Medical Specialists [DVMS], whose duties are 
specifically tied to HMSA enforcement, in order to increase the 
number of facility visits by FSIS personnel with special 
expertise in HMSA enforcement, and to allow each DVMS better 
opportunities to visit facilities in other FSIS districts to 
enhance communication and problem solving among all districts.
    Regulatory and Scientific Training.--The Committee 
recommendation fully funds scientific and regulatory training 
at no less than $20,653,000. The Committee reminds FSIS that 
training of inspectors is a cornerstone of public health 
protection and directs the agency to continue to provide 
training for all levels of inspectors from initial training for 
new inspectors to advanced training for more senior inspectors.
    Risk-Based Inspection System [RBI].--The Committee is aware 
of FSIS' intentions to implement a risk-based inspection system 
for processing at 30 prototype locations. The Committee is 
further aware that under the proposed risk-based inspection 
system, FSIS intends to allocate resources at each processing 
establishment based upon the inherent risk of product produced 
at the establishment and a measure of the amount of actual risk 
control achieved by each processing establishment. There have 
been significant concerns raised regarding the type and amount 
of data FSIS is collecting and will have at its disposal upon 
implementation of RBI, and the Office of the Inspector General 
is currently studying the RBI proposal. The Committee directs 
FSIS to provide quarterly reports to the Committee on the 
implementation of risk-based inspection, and to carry out a 
full evaluation of the pilot program before expanding to any 
locations beyond the 30 prototype locations.
    State Equal to Status.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $63,947,000 for State meat inspection costs, which is 
$500,000 more than the administration's request. About 2,100 
meat and poultry establishments are inspected under State Meat 
and Poultry Programs, and many of these establishments are 
small or very small. FSIS reimburses States up to 50 percent of 
the estimated costs of administering State inspections, and has 
historically provided the full 50 percent of States' documented 
need. In fiscal year 2006, FSIS reimbursements to the States 
fell below 50 percent for the first time in nearly 30 years, 
and it is the Committee's understanding that the funding level 
provided will allow FSIS to resume providing 50 percent of the 
documented need by the States.
    The following table represents the Committee's specific 
recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as 
compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget request levels:

                            FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                    Fiscal year     2008 budget      Committee
                                                                   2007 enacted       request     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food safety inspection:
    Federal.....................................................         793,738         831,490         831,490
    State.......................................................          61,906          63,447          63,947
    International...............................................          17,862          18,472          18,472
Codex Alimentarius..............................................           3,680           3,737           3,737
PHDCIS..........................................................          14,950          12,974          12,974
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................         892,136         930,120         930,620
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
                                Services

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $632,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         695,000
Committee recommendation................................         666,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's international affairs (except for foreign 
economic development) and commodity programs. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Farm Service 
Agency, including the Commodity Credit Corporation, Risk 
Management Agency, and the Foreign Agricultural Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $666,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services.
    Export Credit.--The Committee supports the General Sales 
Manager [GSM] export credit program, including the 
implementation of effective regional GSM programs, and expects 
USDA to fully utilize this program to expand markets for U.S. 
agricultural goods. The Committee expects USDA to set risk-
based fees to cover, and not exceed, long-term operating costs 
and losses of the program. USDA should be flexible and 
implement adjustments to risk-based fees as necessary to ensure 
program effectiveness and enhance the competitiveness of U.S. 
exports. The Committee expects that USDA will seek input from 
the private sector when evaluating country risk. The Committee 
believes fee schedules and country risk determinations should 
be reviewed regularly and modified in response to material 
changes in country risk conditions.

                          Farm Service Agency

    The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established October 3, 
1994, pursuant to the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and 
Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, Public 
Law 103-354. The FSA administers a variety of activities, such 
as the commodity price support and production adjustment 
programs financed by the Commodity Credit Corporation; the 
Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]; the Emergency Conservation 
Program; the Commodity Operation Programs including the 
warehouse examination function; farm ownership, farm operating, 
emergency disaster, and other loan programs; and the Noninsured 
Crop Disaster Assistance Program [NAP], which provides crop 
loss protection for growers of many crops for which crop 
insurance is not available. In addition, FSA currently provides 
certain administrative support services to the Foreign 
Agricultural Service [FAS] and to the Risk Management Agency 
[RMA].

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Transfers from    Total, FSA,
                                                                Appropriations      program        salaries and
                                                                                    accounts         expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007.........................................        1,030,193          306,859        1,337,052
Supplemental appropriation, 2007.............................           37,500  ...............           37,500
Budget estimate, 2008........................................        1,228,662          319,517        1,548,179
Committee recommendation.....................................        1,160,662          317,992        1,478,654
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The account Salaries and Expenses, Farm Service Agency, 
funds the administrative expenses of program administration and 
other functions assigned to FSA. The funds consist of 
appropriations and transfers from the CCC export credit 
guarantees, Public Law 480 loans, and agricultural credit 
insurance fund program accounts, and miscellaneous advances 
from other sources. All administrative funds used by FSA are 
consolidated into one account. The consolidation provides 
clarity and better management and control of funds, and 
facilitates accounting, fiscal, and budgetary work by 
eliminating the necessity for making individual allocations and 
allotments and maintaining and recording obligations and 
expenditures under numerous separate accounts.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,160,662,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency.
    National Agriculture Imagery Program.--The Committee 
recommends that funds be allocated to purchase high resolution 
satellite imagery data or products to meet programmatic 
requirements. The acquisition of high resolution satellite 
imagery will also encourage the development of second 
generation imagery satellites, which is key to preparing our 
Nation's agricultural economy to keep pace with 21st century 
technological innovation.

                         STATE MEDIATION GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $4,208,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       4,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,750,000

    This program is authorized under title V of the 
Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 (7 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.). 
Originally designed to address agricultural credit disputes, 
the program was expanded by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform 
and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 
(Public Law 103-354) to include other agricultural issues such 
as wetland determinations, conservation compliance, rural water 
loan programs, grazing on National Forest System lands, and 
pesticides. The authorization for this program was extended 
through fiscal year 2010 by Public Law 109-17. Grants are made 
to States whose mediation programs have been certified by the 
FSA. Grants will be solely for operation and administration of 
the State's agricultural mediation program.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,750,000 for 
State Mediation Grants.

               GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $3,713,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................................
Committee recommendation................................       3,713,000

    This program is authorized under section 2502 of Public Law 
107-171. It is intended to assist in the protection of 
groundwater through State rural water associations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,713,000 for 
Grassroots Source Water Protection.

                        DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $100,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         100,000
Committee recommendation................................         100,000

    Under the program, the Department makes indemnification 
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products 
who, through no fault of their own, suffer losses because they 
are directed to remove their milk from commercial markets due 
to contamination of their products by registered pesticides. 
The program also authorizes indemnity payments to dairy farmers 
for losses resulting from the removal of cows or dairy products 
from the market due to nuclear radiation or fallout.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,000 for 
the Dairy Indemnity Program.

           AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

    The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is 
used to provide direct and guaranteed farm ownership, farm 
operating, and emergency loans to individuals, as well as the 
following types of loans to associations: irrigation and 
drainage, grazing, Indian tribe land acquisition, and boll 
weevil eradication.
    FSA is also authorized to provide financial assistance to 
borrowers by guaranteeing loans made by private lenders having 
a contract of guarantee from FSA as approved by the Secretary 
of Agriculture.
    The following programs are financed through this fund:
    Boll Weevil Eradication Loans.--Made to assist foundations 
in financing the operations of the boll weevil eradication 
programs provided to farmers.
    Credit Sales of Acquired Property.--Property is sold out of 
inventory and is made available to an eligible buyer by 
providing FSA loans.
    Emergency Loans.--Made to producers to aid recovery from 
production and physical losses due to drought, flooding, other 
natural disasters, or quarantine. The loans may be used to: 
restore or replace essential property; pay all or part of 
production costs associated with the disaster year; pay 
essential family living expenses; reorganize the farming 
operation; and refinance certain debts.
    Farm Operating Loans.--Provide short-to-intermediate term 
production or chattel credit to farmers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere, to improve their farm and home operations, 
and to develop or maintain a reasonable standard of living. The 
term of the loan varies from 1 to 7 years.
    Farm Ownership Loans.--Made to borrowers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere to restructure their debts, improve or 
purchase farms, refinance nonfarm enterprises which supplement 
but do not supplant farm income, or make additions to farms. 
Loans are made for 40 years or less.
    Indian Tribe Land Acquisition Loans.--Made to any Indian 
tribe recognized by the Secretary of the Interior or tribal 
corporation established pursuant to the Indian Reorganization 
Act (Public Law 93-638) which does not have adequate 
uncommitted funds to acquire lands or interest in lands within 
the tribe's reservation or Alaskan Indian community, as 
determined by the Secretary of the Interior, for use of the 
tribe or the corporation or the members thereof.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a total loan level of 
$3,450,903,000 for programs within the Agricultural Credit 
Insurance Fund Program Account.
    Emergency Loan Program.--The Committee recommends no new 
budget authority for the emergency loan program. Currently, 
this loan program has over $60,000,000 available for eligible 
producers. Based on historical loan activity, this amount 
should meet all needs for emergency loans in this fiscal year.
    The following table reflects the program levels for farm 
credit programs administered by the Farm Service Agency 
recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year 
2007 and the budget request levels:

                                    AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                                                                 2007 enacted     2008 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm ownership:
    Direct...................................................          207,642          223,857          223,857
    Guaranteed...............................................        1,386,000        1,200,000        1,247,400
Farm operating:
    Direct...................................................          643,500          629,595          579,150
    Guaranteed unsubsidized..................................        1,138,500        1,000,000        1,024,650
    Guaranteed subsidized....................................          271,886          250,000          271,886
Indian tribe land acquisition................................            2,000            3,960            3,960
Boll weevil eradication......................................          100,000           59,400          100,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, farm loans......................................        3,749,528        3,366,812        3,450,903
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           LOAN SUBSIDIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Subsidies                  Administrative expenses
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Guaranteed                               Transfer to   Total ACIF
                                 Direct loan      loan        Total     Appropriations      FSA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007...........       86,248       63,539      149,787        311,229       303,309      461,016
Budget estimate, 2008..........       89,983       62,350      152,333        319,657       311,737      471,990
Committee recommendation.......       83,581       66,057      149,638        318,150       310,230      467,788
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account are used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed, as well as for 
administrative expenses.
    The following table reflects the cost of loan programs 
under credit reform:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                 2007 enacted     2008 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Farm ownership:
        Direct...............................................            8,700            9,962            9,962
        Guaranteed...........................................            8,039            4,800            4,990
    Farm operating:
        Direct...............................................           75,225           79,896           73,494
        Guaranteed unsubsidized..............................           28,121           24,200           24,797
        Guaranteed subsidized................................           27,379           33,350           36,270
    Indian tribe land acquisition............................              423              125              125
    Boll weevil eradication..................................            1,900  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total, loan subsidies................................          149,787          152,333          149,638
ACIF expenses................................................          311,229          319,657          318,150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Risk Management Agency

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $76,658,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      79,062,000
Committee recommendation................................      78,833,000

    The Risk Management Agency performs administrative 
functions relative to the Federal crop insurance program that 
is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 
1508), as amended by the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 
2000 [ARPA], Public Law 106-224, and the Farm Security and 
Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171.
    ARPA authorized significant changes in the crop insurance 
program. This act provides higher government subsidies for 
producer premiums to make coverage more affordable; expands 
research and development for new insurance products and under-
served areas through contracts with the private sector; and 
tightens compliance. Functional areas of risk management are: 
research and development; insurance services; and compliance, 
whose functions include policy formulation and procedures and 
regulations development.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $78,833,000 
for the Risk Management Agency.
    Data Mining.--The Committee includes bill language, as 
requested by the administration, to allow up to $11,166,000 of 
the unobligated funds of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation 
Fund to be used for program compliance and integrity purposes, 
including the data mining projects, and for the Common 
Information Management System.
    Risk Management Education Program.--The Risk Management 
Education Program was established under section 133 of the 
Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. This program operates 
through the four regional Risk Management Education Centers to 
educate agricultural producers on the full range of risk 
management strategies and tactics, including futures, options, 
agricultural trade options, crop insurance, cash forward 
contracting, debt reduction, production diversification, farm 
resources risk reduction, and other risk management strategies. 
The Committee notes that $5,000,000 is made available annually 
to both RMA and CSREES for this program.

                              CORPORATIONS


                Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund

Appropriations, 2007 \1\................................  $4,379,256,000
Budget estimate, 2008 \1\...............................   4,818,099,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................   4,818,099,000

\1\ Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary, to remain available 
until expended, are provided.

    The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal 
Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of 
expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss adjustment, 
delivery expenses, program-related research and development, 
startup costs for implementing this legislation such as 
studies, pilot projects, data processing improvements, public 
outreach, and related tasks and functions.
    All program costs, except for Federal salaries and 
expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to appropriation.
    Producers of insurable crops are eligible to receive a 
basic level of protection against catastrophic losses, which 
cover 50 percent of the normal yield at 55 percent of the 
expected price. The only cost to the producer is an 
administrative fee of $100 per crop per policy.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary, estimated to be $4,818,099,000 for the 
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund.

                   Commodity Credit Corporation Fund

    The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned 
Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support, 
and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced 
and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including 
products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the orderly 
distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally 
incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated 
June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department 
of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, 
approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714).
    The Commodity Credit Corporation engages in buying, 
selling, lending, and other activities with respect to 
agricultural commodities, their products, food, feed, and 
fibers. Its purposes include stabilizing, supporting, and 
protecting farm income and prices; maintaining the balance and 
adequate supplies of selected commodities; and facilitating the 
orderly distribution of such commodities. In addition, the 
Corporation makes available materials and facilities required 
in connection with the storage and distribution of such 
commodities. The Corporation also disburses funds for sharing 
of costs with producers for the establishment of approved 
conservation practices on environmentally sensitive land and 
subsequent rental payments for such land for the duration of 
Conservation Reserve Program contracts.
    Corporation activities are primarily governed by the 
following statutes: the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
Act (Public Law 80-806), as amended; the Agricultural Act of 
1949 (Public Law 81-439), as amended (1949 Act); the 
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-430), as 
amended (the 1938 Act); the Food Security Act of 1985 (Public 
Law 99-198), as amended (1985 Act); and the Farm Security and 
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171) (2002 Act), 
enacted May 13, 2002.
    Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of 
directors, subject to the general supervision and direction of 
the Secretary of Agriculture, who is an ex officio director and 
chairman of the board. The board consists of seven members, in 
addition to the Secretary, who are appointed by the President 
of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. 
Officers of the Corporation are designated according to their 
positions in the Department of Agriculture.
    The activities of the Corporation are carried out mainly by 
the personnel and through the facilities of the Farm Service 
Agency [FSA] and the Farm Service Agency State and county 
committees. The Foreign Agricultural Service, the General Sales 
Manager, other agencies and offices of the Department, and 
commercial agents are also used to carry out certain aspects of 
the Corporation's activities.
    Under Public Law 87-155 (15 U.S.C. 713a-11, 713a-12), 
annual appropriations are authorized for each fiscal year, 
commencing with fiscal year 1961. These appropriations are to 
reimburse the Corporation for net realized losses.

                 REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES

Appropriations, 2007 \1\................................ $23,098,328,000
Budget estimate, 2008 \1\...............................  12,983,000,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................  12,983,000,000

\1\ Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2008 to be 
$12,983,000,000 for the payment to reimburse the Commodity 
Credit Corporation for net realized losses.
    CCC Inventories.--The Committee is aware that certain CCC 
surplus commodities have been used to supplement various 
programs, including support for domestic nutrition assistance. 
In those instances where surplus nonfat dry milk stocks have 
been used, information relating to the amount available and the 
quality of those stocks is important for program planning. The 
Committee directs the Department to provide monthly reports to 
the Committee regarding ending monthly stocks of nonfat dry 
milk. This report should include the amount of nonfat dry milk 
in stock at the end of each month; the quality of those stocks, 
including the quantity suitable for human consumption; detailed 
information on how the nonfat dry milk was distributed during 
the month; and the plans for distribution during the next 
month.
    The Committee directs the USDA through the Commodity Credit 
Corporation to provide, as stocks become available, 15 million 
pounds of nonfat dry milk unsuitable for human consumption, to 
the U.S. farm-raised catfish industry for evaluation as a 
catfish feed ingredient. This product shall be provided at 
prices and terms consistent with existing programs supporting 
other U.S. agricultural industries.

                       HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

Limitation, 2007........................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

    The Commodity Credit Corporation's [CCC] hazardous waste 
management program is intended to ensure compliance with the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) and the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). The CCC 
funds operations and maintenance costs as well as site 
investigation and cleanup expenses. Investigative and cleanup 
costs associated with the management of CCC hazardous waste are 
also paid from USDA's hazardous waste management appropriation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $5,000,000 for 
Commodity Credit Corporation hazardous waste management.

              FARM STORAGE FACILITY LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2007....................................................
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      $4,660,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,660,000

    The Farm Storage Facility Loan Program [FSFL], originally 
established in 1949, was discontinued in the early 1980's 
pending adequate capacity, and re-established in fiscal year 
2000 to address current storage space shortages. Federal 
Government subsidy costs supporting this program are estimated 
pursuant to the Federal Credit Reform Act [FCRA] of 1990 
(Public Law 101-508, sec. 13201, et seq.) (2 U.S.C. 661, et 
seq.). The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 
directed the CCC to establish a Sugar Storage Facility Loan 
Program to provide financing for domestic processors to 
construct and improve sugar storage and handling facilities. 
Administrative expenses for this program have been included in 
the Salaries and Expenses account of the Farm Service Agency 
[FSA], which administers the program. Following OMB guidance 
(Circular A-11), FSA recently moved these expenses to the FSFL 
account to comply with FCRA section 504(g) direction that all 
funding for an agency's administration of a direct loan or loan 
guarantee program shall be displayed as distinct and separately 
identified subaccounts within the same budget account as the 
program's cost (2 U.S.C. 661c).

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,660,000 for 
administration of the Farm Storage Facility Loan Program.

                                TITLE II

                         CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

  Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $742,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         822,000
Committee recommendation................................         781,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
Environment provides direction and coordination in carrying out 
the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to natural 
resources and the environment. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service and the Forest Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $781,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
Environment.
    Atlantic Salmon Recovery.--The Committee supports the goals 
of the Penobscot River Restoration Project in the State of 
Maine. This project will restore nearly 1,000 miles of habitat 
in the Penobscot watershed for endangered Atlantic salmon and 
six other species of sea-run fish and 100 percent of the 
historic habitat in Maine's largest river system for four 
additional species. The Committee encourages NRCS to improve 
migratory fish habitat in this watershed, including the 
purchase of dams and the removal of impediments to passage, by 
utilizing all appropriate funding sources.
    Wetlands Reserve Program.--The Committee strongly 
encourages the NRCS to establish a demonstration pilot program 
utilizing rapid growth reforestation technology.
    Wetlands Reserve Program Assessments.--In February 2006, 
the Secretary announced a change in the Wetlands Reserve 
Program that would take into account the value of recreational 
and similar uses in determining the appraised value of 
easements offered under this program. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to minimize the effect this change will have in 
regard to geographical participation in the Wetlands Reserve 
Program and report to the Committee within 120 days of 
enactment of this act on the impact this policy change may have 
on utilization of this program in all regions of the country 
and the steps taken to minimize such change.

                 Natural Resources Conservation Service

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] was 
established pursuant to Public Law 103-354, the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6962). The 
NRCS works with conservation districts, watershed groups, and 
Federal and State agencies to bring about physical adjustments 
in land use that will conserve soil and water resources, 
provide for agricultural production on a sustained basis, and 
reduce flood damage and sedimentation.

                        conservation operations

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $763,360,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     801,825,000
Committee recommendation................................     862,996,000

    Conservation operations are authorized by Public Law 74-46 
(16 U.S.C. 590a-590f). Activities include:
    Conservation Technical Assistance.--Provides assistance to 
district cooperators and other land users in the planning and 
application of conservation treatments to control erosion and 
improve the quantity and quality of soil resources, improve and 
conserve water, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, conserve 
energy, improve woodland, pasture and range conditions, and 
reduce upstream flooding; all to protect and enhance the 
natural resource base.
    Inventory and monitoring provides soil, water, and related 
resource data for land conservation, use, and development; 
guidance of community development; identification of prime 
agricultural producing areas that should be protected; 
environmental quality protection; and for the issuance of 
periodic inventory reports of resource conditions.
    Resource appraisal and program development ensures that 
programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture for the 
conservation of soil, water, and related resources shall 
respond to the Nation's long-term needs.
    Plant Materials Centers.--Assembles, tests, and encourages 
increased use of plant species which show promise for use in 
the treatment of conservation problem areas.
    Snow Survey and Water Forecasting.--Provides estimates of 
annual water availability from high mountain snow packs and 
relates to summer stream flow in the western States and Alaska. 
Information is used by agriculture, industry, and cities in 
estimating future water supplies.
    Soil Surveys.--Inventories the Nation's basic soil 
resources and determines land capabilities and conservation 
treatment needs. Soil survey publications include 
interpretations useful to cooperators, other Federal agencies, 
State, and local organizations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $862,996,000 
for Conservation Operations.
    For fiscal year 2008, the Committee recommends funding, as 
specified below, for new and ongoing conservation activities. 
Amounts recommended by the Committee for specific conservation 
measures shall be in addition to levels otherwise made 
available to States.
    Agricultural Development and Resource Conservation.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $400,000 to continue a 
community-based agricultural development and resource 
conservation program with the four RC&D; Councils in Hawaii. 
(Inouye, Akaka/Hawaii RC&D; Councils)
    Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center [AWCC].--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for the AWCC. The 
AWCC is part of NRCS and supports the development of wildlife 
habitat technology through a competitive grants program 
available to many cooperative conservation partners, including 
fish and wildlife conservation groups, universities, and State 
agencies. The AWCC will ensure new technology is available to 
farmers and ranchers nationwide through NRCS field offices. 
(Cochran/Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center)
    Alaska Association of Conservation Districts.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $916,000 for conservation 
efforts in the State of Alaska. This project assists 
conservation district cooperators and other land users in the 
planning and application of conservation treatments. (Stevens/
Alaska Association of Conservation Districts)
    Big Sandy Tri-State Watershed Inventory and Analysis.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $400,000 for the Big Sandy 
Watershed. This project will initiate watershed inventory and 
analysis activities, which include identifying abandoned mine 
lands, assessing associated water quality impacts, and 
coordinating with partners to complete the master plan. (Byrd/
West Virginia Conservation Agency)
    Carson City Erosion Control.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $400,000 for the Carson City erosion control project 
in the State of Nevada. In July 2004, Carson City suffered a 
wildfire that burned over 8,700 acres. The purpose of this 
project is to develop a plan for preventing future wildfires, 
manage erosion control, and reforestation. (Ensign, Reid/Carson 
City, Nevada)
    Certified Environmental Management Systems for 
Agriculture.--The Committee recommendation includes $400,000 
for Certified Environmental Management Systems for Agriculture. 
This project guides the producer through planning, 
implementing, evaluating and reviewing business decisions that 
affect the environment. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa Soybean 
Association)
    Conservation Education.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 for conservation education in the State of 
Alabama. This project emphasizes the economic value of 
improving wildlife habitat in the State. (Shelby/Alabama 
Wildlife Federation)
    Conservation Internship.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $120,000 for conservation internships. Together with 
State and local resources, these funds provide internships for 
college students preparing for careers in natural resource 
management. This real world training helps these emerging 
natural resource professionals navigate the day-to-day 
challenges faced by farmers and Federal, State, and local 
natural resource planners. (Kohl/Wisconsin Land and Water 
Conservation Association)
    Conservation Planning.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $600,000 for cranberry conservation work in the States 
of Wisconsin and Massachusetts. The purpose of this project is 
to help farmers increase cranberry production while reducing 
the effects on the environment. Cranberry growers can develop 
conservation plans to ensure that cranberry cultivation is done 
in a manner that protects water quality, prevents soil erosion 
and manages nutrient and pesticide use. (Kohl, Kennedy, Kerry/
NRCS Wisconsin/Massachusetts)
    Conservation Technical Assistance.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $350,000 for conservation technical 
assistance in the State of New Jersey. These funds will address 
water quality issues and small farm operations. In addition, 
funding will provide technical assistance towards agricultural 
operation in the New Jersey Highlands. (Lautenberg, Menendez/
NRCS New Jersey)
    Conservation Technology Transfer.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $700,000 for conservation technology 
transfer in the State of Wisconsin. This program brings 
together NRCS, the University of Wisconsin Extension, and the 
University of Wisconsin Platteville in a collaborative effort 
to demonstrate effective conservation practices. Working on 
real farms under a variety of cropping and land use systems, 
they help farmers adopt effective conservation practices that 
have been tested under their local conditions. (Kohl/University 
of Wisconsin)
    Dairy Business Association.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 for environmental compliance in the State of 
Wisconsin. This project helps agriculture producers comply with 
Federal, State and local land use and environmental protection 
initiatives. Together they will develop a model ``one stop'' 
program which will help producers efficiently navigate these 
changing and multi-faceted requirements. (Kohl/ Wisconsin Dairy 
Business Association)
    Delta Conservation Demonstration.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $600,000 for a demonstration project in 
Washington County, Mississippi. This project will develop an 
education and training program for the short and long term 
natural resources conservation training needs of the NRCS, the 
Mississippi Soil and Water Conservation Commission, and the 
Soil and Water Conservation Districts. (Cochran/Washington 
County, Mississippi)
    Delta Water Study.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$250,000 to address water supply and water quality concerns in 
the Mississippi Delta. This project will address declining 
groundwater supplies and low flows in streams as identified in 
the Mississippi State Water Management Plan. (Cochran/NRCS 
Mississippi)
    Driftless Area Initiative.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $350,000 for conservation in the driftless area in the 
States of Wisconsin and Minnesota. This project will help to 
reduce the significant soil erosion, sedimentation, and run-off 
affecting water quality in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. 
Excess sediment and nutrients severely damage local rivers and 
wetlands, and are being washed down the Mississippi River to 
the Gulf of Mexico. (Kohl, Klobuchar/NRCS Wisconsin)
    Farm Viability Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $350,000 for a farm viability program in the State of 
Vermont. This program helps producers assess the long-term 
viability of their farming operation by implementing plans to 
improve their long-term business prospects. (Leahy/Vermont 
Housing and Conservation Board)
    Fort Hood Range Revegetation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 for range revegetation in the State of Texas. 
This project addresses the removal of nutrients from the Bosque 
watershed and application of those nutrients to promote 
revegetation efforts on impacted Fort Hood training areas. 
(Hutchison/Fort Hood, Bell County, Texas)
    Geographic Information Systems Center of Excellence.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $4,500,000 for the National 
Geospatial Development Center in the State of West Virginia. 
The center provides expertise in geographic information science 
and remote sensing using a team of scientists, engineers, and 
geographers that support conservation operations across the 
country. (Byrd/National Geospatial Development Center)
    Georgia Soil and Water Commission.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $800,000 for a cooperative agreement in 
the State of Georgia. This project provides agricultural water 
storage facilities for irrigation of cropland and improves the 
efficiencies of existing irrigation systems. (Chambliss, 
Isakson/Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission)
    Geospatial Framework for Water Management.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $500,000 for comprehensive geospatial 
framework for the State of New Mexico. This project will 
acquire color infrared imagery and complete the comprehensive 
geospatial framework of the entire State of New Mexico. This 
should provide accurate information to manage New Mexico's 
water resources. (Domenici/State of New Mexico, Office of the 
State Engineer)
    Grazing Land Conservation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $950,000 for grazing land conservation activities in 
the State of Wisconsin. This project supports applied research, 
on-farm demonstrations, education activities, and technical 
services through the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade 
and Consumer Protection [DATCP] to support producers wishing to 
switch to a grazing system or wanting to enhance their existing 
systems. (Kohl/NRCS Wisconsin)
    Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $27,799,000 for the grazing lands 
conservation initiative.
    Great Lakes Basin Soil and Erosion Control.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $600,000 for Great Lakes basin soil and 
erosion control. Sediment from agriculture is a major 
contaminant in drinking water. The goal of this program is to 
prevent soil, nitrogen, and phosphorus from entering the Great 
Lakes and regional waters by reducing soil erosion and 
controlling sedimentation. (Clinton, Klobuchar, Levin, Schumer, 
Stabenow/Great Lakes Commission)
    Green River Water Quality and Biological Diversity 
Project.--The Committee recommendation includes $125,000 for a 
cooperative agreement in the State of Kentucky. The goal of 
this project is to monitor the water quality and biological 
diversity of the Green River and surrounding watershed to 
evaluate the effectiveness of state conservation efforts to 
limit erosion in the watershed and mitigate pesticide and 
nutrient loading from nearby agricultural operations. 
(McConnell/Western Kentucky Research Foundation)
    Houlka Master Water Management District.--The Committee 
strongly encourages the Chief of the NRCS to settle claims 
associated with the Houlka Master Water Management District.
    Illinois River Agricultural Water Conservation.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $150,000 for the Illinois 
River Agricultural Water Conservation Project in the State of 
Illinois. The goal of this ongoing project is to conduct 
wetland demonstration projects to protect against flood damage, 
reduce soil erosion and improve water quality associated with 
the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers; and to facilitate 
landowner adoption of multi-purpose soil, water and wetland 
conservation practices in cooperation with local soil and water 
conservation districts. (Durbin/Illinois Department of Natural 
Resources)
    Irrigation System Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $350,000 for an irrigation system program in the State 
of Delaware. This project will provide better and current 
technology for irrigation systems which is crucial to the 
continued improvement of existing irrigation systems. This is 
necessary both from agricultural viability and improved 
environmental perspective. (Biden, Carper/Delaware Department 
of Agriculture)
    Kentucky Soil Erosion Control.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,075,000 for soil erosion control in 
the State of Kentucky. The goal of this project is to plan, 
design, construct, and implement best management practices to 
protect the resource base and provide environmental benefits. 
(McConnell, Bunning/NRCS Kentucky)
    Little Wood River Irrigation District Gravity Pressure 
Delivery System.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$200,000 for a gravity delivery system in the State of Idaho. 
This project will convert an open canal gravity delivery system 
to a closed gravity pressurized system which will result in 
energy and water savings. (Craig/ Little Wood Irrigation 
District, Carey, Idaho)
    Loess Hills Soil Erosion.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 to address soil erosion in the Loess Hills 
area in the State of Iowa. Streambed degradation in the loess 
soils of western Iowa has caused damage to infrastructure and 
loss of land. The goal of this project is to provide financial 
and technical assistance for streambed stabilization projects; 
to conduct research in effective methods of streambed 
stabilization; and to provide demonstration of streambed 
stabilization projects. (Harkin, Grassley/ Hungry Canyons 
Alliance)
    Mississippi Conservation Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,650,000 for the Mississippi 
Conservation Initiative. This project assists several cities 
and towns in Mississippi with drainage improvements. The 
improvements consist of water retention ponds, de-snagging, 
repair and technical assistance of existing dams, and 
assistance with project development on several sites. (Cochran/
NRCS Mississippi)
    Molokai Agriculture Development and Resource 
Conservation.--The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 
for agriculture development and resource conservation on the 
Island of Molokai, Hawaii. (Inouye, Akaka/Molokai RC&D;)
    Native Plant Commercialization.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $184,000 for native plant 
commercialization in the State of Alaska. The goal of this 
project is to produce and provide an adequate amount of native 
plant materials for construction development projects, as 
required by law. This program distributes plants to growers and 
contributes plant materials for many conservation projects. 
(Stevens/NRCS Alaska)
    Natural Resources Inventory.--In previous fiscal years the 
Committee has provided funding for a Natural Resources 
Inventory pilot project in Alaska. The Committee requests a 
report on the results of the pilot project. The report should 
include a listing of areas inventoried during the project and 
those areas yet to be inventoried.
    Nitrate Pollution Reduction.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $230,000 for nitrate pollution reduction in the State 
of Rhode Island. This project would permit NRCS to work with 
the University of Rhode Island, agricultural producers, and 
rural residents to develop nitrate control strategies that 
reduce nitrate contamination in aquifers and watersheds. (Reed/
NRCS Rhode Island)
    On-Farm Management Systems Evaluation Network.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $150,000 for an On-Farm 
Management Systems Evaluation Network. The purpose of this 
project is to coordinate a statewide network of growers using 
GPS, yield monitors, and remote sensing technologies to improve 
nitrogen management in corn. (Harkin, Grassley/Iowa Soybean 
Association)
    Operation Oak Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $100,000 for the Operation Oak Program. This program 
supplies oak and other mast producing hardwood species 
seedlings to landowners to meet the needs of timber production 
and wildlife management and to reverse the decline of hardwood 
regeneration in the South. (Chambliss, Graham, Lincoln, Pryor/
National Wild Turkey Federation)
    Phosphorous Loading in Lake Champlain.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $250,000 to reduce phosphorous loadings 
to Lake Champlain in the State of Vermont. The phosphorous 
levels in parts of Lake Champlain are so high that they cause 
excessive algal growth. The goal of this project is to find new 
agricultural and wastewater management technologies to reduce 
phosphorous in the lake. (Leahy/Poultney Conservation District)
    Plant Material Centers.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $12,365,000 for NRCS plant material centers.
    Potomac River Tributary Strategy.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $250,000 for Potomac River tributary 
strategy in the State of West Virginia. This project will 
assist agriculture producers in the Potomac Highlands to 
develop Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans to address 
water quality issues in the Potomac River and the Chesapeake 
Bay Watershed. (Byrd/NRCS West Virginia)
    Rangeland Conservation and Fuels Management.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for rangeland conservation in 
the State of Nevada. This project will provide assistance to 
efficiently and effectively reduce the wildfire risks in 
Nevada's wildland-urban interface communities. (Reid/Nevada 
Fire Safety Council)
    Riparian Restoration.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $250,000 for riparian restoration along the Rio 
Grande, Pecos, and Canadian Rivers in the State of New Mexico. 
This project emphasizes restoration of areas affected by 
invasive species. (Bingaman/New Mexico Association of Soil and 
Water Conservation Districts)
    Risk Management Initiative.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,000,000 for a risk management initiative in the 
State of West Virginia. This project provides on-farm technical 
assistance to educate producers about planning better pasture 
and livestock management to enhance economic development and 
protect the environment. (Byrd/NRCS West Virginia)
    Sand County Foundation.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,000,000 for the Sand County Foundation. This 
project is operating a multi-year, multi-State experiment to 
demonstrate, test, and evaluate the cost effectiveness of 
techniques to reduce runoff of nitrogen from agricultural 
practices. (Kohl/Sand County Foundation)
    Small Farm Outreach.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$200,000 for the Small Farm Outreach Wetlands Management 
Center. Through this program, technical assistance is provided 
in research, development and technology transfer of projects in 
irrigation water management; groundwater preservation and 
monitoring; soil conservation; rural natural resource 
conservation and community development; wetlands; wildlife 
habitat; and traditional and alternative crop production. 
(Lincoln, Pryor/University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff)
    Soil Phosphorus Studies.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $300,000 for soil phosphorus studies in the State of 
West Virginia. This project supports farm operators, 
particularly poultry and beef, to meet environmental 
regulations regarding the management of phosphorus on their 
lands by conducting soil analysis and building technical 
information specific to the state. (Byrd/NRCS West Virginia)
    Snow Survey.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$10,950,000 for snow surveys.
    Soil Survey.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$92,148,000 for nationwide soil surveys. In addition, $200,000 
is included for soil surveys in the State of Rhode Island 
(Reed/NRCS Rhode Island) and $200,000 for soil surveys in the 
State of Wyoming (Enzi, Thomas/NRCS Wyoming)
    Technical Assistance Grants.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $580,000 for technical assistance grants to Kentucky 
Soil Conservation Districts. These funds will assist landowners 
with the planning, design, and implementation of best 
management practice to protect natural resources and ensure 
that producers participating in farm bill conservation programs 
receive adequate technical assistance. (McConnell, Bunning/
Kentucky Division of Conservation)
    Union-Lincoln Parish Regional Water Conservation.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $200,000 for a water 
conservation project in the State of Louisiana. Because of 
dependence on and depletion of the Sparta Aquifer in north 
Louisiana and south Arkansas, it is necessary to consider 
limitations on its continued use. The goal of this project is 
to develop an alternative water supply for Union and Lincoln 
Parishes. (Landrieu, Vitter/Union and Lincoln Parishes, 
Louisiana)
    U.S. Cold Regions Botanical Research Network.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $184,000 for cold regions 
botanical research in the State of Alaska. This project allows 
the purchase, storage, and evaluation of plant material and the 
seed of plants indigenous to cold regions. (Stevens/NRCS 
Alaska)
    Utah Conservation Initiative.--The committee recommendation 
includes $3,650,000 for the Utah Conservation Initiative. This 
project funds conservation projects throughout Utah, including 
work focusing on water quality and quantity; invasive species; 
and range, riparian, and wildlife habitat restoration. 
(Bennett/NRCS Utah)
    Water Conservation.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$500,000 for a water conservation project in the State of 
Colorado. Because of declining water availability in the South 
Platte River basin, combined with increasing demand for water 
by competing interests, the implementation of new conservation 
technologies is necessary. The goal of this project is to allow 
the resumption of use of irrigation wells for agriculture and 
continued water management for competing users. (Allard, 
Salazar/Central Colorado Water Conservancy District)
    Water Conservation and Efficient Irrigation.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for a water conservation and 
efficient irrigation project in the State of California. The 
goal of this project is to conserve 30,000 acre-feet of water 
in Orange County, California. (Feinstein, Boxer/Municipal Water 
District of Orange County, California)
    Water quality.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$350,000 to improve water quality through the Utah confined 
animal feed operation/animal feeding operation pilot project. 
(Bennett/Utah Farm Bureau)
    Watershed Demonstration Project.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for a watershed demonstration 
project. The goal of this project is to document and 
demonstrate progress in meeting national water quality 
objectives for agriculture at a watershed level. The means to 
accomplish this involves a partnership effort with local 
producers, industry, researchers, and government agencies. 
(Harkin, Grassley/NRCS Iowa)
    Wildfire Support.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$150,000 for wildfire support in the State of Nevada. This 
project will conduct site-specific wildfire planning and 
implementation assistance on private lands susceptible to 
wildfire throughout the Winnemucca District of Nevada. (Reid/
Wildfire Support Group)
    Wildlife Habitat Improvement.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $150,000 for ongoing wildlife habitat improvement in 
the State of Illinois. Wildlife professionals are concerned 
about the rapid decline of prairie-dependent wildlife and 
plants. This ongoing project would allow for hundreds of 
thousands of additional acres of wildlife habitat to be 
improved creating miles of corridors of natural prairie. 
(Durbin/Illinois Department of Natural Resources)

                     WATERSHED SURVEYS AND PLANNING

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $6,056,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, Public 
Law 83-566, August 4, 1954, provided for the establishment of 
the Small Watershed Program (16 U.S.C. 1001-1008), and section 
6 of the act provided for the establishment of the River Basin 
Surveys and Investigation Program (16 U.S.C. 1006-1009). A 
separate appropriation funded the two programs until fiscal 
year 1996 when they were combined into a single appropriation, 
watershed surveys and planning.
    River basin activities provide for cooperation with other 
Federal, State, and local agencies in making investigations and 
surveys of the watersheds of rivers and other waterways as a 
basis for the development of coordinated programs. Reports of 
the investigations and surveys are prepared to serve as a guide 
for the development of agricultural, rural, and upstream 
watershed aspects of water and related land resources, and as a 
basis for coordination of this development with downstream and 
other phases of water development.
    Watershed planning activities provide for cooperation 
between the Federal Government and the States and their 
political subdivisions in a program of watershed planning. 
Watershed plans form the basis for installing works of 
improvement for floodwater retardation, erosion control, and 
reduction of sedimentation in the watersheds of rivers and 
streams and to further the conservation, development, 
utilization, and disposal of water. The work of the Department 
in watershed planning consists of assisting local organizations 
to develop their watershed work plan by making investigations 
and surveys in response to requests made by sponsoring local 
organizations. These plans describe the soil erosion, water 
management, and sedimentation problems in a watershed and works 
of improvement proposed to alleviate these problems. Plans also 
include estimated benefits and costs, cost-sharing and 
operating and maintenance arrangements, and other appropriate 
information necessary to justify Federal assistance for 
carrying out the plan.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for 
Watershed Surveys and Planning.

               watershed and flood prevention operations

Appropriations, 2007....................................................
Budget estimate, 2008...................................................
Committee recommendation................................     $33,450,000

    The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public 
Law 566, 83d Cong.) (16 U.S.C. 1001-1005, 1007-1009) provides 
for cooperation between the Federal Government and the States 
and their political subdivisions in a program to prevent 
erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the watersheds or 
rivers and streams and to further the conservation, 
development, utilization, and disposal of water.
    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility for administration of activities, which include 
cooperation with local sponsors, State, and other public 
agencies in the installation of planned works of improvement to 
reduce erosion, floodwater, and sediment damage; conserve, 
develop, utilize, and dispose of water; plan and install works 
of improvement for flood prevention, including the development 
of recreational facilities and the improvement of fish and 
wildlife habitat; and loans to local organizations to help 
finance the local share of the cost of carrying out planned 
watershed and flood prevention works of improvement.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $33,450,000 
for Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations.

                    WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $31,309,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       5,807,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

    The watershed rehabilitation program account provides for 
technical and financial assistance to carry out rehabilitation 
of structural measures, in accordance with section 14 of the 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, approved August 
4, 1954 (16 U.S.C. 1012, U.S.C. 1001, et seq.), as amended by 
section 313 of Public Law 106-472, November 9, 2000, and by 
section 2505 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 
2002 (Public Law 107-171).

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,000,000 
for the Watershed Rehabilitation Program.
    The Committee directs that funding under this program be 
provided for rehabilitation of structures determined to be of 
high priority need in order to protect property and ensure 
public safety.

                 resource conservation and development

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $51,088,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      14,653,000
Committee recommendation................................      53,150,000

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility under provisions of section 102, title I of the 
Food and Agriculture Act of 1962 (7 U.S.C. 1010 et seq.), for 
developing overall work plans for resource conservation and 
development projects in cooperation with local sponsors; to 
help develop local programs of land conservation and 
utilization; to assist local groups and individuals in carrying 
out such plans and programs; to conduct surveys and 
investigations relating to the conditions and factors affecting 
such work on private lands; and to make loans to project 
sponsors for conservation and development purposes and to 
individual operators for establishing soil and water 
conservation practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,150,000 
for Resource Conservation and Development.

                    HEALTHY FORESTS RESERVE PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $2,476,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       2,476,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,476,000

    The healthy forests reserve program [HFRP] was authorized 
by title V of Public Law 108-148 (16 U.S.C. 6571-6578). The 
purpose of the HFRP is to restore and enhance forest ecosystems 
to promote the recovery of threatened and endangered species; 
to improve biodiversity; and to enhance carbon sequestration. 
The program operates on a voluntary basis with private 
landowners utilizing cost-share agreements or easements of 
varying duration. The Federal Government assists participating 
landowners with the cost of the approved conservation 
practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,476,000 for 
the Healthy Forest Reserve Program.

                               TITLE III

                       RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

    The Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354) 
abolished the Farmers Home Administration, Rural Development 
Administration, and Rural Electrification Administration and 
replaced those agencies with the Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service, (currently, the Rural Housing Service), 
Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service (currently, 
the Rural Business--Cooperative Service), and Rural Utilities 
Service and placed them under the oversight of the Under 
Secretary for Rural Economic and Community Development, 
(currently, Rural Development). These agencies deliver a 
variety of programs through a network of State, district, and 
county offices.

          Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $632,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         695,000
Committee recommendation................................         666,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development 
provides direction and coordination in carrying out the laws 
enacted by the Congress with respect to the Department's rural 
economic and community development activities. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Rural Housing 
Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and the Rural 
Utilities Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $666,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development.
    Program Outreach.--The Committee recognizes unique program 
outreach challenges the Department faces to apprise rural 
Hispanic residents and communities of the opportunities 
available through Rural Development programs and technical 
assistance. The Committee has been made aware of and encourages 
the Department to consider a cooperative agreement with the 
Self Reliance Foundation, for the National Hispanic Rural 
Communications Initiative.
    Renewable Energy.--The Committee is concerned about the 
effects high corn prices, due in large part to the use of corn 
in ethanol production, are having on other areas of 
agriculture, namely increased livestock feed prices, reductions 
in the effectiveness of food aid resources, and increased costs 
associated with domestic nutrition programs such as the Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children 
[WIC]. The Committee encourages the Department to focus on a 
broad range of renewable fuel feedstocks as part of their 
various renewable fuel programs to the extent practicable.
    Technical Assistance.--The Committee recognizes that the 
community of Tchula, Mississippi, has requested technical and 
programmatic assistance for housing, business, 
telecommunication, and other essential community needs. The 
Committee expects the Secretary to provide additional 
resources, and encourages the use of available national reserve 
funds.

                  Rural Community Advancement Program

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $737,135,000
Budget estimate, 2008 \1\...............................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ Proposed to be disaggregated and displayed under the Rural Community 
Program Account, the Rural Business Program Account, and the Rural Water 
and Waste Disposal Program account.

    The Rural Community Advancement Program [RCAP] was 
authorized by the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform 
Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-127), to consolidate funding for 
the following programs: direct and guaranteed water and waste 
disposal loans, water and waste disposal grants, emergency 
community water assistance grants, solid waste management 
grants, direct and guaranteed community facility loans, 
community facility grants, direct and guaranteed business and 
industry loans, rural business enterprise grants, and rural 
business opportunity grants.
    Over time, as additional programs have been added, the RCAP 
account display has become unwieldy. To improve clarity, 
enhance understanding, and expedite budget processes the 
administration proposed revising the presentation to place the 
programs associated with each funding stream with its agency. 
No changes are proposed to program operations or 
implementation, including the ability to reallocate funds 
within each stream as authorized under RCAP.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee accepts the proposal to display Rural 
Community Advancement programs with their associated agencies.

                                     RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                     2007         2008 budget     recommendation
                                                                appropriation       request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation................................................          161,298          208,194          175,302
Transfer from:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account........          452,927          434,890          462,521
    Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans                  38,623           37,009           39,405
     Program Account.........................................
    Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account..............            4,774            4,576            4,861
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, RD salaries and expenses........................          657,622          684,669          682,089
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
programs of the Rural Utilities Service, the Rural Housing 
Service, and the Rural Business--Cooperative Service, including 
reviewing applications, making and collecting loans and 
providing technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; and 
to assist in extending other Federal programs to people in 
rural areas.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for 
costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $682,089,000 for salaries and 
expenses of Rural Development, including a direct appropriation 
of $175,302,000.
    Inherent Function of Government.--The Committee expects 
that none of the funds recommended for Rural Development, 
Salaries and Expenses should be used to enter into or renew a 
contract for any activity that is best suited as an inherent 
function of Government, without prior approval from the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate. Such 
activities may include, but are not limited to, any function 
that affects eligibility determination, disbursement, 
collection or accounting for Government subsidies provided 
under any of the direct or guaranteed loan programs of the 
Rural Development mission area or the Farm Service Agency.

                         Rural Housing Service

    The Rural Housing Service [RHS] was established under the 
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994.
    The mission of the Service is to improve the quality of 
life in rural America by assisting rural residents and 
communities in obtaining adequate and affordable housing and 
access to needed community facilities. The goals and objectives 
of the Service are: (1) facilitate the economic revitalization 
of rural areas by providing direct and indirect economic 
benefits to individual borrowers, families, and rural 
communities; (2) assure that benefits are communicated to all 
program eligible customers with special outreach efforts to 
target resources to underserved, impoverished, or economically 
declining rural areas; (3) lower the cost of programs while 
retaining the benefits by redesigning more effective programs 
that work in partnership with State and local governments and 
the private sector; and (4) leverage the economic benefits 
through the use of low-cost credit programs, especially 
guaranteed loans.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a loan and grant level of 
$5,748,613,000 for the Rural Housing Service housing programs.
    Section 502 Single Family Housing Programs.--The Committee 
recommends $1,129,391,000 for Direct Single Family Housing 
loans and $3,561,111,000 for Unsubsidized Guaranteed Single 
Family Housing loans. The Committee rejects the 
administration's comprehensive Single Family Housing overhaul. 
Termination of the flagship direct loan program with its long 
history of unqualified success is unwarranted. Coupled with 
this termination is a severe reduction in Mutual and Self Help 
Housing grants, and elimination of the Self Help Land 
Development loan program. The ensuing shortfall in low income 
housing assistance would be made up by increasing unsubsidized 
guaranteed loans, with a 50 percent guarantee fee increase, and 
the promise of a legislative proposal for a subsidized 
guaranteed program. No funding was sought for the subsidized 
loan proposal, and no legislative proposal has been submitted.
    The Committee is concerned with the lack of empirical 
grounding for this plan. In spite of repeated requests, no 
evidence was offered to demonstrate that adequate assistance 
would be available for the low and very low income rural 
residents who rely on existing programs. Absent verification 
that guaranteed programs can reach the income levels existing 
programs serve, the Committee rejects these radical changes.
    Section 515/Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program.--
The Committee recommends $33,423,000 to continue the 
Department's efforts to address the preservation of the section 
515 portfolio through financial options to project owners, 
including vouchers. The Committee provided funding and this 
authority in separate accounts in fiscal year 2007. The 
Committee recommends $15,500,000 for rural housing vouchers, 
$2,923,000 for the multi-family revolving loan demonstration 
program, and $15,000,000 to restructure existing section 515 
loans. The Committee provides statutory language to allow the 
Secretary to transfer funding among the programs to meet 
existing need. The Committee recognizes that the Department has 
authorizing language currently under consideration by Congress 
and provides the Secretary, upon enactment, the authority to 
transfer funds made available under this heading to carry out 
such legislation with prior approval of the Committee on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
    The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for the section 515 
program. In recent years a substantial amount of the section 
515 appropriation has been used for needed repairs and 
rehabilitation in the portfolio. The Committee believes project 
rehabilitation can be more effectively performed through the 
revitalization initiative. To that end, funding that would have 
been used for section 515 repair and rehabilitation is provided 
directly to the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program 
Account.
    The following table presents loan and grant program levels 
recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year 
2007 levels and the 2008 budget request:

                                              LOAN AND GRANT LEVELS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                       2007        2008 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account loan levels:
    Single family housing (sec. 502):
        Direct..................................................       1,129,391  ..............       1,129,391
        Unsubsidized guaranteed.................................       3,644,224       4,848,611       3,561,111
    Housing repair (sec. 504)...................................          34,652          22,855          34,652
    Multifamily housing guarantees (sec. 538)...................          99,000         200,000         150,000
    Rental housing (sec. 515)...................................          99,000  ..............          70,000
    Site loans (sec. 524).......................................           5,000           5,045           5,045
    Credit sales of acquired property...........................          11,485          11,408          11,485
    Self-help housing land development fund.....................           4,998  ..............           5,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, RHIF (excluding multifamily housing preservation)..       5,027,750       5,087,919       4,966,684
                                                                 ===============================================
Farm Labor Program:
    Farm labor housing loan level...............................          38,117          13,520          27,739
    Farm labor housing grants...................................          13,860           4,000          10,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, Farm Labor Program.................................          51,977          17,520          37,739
                                                                 ===============================================
Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program: \1\
    Rural housing voucher program...............................          15,840          27,800          15,500
    Multifamily housing preservation............................          94,989  ..............         146,850
    Revolving loans demo........................................           6,301  ..............           6,300
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program..........         117,130          27,800         168,650
                                                                 ===============================================
Mutual and self-help housing....................................          33,660           9,500          38,000
Rental assistance...............................................         616,020         567,000         496,950
Rural housing assistance grants [RHAG] (excluding multifamily             40,590          39,000          40,590
 housing revolving loan fund)...................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, rural housing loans and grants.....................       5,887,127       5,748,739       5,748,613
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In fiscal year 2007 housing vouchers were provided under the rural housing voucher program account,
  multifamily housing preservation was provided under the rural housing insurance fund, and the revolving loans
  demo was provided under rural housing assistance grants.

              RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

    This fund was established in 1965 (Public Law 89-117) 
pursuant to section 517 of title V of the Housing Act of 1949 
(42 U.S.C. 517(d)), as amended. This fund may be used to insure 
or guarantee rural housing loans for single-family homes, 
rental and cooperative housing, and rural housing sites. Rural 
housing loans are made to construct, improve, alter, repair, or 
replace dwellings and essential farm service buildings that are 
modest in size, design, and cost. Rental housing insured loans 
are made to individuals, corporations, associations, trusts, or 
partnerships to provide moderate-cost rental housing and 
related facilities for elderly persons in rural areas. These 
loans are repayable in terms up to 30 years. Loan programs are 
limited to rural areas, which include towns, villages, and 
other places of not more than 10,000 population, which are not 
part of an urban area. Loans may also be made in areas with a 
population in excess of 10,000, but less than 20,000, if the 
area is not included in a standard metropolitan statistical 
area and has a serious lack of mortgage credit for low- and 
moderate-income borrowers.

            LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508) 
established the RHIF program account. Appropriations to this 
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs 
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees 
committed in 2008, as well as for administrative expenses. The 
following table presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to 
the 2007 levels and the 2008 budget request:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Single family (sec. 502):
        Direct...............................................          113,278  ...............          105,824
        Unsubsidized guaranteed..............................           42,641           10,070           42,495
    Housing repair (sec. 504)................................           10,240            6,461            9,796
    Multi-family housing guarantees (sec. 538)...............            7,663           18,800           14,100
    Rental housing (sec. 515)................................           45,213  ...............           29,827
    Site loans (sec. 524) \1\................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Credit sales of acquired property........................              721              523              552
    Multifamily housing preservation \2\.....................            8,910  ...............  ...............
    Self-help housing land development fund..................              123  ...............              142
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies..................................          228,789           35,854          202,736
                                                              ==================================================
Administrative expenses......................................          452,927          434,890          462,521
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Negative subsidy rates for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 are calculated for this program.
\2\ Reflected under the multifamily housing revitalization program account in fiscal year 2008.

                       FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Subsidy
                                        Loan level    level      Grants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007..................     38,117      18,277     13,860
Budget estimate, 2008.................     13,520       5,849      4,000
Committee recommendation..............     27,739      12,000     10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The direct farm labor housing loan program is authorized 
under section 514 and the rural housing for domestic farm labor 
housing grant program is authorized under section 516 of the 
Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The loans, grants, and 
contracts are made to public and private nonprofit 
organizations for low-rent housing and related facilities for 
domestic farm labor. Grant assistance may not exceed 90 percent 
of the cost of a project. Loans and grants may be used for 
construction of new structures, site acquisition and 
development, rehabilitation of existing structures, and 
purchase of furnishings and equipment for dwellings, dining 
halls, community rooms, and infirmaries.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for 
costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,000,000 
for the cost of Direct Farm Labor Housing Loans and Grants.

               MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................................
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     $27,800,000
Committee recommendation................................      33,423,000

    The Rural Housing Voucher Program was authorized under the 
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1940r) to assist very low income 
families and individuals who reside in rental housing in rural 
areas. Housing vouchers may be provided to residents of rental 
housing projects financed by section 515 loans that have been 
prepaid after September 30, 2005. Voucher amounts reflect the 
difference between comparable market rents and tenant-paid rent 
prior to loan prepayment. Vouchers allow tenants to remain in 
existing projects or move to other rental housing.
    The Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account 
includes funding for housing vouchers, a multifamily revolving 
loan demonstration program, and a demonstration program for the 
preservation and revitalization of affordable multifamily 
housing projects. Rural Development's multifamily housing 
portfolio faces dual pressures for loan prepayments and repair/
rehabilitation stemming from inadequate reserves resulting in 
deferred property maintenance. A recent study revealed that the 
section 515 portfolio could be partitioned into three 
components: properties in growing markets where it is 
economically feasible for owners to prepay and leave the 
program (about 10 percent of the portfolio); properties in 
extremely depressed markets with substantial vacancies and 
diminishing demand in which continuation is neither viable nor 
needed (about 10 percent of the portfolio); and the balance (80 
percent of the portfolio) that continues to provide essential 
affordable rental housing but face varying degrees of deferred 
maintenance and need for preservation and revitalization 
assistance.
    Provision of affordable rental housing can be accomplished 
more economically by revitalizing existing housing stock rather 
than funding new construction. The Multifamily Housing 
Revitalization Program Account includes revitalization tools 
for maintenance of existing units and vouchers to protect 
tenants in those projects that prepay. Flexibility is provided 
to allow Rural Development to utilize funding among vouchers 
and the two demonstration programs to meet the most urgent 
local needs for tenant protection and project revitalization.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $33,423,000 
for the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account.

                       RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $616,020,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     567,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     496,950,000

    The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
U.S.C. 1490a) established a rural rental assistance program to 
be administered through the rural housing loans program. The 
objective of the program is to reduce rents paid by low-income 
families living in Rural Housing Service financed rental 
projects and farm labor housing projects. Under this program, 
low-income tenants will contribute the higher of: (1) 30 
percent of monthly adjusted income; (2) 10 percent of monthly 
income; or (3) designated housing payments from a welfare 
agency.
    Payments from the fund are made to the project owner for 
the difference between the tenant's payment and the approved 
rental rate established for the unit.
    The program is administered in tandem with Rural Housing 
Service section 515 rural rental and cooperative housing 
programs and the farm labor loan and grant programs. Priority 
is given to existing projects for units occupied by rent over 
burdened low-income families and projects experiencing 
financial difficulties beyond the control of the owner; any 
remaining authority will be used for projects receiving new 
construction commitments under sections 514, 515, or 516 for 
very low-income families with certain limitations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $496,950,000 
for the Rental Assistance Program.
    Rental Assistance.--The Committee provides funding to meet 
the needs of expiring and new rental assistance contracts for 
section 515 and 514/516 multi-family housing projects. The 
Committee includes statutory language requiring rental 
assistance to be held in 514/516 projects for a minimum period 
of time.
    Due to difficulties in accurately estimating the number of 
expiring rental assistance contracts each year, the Committee 
includes language reducing the contract length for new rental 
assistance contracts to 1 year. Recently contracts have ranged 
from 2 to 5 years in length, but outside costs such as higher 
insurance and energy costs have made the process to estimate 
the number of expiring contracts very unreliable. Because of 
this, unbudgeted expenditures have arisen over the past few 
years to cover an increasing number of expiring contracts, 
forcing various courses of action to cover the lack of funds. 
The Committee feels shortening the contract term to 1 year will 
allow the Department to more accurately anticipate the number 
of expiring contracts, therefore making the budgetary 
estimation and subsequent appropriation more accurate. The 
Committee is aware of the increase in annual appropriations 
which will be necessary in subsequent years to support this 
change and will act accordingly.

                  MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $33,660,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       9,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      38,000,000

    The Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants Program is 
authorized by title V of the Housing Act of 1949. Grants are 
made to local organizations to promote the development of 
mutual or self-help programs under which groups of usually 6 to 
10 families build their own homes by mutually exchanging labor. 
Funds may be used to pay the cost of construction supervisors 
who will work with families in the construction of their homes 
and for administrative expenses of the organizations providing 
the self-help assistance.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,000,000 
for Mutual and Self-help Housing Grants.

                    rural housing assistance grants

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $43,603,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      39,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,590,000

    The Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program consolidates 
funding for rural housing grant programs. This consolidation of 
housing grant funding provides greater flexibility to tailor 
financial assistance to applicant needs.
    Very Low-income Housing Repair Grants.--The Very Low-Income 
Housing Repair Grants Program is authorized under section 504 
of title V of the Housing Act of 1949. The rural housing repair 
grant program is carried out by making grants to very low-
income families to make necessary repairs to their homes in 
order to make such dwellings safe and sanitary, and remove 
hazards to the health of the occupants, their families, or the 
community.
    These grants may be made to cover the cost of improvements 
or additions, such as repairing roofs, providing toilet 
facilities, providing a convenient and sanitary water supply, 
supplying screens, repairing or providing structural supports 
or making similar repairs, additions, or improvements, 
including all preliminary and installation costs in obtaining 
central water and sewer service. A grant can be made in 
combination with a section 504 very low-income housing repair 
loan.
    No assistance can be extended to any one individual in the 
form of a loan, grant, or combined loans and grants in excess 
of $27,500, and grant assistance is limited to persons, or 
families headed by persons who are 62 years of age or older.
    Supervisory and Technical Assistance Grants.--Supervisory 
and technical assistance grants are made to public and private 
nonprofit organizations for packaging loan applications for 
housing assistance under sections 502, 504, 514/516, 515, and 
533 of the Housing Act of 1949. The assistance is directed to 
very low-income families in underserved areas where at least 20 
percent of the population is below the poverty level and at 
least 10 percent or more of the population resides in 
substandard housing. In fiscal year 1994 a Homebuyer Education 
Program was implemented under this authority. This program 
provides low-income individuals and families education and 
counseling on obtaining and/or maintaining occupancy of 
adequate housing and supervised credit assistance to become 
successful homeowners.
    Compensation for Construction Defects.--Compensation for 
construction defects provides funds for grants to eligible 
section 502 borrowers to correct structural defects, or to pay 
claims of owners arising from such defects on a newly 
constructed dwelling purchased with RHS financial assistance. 
Claims are not paid until provisions under the builder's 
warranty have been fully pursued. Requests for compensation for 
construction defects must be made by the owner of the property 
within 18 months after the date financial assistance was 
granted.
    Rural Housing Preservation Grants.--Rural housing 
preservation grants (section 533) of the Housing and Urban-
Rural Recovery Act of 1983 (42 U.S.C. 1490m) authorizes the 
Rural Housing Service to administer a program of home repair 
directed at low- and very low-income people.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,590,000 
for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program.
    The following table compares the grant program levels 
recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2007 levels and 
the budget request:

                                         RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very low-income housing repair grants........................           29,601           30,000           29,601
Supervisory and technical assistance.........................              990  ...............              990
Rural housing preservation grants............................            9,900            9,000            9,900
Compensation for construction defects........................               99  ...............               99
Multi-family housing preservation............................            3,013  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................           43,603           39,000           40,590
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    RURAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriation, 2007.....................................     $97,743,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      24,512,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................      67,422,000

\1\ Committee recommendation does not reflect High Energy Cost grants, 
which appear in Rural Utilities Services.

    Community facility loans were created by the Rural 
Development Act of 1972 (7 U.S.C. 1926 et seq.) to finance a 
variety of rural community facilities. Loans are made to 
organizations, including certain Indian tribes and corporations 
not operated for profit and public and quasipublic agencies, to 
construct, enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community 
facilities providing essential services to rural residents. 
Such facilities include those providing or supporting overall 
community development, such as fire and rescue services, 
healthcare, transportation, traffic control, and community, 
social, cultural, and recreational benefits. Loans are made for 
facilities which primarily serve rural residents of open 
country and rural towns and villages of not more than 20,000 
people. Healthcare and fire and rescue facilities are the 
priorities of the program and receive the majority of available 
funds.
    The Community Facility Grant Program authorized in the 
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-127), is used in conjunction with the existing direct 
and guaranteed loan programs for the development of community 
facilities, such as hospitals, fire stations, and community 
centers. Grants are targeted to the lowest income communities. 
Communities that have lower population and income levels 
receive a higher cost-share contribution through these grants, 
to a maximum contribution of 75 percent of the cost of 
developing the facility.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $67,422,000 
for the Rural Community Program Account.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget 
request levels:

                                         RURAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                                   [Budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Fiscal year 2007    2008 budget      Committee
                                                              appropriation \1\      request     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community facility direct loans.............................            19,038           16,784           16,484
Community facility guaranteed loans.........................             7,609            7,728            7,651
Community facility grants...................................            16,830   ..............           17,000
Economic impact initiative grants...........................            17,820   ..............           16,000
Rural community development initiative......................             6,287   ..............            6,287
Tribal college grants.......................................             4,419   ..............            4,000
High Energy Cost grants.....................................            25,740   ..............  ...............
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................................            97,743           24,512           67,422
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2007 appropriation provided under RCAP.

    Consideration to Applications.--Community Facilities loans 
and grants provide financial assistance to construct, enlarge, 
or otherwise improve essential community facilities for health 
care, public safety and other essential public services. The 
Committee has been made aware of and encourages the Department 
to give consideration to applications relating to essential 
community facilities for the following: Alpine County 
Communications Infrastructure (California); Angel Fire Village 
Plaza (New Mexico); Central Michigan University Center for 
Children with Low-Incidence Disabilities (Michigan); city of 
Beattyville/Lee County Emergency Operations Center (Kentucky); 
city of Munising Fire and Police Building (Michigan); Claiborne 
Parish Fire District 3 (Louisiana); Deer Creek Center (Oregon); 
Delta Health Alliance (Mississippi); Deyo Reservoir (Idaho); 
Eastern Oregon University Regional Center (Oregon); Fort 
Edwards Health Center (New York); Germfask Township Community/
Senior Center Renovations (Michigan); Health Quest, Inc. (New 
York); Japonski Island Infrastructure (Alaska); Lafourche 
Parish Government Emergency Generators (Louisiana); Lake 
Okeechobee Regional Hospital Flood Mitigation (Florida); Rural 
Education Transportation Demonstration Project (Nevada); 
village of Calumet Building Renovation (Michigan); and the 
Weber County Communications System (Utah).
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

                  Rural Business--Cooperative Service

    The Rural Business--Cooperative Service [RBS] was 
established by Public Law 103-354, Federal Crop Insurance 
Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, dated October 13, 1994. Its programs were previously 
administered by the Rural Development Administration, the Rural 
Electrification Administration, and the Agricultural 
Cooperative Service.
    The mission of the Rural Business--Cooperative Service is 
to enhance the quality of life for all rural residents by 
assisting new and existing cooperatives and other businesses 
through partnership with rural communities. The goals and 
objectives are to: (1) promote a stable business environment in 
rural America through financial assistance, sound business 
planning, technical assistance, appropriate research, 
education, and information; (2) support environmentally 
sensitive economic growth that meets the needs of the entire 
community; and (3) assure that the Service benefits are 
available to all segments of the rural community, with emphasis 
on those most in need.

                     RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriation, 2007.....................................     $84,399,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      43,200,000
Committee recommendation................................      86,200,000

    The Rural Business and Industry Loan Program was created by 
the Rural Development Act of 1972, and finances a variety of 
rural industrial development loans. Loans are made for rural 
industrialization and rural community facilities under Rural 
Development Act amendments to the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932 et seq.) authorities. Business 
and industrial loans are made to public, private, or 
cooperative organizations organized for profit, to certain 
Indian tribes, or to individuals for the purpose of improving, 
developing or financing business, industry, and employment or 
improving the economic and environmental climate in rural 
areas. Such purposes include financing business and industrial 
acquisition, construction, enlargement, repair or 
modernization, financing the purchase and development of land, 
easements, rights-of-way, buildings, payment of startup costs, 
and supplying working capital. Industrial development loans may 
be made in any area that is not within the outer boundary of 
any city having a population of 50,000 or more and its 
immediately adjacent urbanized and urbanizing areas with a 
population density of more than 100 persons per square mile. 
Special consideration for such loans is given to rural areas 
and cities having a population of less than 25,000.
    Rural business enterprise grants were authorized by the 
Rural Development Act of 1972. Grants are made to public bodies 
and nonprofit organizations to facilitate development of small 
and emerging business enterprises in rural areas, including the 
acquisition and development of land; the construction of 
buildings, plants, equipment, access streets and roads, parking 
areas, and utility extensions; refinancing fees; technical 
assistance; and startup operating costs and working capital.
    Rural business opportunity grants are authorized under 
section 306(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
Development Act, as amended. Grants may be made to public 
bodies and private nonprofit community development corporations 
or entities. Grants are made to identify and analyze business 
opportunities that will use local rural economic and human 
resources; to identify, train, and provide technical assistance 
to rural entrepreneurs and managers; to establish business 
support centers; to conduct economic development planning and 
coordination, and leadership development; and to establish 
centers for training, technology, and trade that will provide 
training to rural businesses in the utilization of interactive 
communications technologies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $86,200,000 
for the Rural Business Program Account.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget 
request levels:

                                         RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                                   [Budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Fiscal year 2007    2008 budget      Committee
                                                              appropriation \1\      request     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business and industry guaranteed loans......................            39,849           43,200           43,200
Rural business enterprise grants............................            39,600   ..............           38,000
Rural business opportunity grants...........................             2,970   ..............            2,000
Delta Regional Authority grants.............................             1,980   ..............            3,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................................            84,399           43,200           86,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2007 appropriation provided under RCAP.

    Rural Business Program Account.--The Committee recommends 
$495,000 for transportation technical assistance.
    The Committee directs that of the $3,996,000 recommended 
for grants to benefit Federally Recognized Native American 
Tribes, $248,000 be used to implement an American Indian and 
Alaska Native passenger transportation development and 
assistance initiative.
    Consideration to Applications--Rural Business Opportunity 
Grants, Rural Business Enterprise Grants, and Business and 
Industry Guaranteed Loans.--The Committee has been made aware 
of and encourages the Department to give consideration to 
applications for rural business opportunity grants, rural 
business enterprise grants, and business and industry 
guaranteed loans for the following: Bio-Renewal Ethanol and Co-
Generation Plant (Louisiana); Center for Producer-Owned Energy 
(Minnesota); Lake Providence Dry Ethanol Plant (Louisiana); 
Northeast Organic Farmers Association (Vermont); the 
Northeastern Vermont Development Association (Vermont); Odessa 
Biodiesel and Oilseed Crushing Facility (Washington); Penobscot 
Bay Commercial Kitchen (Maine); the Port of Umatilla Biodiesel 
Plant (Oregon); the REI Rural Business and Resource Center at 
Seminole State College (Oklahoma); Rhode Island RDC (Rhode 
Island); the San Louis Valley Sustainable Environment and 
Economic Development Park (Colorado); Snohomish County 
Agricultural Industrial Park (Washington); the SUNY Fredonia 
High Tech Incubator (New York); and Women in Technology 
(Hawaii). In addition, the Committee encourages the Department 
to consider applications for grants to rural public television 
broadcasting systems.
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

              RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level.........................................           33,870           33,772           33,870
Direct loan subsidy..........................................           14,926           14,485           14,527
Administrative expenses......................................            4,774            4,576            4,861
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rural development (intermediary relending) loan program 
was originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 
1964 (Public Law 88-452). The making of rural development loans 
by the Department of Agriculture was reauthorized by Public Law 
99-425, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1986.
    Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (this is, small 
investment groups) who in turn will reloan the funds to rural 
businesses, community development corporations, private 
nonprofit organizations, public agencies, et cetera, for the 
purpose of improving business, industry, community facilities, 
and employment opportunities and diversification of the economy 
in rural areas.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 2008, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,527,000 
for Rural Development (intermediary relending) loans.
    Consideration to Applications--Intermediary Relending 
Program.--The Committee has been made aware of and encourages 
the Department to give consideration to an application for the 
intermediary relending program for the REI Rural Intermediary 
Relending Program, (Oklahoma).
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

            RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level.........................................           24,752           33,077           33,077
Direct loan subsidy \1\......................................            5,406  ...............  ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Offset in 2007 by a rescission from interest on the cushion of credit payments as authorized by section 313
  of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936.

    The Rural Economic Development Loans program was 
established by the Reconciliation Act of December 1987 (Public 
Law 100-203), which amended the Rural Electrification Act of 
1936 (Act of May 20, 1936), by establishing a new section 313. 
This section of the Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 901) 
established a cushion of credits payment program and created 
the rural economic development subaccount. The Administrator of 
RUS is authorized under the act to utilize funds in this 
program to provide zero interest loans to electric and 
telecommunications borrowers for the purpose of promoting rural 
economic development and job creation projects, including 
funding for feasibility studies, startup costs, and other 
reasonable expenses for the purpose of fostering rural economic 
development.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee accepts the administration's proposal to fund 
rural economic development loans from interest earnings on 
cushion of credit payments.

                  RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $26,718,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      20,928,000
Committee recommendation................................      26,403,000

    Rural cooperative development grants are authorized under 
section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act, as amended. Grants are made to fund the establishment and 
operation of centers for rural cooperative development with 
their primary purpose being the improvement of economic 
conditions in rural areas. Grants may be made to nonprofit 
institutions or institutions of higher education. Grants may be 
used to pay up to 75 percent of the cost of the project and 
associated administrative costs. The applicant must contribute 
at least 25 percent from non-Federal sources, except 1994 
institutions, which only need to provide 5 percent. Grants are 
competitive and are awarded based on specific selection 
criteria.
    Cooperative research agreements are authorized by 7 U.S.C. 
2204b. The funds are used for cooperative research agreements, 
primarily with colleges and universities, on critical 
operational, organizational, and structural issues facing 
cooperatives.
    Cooperative agreements are authorized under 7 U.S.C. 2201 
to any qualified State departments of agriculture, university, 
and other State entity to conduct research that will strengthen 
and enhance the operations of agricultural marketing 
cooperatives in rural areas.
    The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas [ATTRA] 
program was first authorized by the Food Security Act of 1985. 
The program provides information and technical assistance to 
agricultural producers to adopt sustainable agricultural 
practices that are environmentally friendly and lower 
production costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,403,000 
for Rural Cooperative Development Grants.
    Of the funds recommended, $3,000,000 is for the Appropriate 
Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program through a 
cooperative agreement with the National Center for Appropriate 
Technology (Kohl, Harkin, Johnson, McConnell, Specter, Leahy, 
Baucus, Lincoln, Pryor, Tester/National Center for Appropriate 
Technology, Butte, Montana).
    The Committee has included language in the bill that not 
more than $1,473,000 shall be made available to cooperatives or 
associations of cooperatives whose primary focus is to provide 
assistance to small, minority producers.
    Value Added.--The Committee recommends $17,475,000 for 
value-added agricultural product market development grants.

       RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $11,088,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000 
for Rural Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities Grants, 
with the funds to be made available in the same manner and with 
the same priorities as in fiscal year 2007.
    Outmigration.--The Committee is concerned that rural 
empowerment zones, particularly zones selected because of 
outmigration, are having a difficult time successfully 
competing for USDA Rural Development programs due primarily to 
the fact that many programs are tied to household income 
levels. Often, household income levels have very little to do 
with the reasons for outmigration. Economic development efforts 
in these zones cannot advance without additional funding from 
competitive grant programs to supplement the funding that the 
Committee has earmarked for the zones for the last several 
years. USDA is directed to provide a report to the Committee 
with suggestions on how to revise competitive grant-making 
criteria to take into consideration outmigration when making 
awards to rural empowerment zones.

                        Renewable Energy Program

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $22,841,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      33,941,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,489,000

    The Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency 
Improvements Program is authorized under 7 U.S.C. 8106. This 
program may provide direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants 
to farmers, ranchers, and small rural businesses for the 
purchase of renewable energy systems and for energy efficiency 
improvements.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,489,000 
for the Renewable Energy Program.

                        Rural Utilities Service

    The Rural Utilities Service [RUS] was established under the 
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354), October 13, 
1994. RUS administers the electric and telephone programs of 
the former Rural Electrification Administration and the water 
and waste programs of the former Rural Development 
Administration.
    The mission of the RUS is to serve a leading role in 
improving the quality of life in rural America by administering 
its electric, telecommunications, and water and waste programs 
in a service oriented, forward looking, and financially 
responsible manner. All three programs have the common goal of 
modernizing and revitalizing rural communities. RUS provides 
funding and support service for utilities serving rural areas. 
The public-private partnerships established by RUS and local 
utilities assist rural communities in modernizing local 
infrastructure. RUS programs are also characterized by the 
substantial amount of private investment which is leveraged by 
the public funds invested into infrastructure and technology, 
resulting in the creation of new sources of employment.

             RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriation, 2007.....................................    $554,994,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     502,779,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................     550,469,000

\1\ Committee recommendation includes High Energy Cost grants.

    The water and waste disposal program is authorized by 
sections 306, 306A, 309A, 306C, 306D, and 310B of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et 
seq., as amended). This program makes loans for water and waste 
development costs. Development loans are made to associations, 
including corporations operating on a nonprofit basis, 
municipalities and similar organizations, generally designated 
as public or quasipublic agencies, that propose projects for 
the development, storage, treatment, purification, and 
distribution of domestic water or the collection, treatment, or 
disposal of waste in rural areas. Such grants may not exceed 75 
percent of the development cost of the projects and can 
supplement other funds borrowed or furnished by applicants to 
pay development costs.
    The solid waste grant program is authorized under section 
310B(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act. 
Grants are made to public bodies and private nonprofit 
organizations to provide technical assistance to local and 
regional governments for the purpose of reducing or eliminating 
pollution of water resources and for improving the planning and 
management of solid waste disposal facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $550,469,000 
for the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account.
    The Committee, again, rejects the administration's proposal 
to: revise direct loan interest rates, increase loan levels, 
diminish grants, and require communities to rely more heavily 
on borrowing rather than grants. The Committee is not convinced 
that this proposal will provide assistance needed to the 
poorest and most remote rural communities currently served. As 
submitted, the proposal would also allow communities with 
projects approved in prior years to take advantage of 
substantially lower interest rates while retaining the grant 
package previously approved. In spite of numerous requests for 
clarification, the agency appears unable to identify the total 
costs of its proposal. The Committee believes these additional 
(but unknown) costs would better serve rural America in the 
form of grants provided through the traditional program.
    The Committee recommends $65,835,000 for water and waste 
disposal systems grants for Native Americans, including Native 
Alaskans, and the Colonias, allocated in a manner consistent 
with the fiscal year 2007 allocations. The Committee recognizes 
the special needs and problems for delivery of basic services 
to these populations. The Secretary is directed to provide a 
report to the Committee that identifies the specific areas in 
which water and waste disposal program resources have been 
provided, where additional resources are most needed, and the 
relative costs of program delivery to the various areas and 
regions covered by the authorities identified for use of these 
specific funds. The Committee expects from the Secretary a 
spending plan of how the funds will be used, quarterly 
notification on grant obligations, and a year end summary 
report. In addition, the Committee makes up to $13,612,500 
available for the circuit rider program.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget 
request levels:

                                 RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                                   [Budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Fiscal year 2007    2008 budget      Committee
                                                              appropriation \1\      request     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water and waste disposal direct loans.......................            98,604          153,394           73,564
Water and waste disposal grants.............................           437,748          344,920          437,748
Solid waste management grants...............................             3,465            3,465            3,465
Emer. community water assistance grants.....................            13,692   ..............           13,692
Water well system grants....................................               990            1,000  ...............
Water and waste water revolving funds.......................               495   ..............  ...............
High energy cost grants.....................................  .................  ..............           22,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................................           554,994          502,779          550,469
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2007 appropriation provided under RCAP.

    Consideration to Applications.--Water and Waste Disposal 
loans and grants provide financial support and technical 
assistance for development and operation of safe and affordable 
water supply systems and waste disposal facilities. Funds may 
be used to construct, repair, expand or otherwise improve water 
supply and distribution, and waste collection and treatment 
systems. The Committee has been made aware of and encourages 
the Department to consider applications for water and waste 
disposal loans and grants for the following projects: Bladen 
Bluffs Regional Surface Water System (North Carolina), Caddo 
Regional Water Supply Initiative (Louisiana); City of 
Battleground Water Reclamation Facility (Washington); City of 
Coburg Wastewater System (Oregon); City of Grambling Sewer 
Project Phase II (Louisiana); City of Port Allen Sewer 
Treatment (Louisiana); City of Santa Paula (California); EOSC 
Lagoon Environmental Cleanup/Utilities (Oklahoma); Eunice 
Wastewater System Upgrade and Water Systems Improvements (New 
Mexico); Franklin Township Wastewater Project (Michigan); 
Gadsden County Rural Utilities Improvement (Florida); Guernsey 
County Water Plant (Ohio); Jal Water and Sewer Improvements 
(New Mexico); Japonski Island Infrastructure (Alaska); Johnson 
Canyon Project (Utah); Leesville Sewer Expansion (Louisiana); 
Lincoln Pipestone Rural Water (Minnesota), Western Prairie 
Rural Water (Minnesota); Long Valley Water Distribution Project 
(Utah); Lovington Water Systems Improvements (New Mexico); Mt. 
Victory Road Water Project (Ohio); National Drinking Water 
Clearinghouse (West Virginia); Neah Bay Water (Washington); 
Newton Water Users Association Pipeline (Utah); Pascoag Utility 
District Potable Water (Rhode Island); Red Rock Rural Water 
(Minnesota); Iowa Lakes Rural Water (Minnesota), South 
Mansfield Elevated Water Tank Rehabilitation (Louisiana); 
Strawberry Zions Flat Project (Utah); Town of Greenwood Water 
Line (Louisiana); Union Rome Wastewater Treatment (Ohio); 
Village of Downsville Wastewater Infrastructure (Louisiana); 
Village of Sterlington Potable Water (Louisiana); Village of 
Vanlue Water System (Ohio); the Village of Williamsburg Sewer 
System Upgrade (Ohio); and West Corrine Waterline Upgrade 
(Utah).
    Water and Waste Technical Assistance and Training Grants.--
The Committee expects the Secretary to continue to provide 
support for the National Drinking Water Clearinghouse through 
the water and waste technical assistance and training grant 
program.
    Solid Waste Management Grants.--The Committee recommends 
$3,465,000 for grants for solid waste management.
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

   RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

    The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et 
seq.) provides the statutory authority for the electric and 
telecommunications programs.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508) 
established the program account. An appropriation to this 
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs 
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees 
committed in fiscal year 2008, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table reflects the Committee's recommendation 
for the rural electrification and telecommunications loans 
program account, the loan subsidy and administrative expenses, 
as compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget request levels:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5 percent....................................           99,000          100,000          100,000
        Direct, Muni.........................................          100,764  ...............  ...............
        Direct, FFB..........................................        2,700,000        4,000,000        6,500,000
        Direct, Treasury rate................................          990,000  ...............  ...............
        Guaranteed...........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Guaranteed, Underwriting.............................        1,500,000  ...............        1,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................................        5,389,764        4,100,000        7,600,000
                                                              ==================================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5 percent....................................          145,000          145,000          145,000
        Direct, Treasury rate................................          419,760          250,000          250,000
        Direct, FFB..........................................          125,000          295,000          295,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................................          689,760          690,000          690,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, loan authorizations.........................        6,079,524        4,790,000        8,290,000
                                                              ==================================================
Loan Subsidies:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5 percent....................................            2,119              120              120
        Direct, Muni.........................................            1,522  ...............  ...............
        Direct, FFB..........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Direct, Treasury rate................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Guaranteed...........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Guaranteed, Underwriting.............................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................................            3,641              120              120
                                                              ==================================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5 percent....................................              537              116              116
        Direct, Treasury rate................................              126            1,675            1,675
        Direct, FFB..........................................  ...............            1,829            1,829
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................................              663            3,620            3,620
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, loan subsidies..............................            4,304            3,740            3,740
                                                              ==================================================
Administrative expenses......................................           38,623           37,009           39,405
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications               42,927           40,749           43,145
       Loans Programs Account................................
                                                              ==================================================
          (Loan authorization)...............................        6,079,524        4,790,000        8,290,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM

                         LOANS AND GRANT LEVELS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan and Grant Levels:
    Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program:
        Direct loans.........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Grants...............................................           29,700           24,750           34,750
    Broadband Program:
        Direct 4 percent loans...............................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Treasury rate loans..................................          495,000          300,000          495,000
        Guaranteed loans.....................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Grants...............................................            8,910  ...............            8,910
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, DLTB grants and loan authorizations.........          533,610          324,750          538,660
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM

                            LOANS AND GRANTS

                                   [Budget authority In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2007 level      2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program:
    Direct loan subsidies....................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Grants...................................................           29,700           24,750           34,750
Broadband Program:
    Direct 4 percent loan subsidies..........................  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Treasury subsidies.......................................           10,643            6,450           10,643
    Guaranteed subsidies.....................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Grants...................................................            8,910  ...............            8,910
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, grants and loan subsidies.......................           49,253           31,200           54,303
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program 
is authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade 
Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), as amended by the 
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-127). This program provides incentives to improve the 
quality of phone services, to provide access to advanced 
telecommunications services and computer networks, and to 
improve rural opportunities.
    This program provides the facilities and equipment to link 
rural education and medical facilities with more urban centers 
and other facilities providing rural residents access to better 
health care through technology and increasing educational 
opportunities for rural students. These funds are available for 
loans and grants.
    The Committee is concerned with the longstanding, unmet 
health care needs in the Mississippi Delta and encourages the 
Department to work with the Delta Health Alliance, a nonprofit 
alliance of academic institutions and economic development 
entities, through existing programs to promote increased health 
access, education, and research in the Mississippi Delta to 
address the growing health care needs of the region.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,303,000 
for the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program. 
The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for public 
broadcasting systems grants to allow noncommercial educational 
television broadcast stations that serve rural areas to convert 
from analog to digital operations. Fiscal year 2008 is the last 
appropriation that can effectively make funding available prior 
to the statutory February 2009 conversion deadline. The 
Committee expects that the $10,000,000 provided will be 
sufficient to meet digital conversion needs in rural areas, and 
future funding is not anticipated.
    Broadband Grants.--In addition, of the funds recommended, 
$8,910,000 in grants shall be made available to support 
broadband transmission and local dial-up Internet services for 
rural areas.
    Consideration to Applications--Broadband and Distance 
Learning, Telemedicine Loans and Grants.--The Committee has 
been made aware of and encourages the Department to give 
consideration to applications for broadband and distance 
learning, telemedicine loans and grants for the following: 
Batavia WIFI Project (New York); CO and Western Region 
Telemedicine Infrastructure Upgrades (Colorado); Eastern Shore 
Broadband Buildout (Virginia); Enhancing Rural Economies 
through Wireless Technologies (Georgia); Gilmer/Braxton 
Research Technology Institute Project (West Virginia); 
Monongahela Valley Hospital (Pennsylvania); Nichols State 
University Geospatial Technology Center (Louisiana); and the 
Otsego County Telecommunications Plan (New York).
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

                                TITLE IV

                         DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services

Appropriations, 2007....................................        $597,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................         655,000
Committee recommendation................................         628,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
Consumer Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's food and consumer activities. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and 
Nutrition Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $628,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
Consumer Services.

                       Food and Nutrition Service

    The Food and Nutrition Service represents an organizational 
effort to eliminate hunger and malnutrition in this country. 
Nutrition assistance programs provide access to a nutritionally 
adequate diet for families and persons with low incomes and 
encourage better eating patterns among the Nation's children. 
These programs include:
    Child Nutrition Programs.--The National School Lunch and 
School Breakfast, Summer Food Service, and Child and Adult Care 
Food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto Rico, the 
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam for use in serving 
nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending schools 
of high school grades and under, to children of preschool age 
in child care centers, and to children in other institutions in 
order to improve the health and well-being of the Nation's 
children, and broaden the markets for agricultural food 
commodities. Through the Special Milk Program, assistance is 
provided to the States for making reimbursement payments to 
eligible schools and child care institutions which institute or 
expand milk service in order to increase the consumption of 
fluid milk by children. Funds for this program are provided by 
direct appropriation and transfer from section 32.
    Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 
and Children [WIC].--This program safeguards the health of 
pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding women, infants, and 
children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk because of 
inadequate nutrition and income by providing supplemental 
foods. The delivery of supplemental foods may be done through 
health clinics, vouchers redeemable at retail food stores, or 
other approved methods which a cooperating State health agency 
may select. Funds for this program are provided by direct 
appropriation.
    Food Stamp Program.--This program seeks to improve 
nutritional standards of needy persons and families. Assistance 
is provided to eligible households to enable them to obtain a 
better diet by increasing their food purchasing capability, 
usually by furnishing benefits in the form of electronic access 
to funds. The program also includes Nutrition Assistance to 
Puerto Rico. The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 
(Public Law 107-171) authorizes block grants for Nutrition 
Assistance to Puerto Rico and American Samoa, which provide 
broad flexibility in establishing nutrition assistance programs 
specifically tailored to the needs of their low-income 
households.
    The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on 
Indian Reservations, which provides nutritious agricultural 
commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian 
reservations who choose not to participate in the Food Stamp 
Program.
    The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public 
Law 107-171, enacted May 13, 2002, provides that $140,000,000 
from funds appropriated in the Food Stamp account be used to 
purchase commodities for The Emergency Food Assistance Program 
[TEFAP].
    Commodity Assistance Program [CAP].--This program provides 
funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP], the 
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, Disaster Assistance, Pacific 
Island Assistance, and administrative expenses for TEFAP.
    CSFP provides supplemental foods to infants and children up 
to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding 
women with low incomes, and who reside in approved project 
areas. In addition, this program operates commodity 
distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons.
    TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State 
agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of 
donated commodities. The Soup Kitchen/Food Bank Program was 
absorbed into TEFAP under the Personal Responsibility and Work 
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193), by 
an amendment to section 201A of the Emergency Food Assistance 
Act.
    Nutritious agricultural commodities are provided to 
residents of the Federated States of Micronesia and the 
Marshall Islands. Cash assistance is provided to distributing 
agencies to assist them in meeting administrative expenses 
incurred. It also provides funding for use in non-
Presidentially declared disasters, and for FNS' administrative 
costs in connection with relief for all disasters. Funds for 
this program are provided by direct appropriation.
    Nutrition Programs Administration.--Most salaries and 
Federal operating expenses of the Food and Nutrition Service 
are funded from this account. Also included is the Center for 
Nutrition Policy and Promotion [CNPP] which oversees 
improvements in and revisions to the food guidance systems, and 
serves as the focal point for advancing and coordinating 
nutrition promotion and education policy to improve the health 
of all Americans.

                        child nutrition programs


                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Section 32
                               Appropriation    transfers       Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007.........      7,614,523     5,731,073    13,345,596
Budget estimate, 2008........      7,592,797     6,304,475    13,897,272
Committee recommendation.....      7,662,215     6,235,057    13,897,272
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Child Nutrition Programs, authorized by the Richard B. 
Russell National School Lunch Act (Public Law 79-396) and the 
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-642), provide 
Federal assistance to State agencies in the form of cash and 
commodities for use in preparing and serving nutritious meals 
to children while they are attending school, residing in 
service institutions, or participating in other organized 
activities away from home. The purpose of these programs is to 
help maintain the health and proper physical development of 
America's children. Milk is provided to children either free or 
at a low cost, depending on their family income level. FNS 
provides cash subsidies to States for administering the 
programs and directly administers the program in the States 
which choose not to do so. Grants are also made for nutritional 
training and surveys and for State administrative expenses. 
Under current law, most of these payments are made on the basis 
of reimbursement rates established by law and applied to 
lunches and breakfasts actually served by the States. The 
reimbursement rates are adjusted annually to reflect changes in 
the Consumer Price Index for food away from home.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$7,662,215,000, plus transfers from section 32 of 
$6,235,057,000, for a total of $13,897,272,000 for the Child 
Nutrition Programs.
    The Committee's recommendation provides for the following 
annual rates for the child nutrition programs.

                                          TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                   Child nutrition programs                     2007 estimate     2008 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program.........................................        7,958,912        8,180,933        8,180,933
School Breakfast Program.....................................        2,241,210        2,389,988        2,389,988
State administrative expenses................................          163,792          175,636          175,636
Summer Food Service Program..................................          293,739          310,634          310,634
Child and Adult Care Food Program............................        2,172,460        2,288,838        2,288,838
Special Milk Program.........................................           14,133           14,618           14,618
Commodity procurement, processing, and computer support......          484,990          518,061          518,061
Coordinated review system....................................            5,302            5,505            5,505
Team nutrition...............................................           10,051           10,037           10,037
Food safety education........................................            1,007            1,022            1,022
CACFP Training and Technical Assistance......................  ...............            2,000            2,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends $10,037,000 for TEAM nutrition. 
Included in this amount is $4,000,000 for food service training 
grants to States; $1,600,000 for technical assistance 
materials; $800,000 for National Food Service Management 
Institute cooperative agreements; $400,000 for print and 
electronic food service resource systems; and $3,237,000 for 
other activities.
    The Committee expects FNS to utilize the National Food 
Service Management Institute to carry out the food safety 
education program.
    Farm to Cafeteria.--The Committee is aware of interest in 
the Farm to Cafeteria program, which links farms and schools to 
bring locally-grown food into the school lunch program. This 
program was authorized in the Child Nutrition Reauthorization 
Act of 2004. However, no funding was provided then, and funding 
has not yet been requested in the administration's budget. The 
Committee supports the intent of this program, and strongly 
encourages USDA to work to identify funding sources through 
which Farm to Cafeteria grants can begin to be made. The 
Committee notes growing interest in local procurement among 
school food service systems across the country. Local 
procurement can help farmers capture a bigger share of food 
expenditures and strengthen local food systems. The Committee 
encourages the Department to work with school lunch 
administrators and local food advocates to identify 
opportunities for growth in local procurement, and directs FNS 
to study ways to enhance local procurement in school food 
service and report back to the Committee within 120 days of 
enactment of this act.
    Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program.--The Committee has 
included language that will allow States that received funding 
for the Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program through Public Law 
109-97 to continue participation at a level not to exceed 
$500,000 per State. (Kohl, Bennett, Bingaman, Crapo/State of 
Wisconsin, State of Utah, State of New Mexico, State of Idaho) 
The Committee understands that there are adequate funds 
provided through the 2004 Child Nutrition and WIC 
Reauthorization Act that remain available to allow States that 
received funding through Public Law 109-97 to continue 
participation until the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 
of 2002 is reauthorized, without negatively impacting other 
participating States. Further, the Committee strongly 
encourages the appropriate authorizing committees of the House 
and Senate to determine whether expansion to all 50 States is 
appropriate, and if so, to provide the necessary mandatory 
funding.

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN 
                                 [WIC]

Appropriations, 2007....................................  $5,204,430,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................   5,386,597,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,720,000,000

    The special supplemental nutrition program for women, 
infants, and children [WIC] is authorized by section 17 of the 
Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Its purpose is to safeguard the 
health of pregnant, breast-feeding and post partum women and 
infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk 
because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income. The 
budget estimate assumes an average monthly participation of 8.8 
million participants at an average food cost of $39.34 per 
person per month in fiscal year 2008.
    The WIC program food packages are designed to provide foods 
which studies have demonstrated are lacking in the diets of the 
WIC program target population. The authorized supplemental 
foods are iron-fortified breakfast cereal, fruit or vegetable 
juice which contains vitamin C, dry beans, peas, and peanut 
butter.
    There are three general types of delivery systems for WIC 
foods: (1) retail purchase in which participants obtain 
supplemental foods through retail stores; (2) home delivery 
systems in which food is delivered to the participant's home; 
and (3) direct distribution systems in which participants pick 
up food from a distribution outlet. The food is free of charge 
to all participants.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,720,000,000 
for the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, 
and Children [WIC].
    The Committee recommends no less than $15,000,000 for 
breastfeeding support initiatives, and $30,000,000, depending 
upon use of the contingency fund, for State management 
information systems.
    Estimates.--The Committee recommendation of $5,720,000,000 
takes into account several changes from the budget request.
    First, the Committee recommendation does not include a 
limitation on State nutrition services and administration [NSA] 
grants as proposed in the budget. The budget request included a 
reduction of $145,000,000 associated with this limitation. The 
Committee does not agree that reducing support for critical WIC 
services including nutrition education, obesity prevention, 
breastfeeding promotion and support, healthcare referrals, and 
immunization screening is a wise and acceptable method of 
finding budget savings.
    Second, since the budget request was submitted in February 
2007, the estimates for food costs and participation are 
trending upward. For example, food costs are estimated to be 
higher in fiscal year 2008 because at least 23 States will be 
entering into new infant formula contracts, which have 
historically increased WIC costs. In addition, USDA's Economic 
Research Service has recently forecast an increase in the cost 
of dairy products that was not included in the President's 
budget request.
    The Committee notes with concern that the current estimate 
to meet WIC program needs is $333,403,000 over the President's 
budget request. The Committee has followed the increases in WIC 
program costs very closely. The Committee is disappointed that 
the administration has not provided an official estimate or 
notification for the dramatic increase in WIC food costs and 
participation. Beginning on the date of enactment of this act, 
and thereafter, the Committee directs the Department to provide 
quarterly reports on the program performance and estimated 
funding requirements to fully fund the WIC program. Timeframes 
addressed in these estimates should include the prior year, 
current year and budget year of the President's budget 
submission currently under consideration by the Congress and 
should separately address baseline program performance from the 
impact of current law and legislative budget proposals. The 
Department shall consider, and include in these reports, 
current participation trends and current Economic Research 
Service food cost estimates in developing updated WIC 
estimates.
    The Committee recommendation for WIC is currently estimated 
to be sufficient to meet program needs. The Committee will 
continue to monitor food costs, participation and carryover 
funds, and take additional action as necessary to ensure that 
funding provided in fiscal year 2008 is sufficient to serve all 
eligible applicants.
    Health Care Services Referral.--While the Committee 
continues to support and encourage State and local agency 
efforts to utilize WIC as an important means of participation 
referral to other health care services, it also continues to 
recognize the constraints that WIC programs are experiencing as 
a result of expanding health care priorities and continuing 
demand for core WIC program activities. The Committee wishes to 
clarify that while WIC plays an important role in screening and 
referral to other health care services, it was never the 
Committee's intention that WIC should perform aggressive 
screening, referral and assessment functions in such a manner 
that supplants the responsibilities of other programs, nor was 
it the Committee's intention that WIC State and local agencies 
should assume the burden of entering into and negotiating 
appropriate cost sharing agreements. The Committee again 
includes language in the bill to preserve WIC funding for WIC 
services authorized by law to ensure that WIC funds are not 
used to pay the expenses or to coordinate operations or 
activities other than those allowable pursuant to section 17 of 
the Child Nutrition Act of 1996, unless fully reimbursed by the 
appropriate Federal agency.

                           food stamp program


                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Puerto Rico      TEFAP
                                Expenses      Amount in   and American    commodity       CSFP          Total
                                               reserve        Samoa       purchases     expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007........    33,464,137     3,000,000     1,557,397       140,000  ............    38,161,534
Budget estimate, 2008.......    35,053,973     3,000,000     1,621,250       140,000        23,000    39,838,223
Committee recommendation....    35,017,973     3,000,000     1,621,250       140,000  ............    39,779,223
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Food Stamp Program, authorized by the Food Stamp Act of 
1977 (Public Law 88-525), attempts to alleviate hunger and 
malnutrition among low-income persons by increasing their food 
purchasing power. Eligible households receive food stamp 
benefits with which they can purchase food through regular 
retail stores. They are thus enabled to obtain a more 
nutritious diet than would be possible without food stamp 
assistance. The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-171, enacted May 13, 2002, reauthorizes the Food 
Stamp Program through fiscal year 2007.
    The Food Stamp Program is currently in operation in all 50 
States, the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, and Guam. 
Participating households receive food benefits, the value of 
which is determined by household size and income. The cost of 
the benefits is paid by the Federal Government. As required by 
law, the Food and Nutrition Service annually revises household 
stamp allotments to reflect changes in the cost of the thrifty 
food plan.
    At the authorized retail store, the recipient presents his/
her card and enters a unique personal identification number 
into a terminal that debits the household's account for the 
amount of purchases. Federal funds are shifted from the Federal 
Reserve to the EBT processor's financial institution so that it 
may reimburse the grocer's account for the amount of purchases. 
The grocer's account at a designated bank is credited for the 
amount of purchases. The associated benefit cost is accounted 
for in the same manner as those benefit costs that result from 
issuance of coupons.
    Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico.--The Farm Security and 
Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171, authorized 
block grants for Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico and 
American Samoa which gives the Commonwealth broad flexibility 
to establish a nutrition assistance program that is 
specifically tailored to the needs of its low-income 
households. However, the Commonwealth must submit its annual 
plan of operation to the Secretary for approval. The Farm 
Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171, 
enacted May 13, 2002, reauthorizes appropriations through 
fiscal year 2007. In addition to the provision of direct 
benefits to the needy, a portion of the grant may be used to 
fund up to 50 percent of the cost of administering the program. 
The grant may also be used to fund projects to improve 
agriculture and food distribution in Puerto Rico.
    The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on 
Indian Reservations which provides nutritious agricultural 
commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian 
reservations who choose not to participate in the Food Stamp 
Program.
    Administrative Costs.--All direct and indirect 
administrative costs incurred for certification of households, 
issuance of benefits, quality control, outreach, and fair 
hearing efforts are shared by the Federal Government and the 
States on a 50-50 basis. The Farm Security and Rural Investment 
Act of 2002, (Public Law 107-171), substantially revised the 
performance requirements for States under the Quality Control 
[QC] System. States with poor performance over 2 years face 
sanctions. States that demonstrate a high degree of accuracy or 
substantial improvement in their degree of accuracy under the 
QC system are eligible to share in a $48,000,000 ``bonus fund'' 
established by Congress to reward States for good performance.
    State Antifraud Activities.--Under the provisions of the 
Food Stamp Act of 1977, as amended by the Mickey Leland 
Childhood Hunger Relief Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-66), States 
are eligible to be reimbursed for 50 percent of the costs of 
their food stamp fraud investigations and prosecutions.
    States are required to implement an employment and training 
program for the purpose of assisting members of households 
participating in the Food Stamp Program in gaining skills, 
training, or experience that will increase their ability to 
obtain regular employment. The Department of Agriculture has 
implemented a grant program to States to assist them in 
providing employment and training services.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$39,779,223,000 for the Food Stamp Program. Of the amount 
recommended, $3,000,000,000 is made available as a contingency 
reserve. The Committee recommendation includes language that 
permits the Food and Nutrition Service to conduct studies and 
evaluations consistent with the budget request.
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program.--The Committee 
recommendation does not include a provision, requested in the 
budget, that would provide transitional benefits to Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program [CSFP] participants. The Committee 
recommends an appropriation for CSFP in the Commodity 
Assistance Program which makes the provision in the Food Stamp 
Program unnecessary.
    Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.--Included 
in the recommended level for FDPIR is $35,206,000 to support 
additional administration funding in the program to address 
current inequities among tribes in the allocation of funds and 
to address pressing needs to improve warehousing and other 
administrative costs associated with commodity distribution. 
The Committee directs the Secretary to conduct an assessment of 
equipment and facility needs in FDPIR and to report on the 
findings within 120 days of enactment of this act.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue the 
purchase of bison from producer-owned and Native American owned 
cooperatives for the Food Distribution Program on Indian 
Reservations. Although funding is not provided specifically for 
bison purchase, historically these purchases have been 
important for the Native American population both economically 
and nutritionally.

                      commodity assistance program

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $177,572,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      70,370,000
Committee recommendation................................     199,070,000

    The Commodity Assistance Program includes funding for the 
Commodity Supplemental Food Program and funding to pay expenses 
associated with the storage and distribution of commodities 
through The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
    The Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP].--Authorized 
by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer Protection Act 
of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note), as amended in 1981 by Public Law 
97-98, this program provides supplemental food to infants and 
children up to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-
feeding women who have low incomes, and reside in approved 
project areas. In addition, the program operates commodity 
distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons 60 
years of age or older.
    The foods for CSFP are provided by the Department of 
Agriculture for distribution through State agencies. The 
authorized commodities include: iron-fortified infant formula, 
rice cereal, cheese, canned juice, evaporated milk and/or 
nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned meat or 
poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and peanut 
butter and dry beans. Elderly participants may receive all 
commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice 
cereal.
    The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP].--Authorized 
by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 7501 et 
seq.), as amended, the program provides nutrition assistance to 
low-income people through prepared meals served on site and 
through the distribution of commodities to low-income 
households for home consumption. The commodities are provided 
by USDA to State agencies for distribution through State-
established networks. State agencies make the commodities 
available to local organizations, such as soup kitchens, food 
pantries, food banks, and community action agencies, for their 
use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need.
    Funds are administered by FNS through grants to State 
agencies which operate commodity distribution programs. 
Allocation of the funds to States is based on a formula which 
considers the States' unemployment rate and the number of 
persons with income below the poverty level.
    The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 permits 
State and local agencies to pay costs associated with the 
storage and distribution of USDA commodities and commodities 
secured from other sources. At the request of the State, these 
funds can be used by USDA to purchase additional commodities. 
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 increases 
funding available for the purchase of TEFAP commodities from 
$100,000,000 to $140,000,000. In addition to the commodities 
purchased specifically for TEFAP, commodities obtained under 
agriculture support and surplus removal programs are donated to 
States for distribution through TEFAP.
    Pacific Island Assistance.--This program provides funding 
for assistance to the nuclear-affected islands in the form of 
commodities and administrative funds. It also provides funding 
for use in non-Presidentially declared disasters and for FNS' 
administrative costs in connection with relief for all 
disasters.
    Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Farmers' Market 
Nutrition Program [FMNP] provides WIC or WIC-eligible 
participants with coupons to purchase fresh, nutritious, 
unprepared foods, such as fruits and vegetables, from farmers' 
markets. This benefits both participants and local farmers by 
increasing the awareness and use of farmers' markets by low-
income households.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,070,000 
for the Commodity Assistance Program. The Committee continues 
to encourage the Department to distribute Commodity Assistance 
Program funds equitably among the States, based on an 
assessment of the needs and priorities of each State and the 
State's preference to receive commodity allocations through 
each of the programs funded under this account.
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program.--The Committee 
recommends $128,000,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food 
Program.
    Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Committee is aware 
that the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program provides fresh 
fruits and vegetables to low-income mothers and children, 
benefiting not only WIC participants, but local farmers as 
well. Therefore, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the 
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and directs the Secretary to 
obligate these funds within 45 days.
    The Emergency Food Assistance Program.--The Farm Security 
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 provides $140,000,000 for 
TEFAP commodities to be purchased with food stamp funds. The 
Committee recommends $50,000,000 for TEFAP administrative 
funding. In addition, the Committee recommendation grants the 
Secretary authority to transfer up to an additional $10,000,000 
from TEFAP commodities for this purpose.

                   nutrition programs administration

Appropriations, 2007....................................    $140,252,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     148,926,000
Committee recommendation................................     147,426,000

    The Nutrition Programs Administration appropriation 
provides for most of the Federal operating expenses of the Food 
and Nutrition Service, which includes the Child Nutrition 
Programs; Special Milk Program; Special Supplemental Nutrition 
Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]; Food Stamp 
Program; Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico; the Commodity 
Assistance Program, including the Commodity Supplemental Food 
Program and the Emergency Food Assistance Program; and Farmers' 
Market Nutrition Program and Pacific Island Assistance.
    The major objective of Nutrition Programs Administration is 
to efficiently and effectively carry out the nutrition 
assistance programs mandated by law. This is to be accomplished 
by the following: (1) giving clear and consistent guidance and 
supervision to State agencies and other cooperators; (2) 
assisting the States and other cooperators by providing 
program, managerial, financial, and other advice and expertise; 
(3) measuring, reviewing, and analyzing the progress being made 
toward achieving program objectives; and (4) carrying out 
regular staff support functions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $147,426,000 
for Nutrition Programs Administration. The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,500,000 to carry out the Bill 
Emerson and Mickey Leland Hunger Fellowships. These fellowships 
send young people to sites throughout the United States and 
abroad in order to work to develop the skills, knowledge and 
experience to become effective anti-hunger leaders in the 
domestic and international arenas. Both programs are carried 
out by the Congressional Hunger Center. (Kohl, Harkin/
Congressional Hunger Center)
    Child and Adult Care Food Program [CACFP].--The Committee 
directs the Food and Nutrition Service to determine the CACFP 
reimbursement needed to serve meals and snacks consistent with 
the Dietary Guidelines.
    Childhood Obesity.--The Committee is concerned about the 
rapidly growing rate of childhood obesity. Further, the 
Committee is aware that a predominance of food advertising to 
children is aimed at the purchasing and consumption of food 
products. While the Committee recognizes the efforts of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug 
Administration to increase public awareness of health, such as 
MyPyramid and the Children's Food Pyramid, the Committee 
believes that to effectively aid the public in improving child 
nutrition and overall health, there should be a uniform 
scientifically based set of nutrition guidelines to better 
equip the public when making consumer food choices. Therefore, 
the Committee encourages USDA and FDA to create an inter-agency 
working group, consisting of all Government institutions with 
jurisdiction over health and nutrition policy. Through this 
collaboration, a set of clear, concise and uniform health 
standards for children such as proper portion sizes, healthy 
versus unhealthy nutritional content, and daily recommended 
amounts can be established and made easily available to the 
American public.
    Nutrition Initiatives.--The Committee is aware of the 
important work being undertaken by numerous State, local and 
private organizations in order to reduce hunger and increase 
nutrition education throughout the United States. The Committee 
applauds these efforts, and encourages USDA to work with 
interested organizations throughout the country, including the 
Salvation Army Bed and Bread Program in Detroit, Michigan; the 
YWCA Family Center in Franklin County, Ohio; and the Vermont 
Foodbank Farm to provide technical and financial assistance 
where appropriate, to help these organizations further their 
goals. The Committee further encourages USDA to provide funding 
to carry out existing Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion 
Nutrition Education and Promotion Program cooperative 
agreements for national Hispanic outreach efforts.

                                TITLE V

                FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                      Foreign Agricultural Service

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Transfers
                                Appropriations   from loan      Total
                                                  accounts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007..........        156,220         3,599      159,819
Budget estimate, 2008.........        168,209         4,985      173,194
Committee recommendation......        167,391         4,985      172,376
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] was established 
March 10, 1953, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1320, supplement 
1. Public Law 83-690, approved August 28, 1954, transferred the 
agricultural attaches from the Department of State to the 
Foreign Agricultural Service.
    The mission of FAS overseas is to represent U.S. 
agricultural interests, to promote export of domestic farm 
products, improve world trade conditions, and report on 
agricultural production and trade in foreign countries. FAS 
staff are stationed at 77 offices around the world where they 
provide expertise in agricultural economics and marketing, as 
well as provide attache services.
    FAS carries out several export assistance programs to 
counter the adverse effects of unfair trade practices by 
competitors on U.S. agricultural trade. The Export Enhancement 
Program uses CCC-owned commodities as export bonuses to provide 
export enhancements to U.S. producers. The Market Access 
Program [MAP] conducts both generic and brand-identified 
promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit agricultural 
associations and private firms financed through reimbursable 
CCC payments.
    The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to 
section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
and 15 U.S.C. 714-714p. The funds allocated to the General 
Sales Manager are used for conducting the following programs: 
(1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), including 
supplier credit guarantees and facilities financing guarantees, 
(2) Intermediate Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-103), (3) Public 
Law 480, (4) section 416 Overseas Donations Program, (5) Export 
Enhancement Program, (6) Market Access Program, and (7) 
programs authorized by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
Act including barter, export sales of most CCC-owned 
commodities, export payments, and other programs as assigned to 
encourage and enhance the export of U.S. agricultural 
commodities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $172,376,000 for the Foreign 
Agricultural Service, including a direct appropriation of 
$167,391,000.
    Biotechnology.--To promote the export of domestic farm 
products and improve world agriculture trade conditions, the 
Foreign Agricultural Service must increase its efforts to 
improve the understanding among trading partners of the safety 
of biotechnology and the thoroughness of the U.S. regulatory 
oversight of biotechnology. As trading partners construct 
regulatory systems for biotechnology and commodity trade, FAS 
is frequently requested to provide experts for the purpose of 
educating foreign government officials on the U.S. regulatory 
system. If the United States fails to participate in such 
discussions, those attempting to limit the access to foreign 
markets by U.S. producers will be presented an opportunity to 
undermine confidence in the benefits and safety of the 
technology while reducing trade opportunities for American 
producers. The Committee directs FAS to allocate adequate 
funding to meet the needs of our trading partners so that 
officials from the Department of Agriculture may, when 
requested, educate foreign regulators on the safety of the 
technology and the thoroughness of the U.S. regulatory process.
    Capital Security Cost Sharing.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,334,000 for Capital Security Cost 
Sharing [CSCS], as proposed in the budget. The Committee funds 
the fiscal year 2008 CSCS assessment at the level requested by 
FAS with the understanding that space assignments made by the 
Department of State in newly constructed embassies will meet 
current and projected FAS space requirements.
    Cochran Fellowship Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $5,000,000 for the Cochran Fellowship Program. The 
Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to provide 
additional support for the program through the Commodity Credit 
Corporation Emerging Markets Program.
    Currency Exchange Rates.--The Committee continues to 
include language in a general provision in the bill, as 
requested in the budget, to allow up to $2,000,000 of the 
amount appropriated to the FAS to remain available until 
expended solely for the purpose of offsetting fluctuations in 
international currency exchange rates, subject to 
documentation.
    Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.--The 
Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market 
Development Cooperator Program at no less than the fiscal year 
2007 level.
    Specialty Crops.--The Committee is aware of FAS activities 
to provide technical assistance for the promotion of specialty 
crop exports, consistent with section 3205 of the Farm Security 
and Rural Investment Act of 2002. The Committee recommendation 
includes $2,000,000 to support these activities.

                 PUBLIC LAW 480 TITLE I PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Administrative
                                                                 Credit level     Loan subsidy       expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007.........................................  ...............  ...............            3,373
Budget estimate, 2008........................................  ...............  ...............            2,761
Committee recommendation.....................................  ...............  ...............            2,749
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public Law 480 title I authorizes the financing of sales to 
developing countries for local currencies and for dollars on 
credit terms. Sales for dollars or local currency may be made 
to foreign governments. The legislation provides for repayment 
terms either in local currencies or U.S. dollars on credit 
terms of up to 30 years, with a grace period of up to 5 years.
    Local currencies under title I sales agreements may be used 
in carrying out activities under section 104 of the 
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 (7 
U.S.C. 1704), as amended. Activities in the recipient country 
for which these local currencies may be used include developing 
new markets for U.S. agricultural commodities, paying U.S. 
obligations, and supporting agricultural development and 
research.
    Title I appropriated funds may also be used under the Food 
for Progress Act of 1985 to furnish commodities on credit terms 
or on a grant basis to assist developing countries and 
countries that are emerging democracies that have a commitment 
to introduce and expand free enterprise elements in their 
agricultural economies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for 
Public Law 480, title I. The Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $2,749,000 for administrative expenses to 
continue servicing existing agreements.

                     PUBLIC LAW 480 TITLE II GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................  $1,214,711,000
Supplemental appropriation, 2007........................     450,000,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................   1,219,400,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,219,400,000

    The Committee recognizes the important mission of the 
Public Law 480 Program to combat hunger and malnutrition; 
promote broad-based equitable and sustainable development; 
expand international trade; develop and expand export markets 
for U.S. agricultural commodities; and to foster and encourage 
the development of private enterprise and democratic 
participation in developing countries. The Committee strongly 
supports the continued efficient operation of this important 
program.
    Commodities Supplied in Connection With Dispositions Abroad 
(Title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721-1726).--Commodities are supplied 
without cost through foreign governments to combat malnutrition 
and to meet famine and other emergency requirements. 
Commodities are also supplied for nonemergencies through public 
and private agencies, including intergovernmental 
organizations. The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean 
freight on shipments under this title, and may also pay 
overland transportation costs to a landlocked country, as well 
as internal distribution costs in emergency situations. The 
funds appropriated for title II are made available to private 
voluntary organizations and cooperatives to assist these 
organizations in meeting administrative and related costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a program level of $1,219,400,000 
for title II.
    Monetization.--The Committee directs the administration not 
to place arbitrary limits on monetization under the Public Law 
480 title II program. In food-deficit, import-reliant 
countries, monetization stimulates the economy and allows 
needed commodities to be provided in the marketplace. Food aid 
proposals should be approved based on the merits of the program 
plan to promote food security and improve people's lives, not 
on the level of monetization.
    Non-emergency Assistance.--The Farm Security and Rural 
Investment Act of 2002 increased the level of Public Law 480 
title II non-emergency assistance to 1,875,000 metric tons. 
Congress provided this level to help address the underlying 
causes of hunger in the world, which leads to weakened immune 
systems, higher rates of chronic disease and poverty, and the 
inability of entire populations to achieve economic and social 
independence. The Committee expects that funding for Public Law 
480 title II will be used for its intended purpose and not for 
ad hoc emergency assistance. In the event of additional 
emergency needs, the Committee reminds the Department of the 
availability of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.

  MC GOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION 
                             PROGRAM GRANTS

Appropriations, 2007....................................     $99,000,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................     100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     100,000,000

    Authorized in the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 
2002, Public Law 107-171, the McGovern-Dole International Food 
for Education and Child Nutrition Program helps support 
education, child development, and food security for some of the 
world's poorest children. The program provides for donations of 
U.S. agricultural products, as well as financial and technical 
assistance, for school feeding and maternal and child nutrition 
projects in low-income, food-deficit countries that are 
committed to universal education. Commodities made available 
for donation through agreements with private voluntary 
organizations, cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations, 
and foreign governments may be donated for direct feeding or 
for local sale to generate proceeds to support school feeding 
and nutrition projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,000,000 
for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and 
Child Nutrition Program.

       COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                  (EXPORT CREDIT PROGRAMS AND GSM-102)

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Guaranteed loan  Guaranteed loan   Administrative
                                                                  levels \1\      subsidy \1\        expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007.........................................        1,990,000           60,893            5,260
Budget estimate, 2008........................................        2,440,000           64,077            5,344
Committee recommendation.....................................        2,440,000           64,077            5,334
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No appropriation required since export credit authorizations are permanent authority.

    In 1980, the Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] instituted 
the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102) under its charter 
authority. With this program, CCC guarantees, for a fee, 
payments due U.S. exporters under deferred payment sales 
contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults due to commercial as 
well as noncommercial risks. The risk to CCC extends from the 
date of export to the end of the deferred payment period 
covered in the export sales contract and covers only that 
portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance agreement. 
Operation of this program is based on criteria which will 
assure that it is used only where it is determined that it will 
develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand 
existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The 
program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide 
financing to those areas where the institutions would be 
unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC 
guarantees. Other credit activities may also be financed under 
the Export Credit Guarantee programs including supplier credit 
guarantee, under which CCC guarantees payments due to importers 
under short term financing (up to 180 days) that exporters 
extend directly to importers for the purchase of U.S. 
agricultural products. CCC also provides facilities financing 
guarantees.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the 
program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export guarantee 
programs are exempt from the requirement of advance 
appropriations of budget authority according to section 
504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public Law 
101-508. Appropriations to this account will be used for 
administrative expenses.

                                TITLE VI

           RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                      Food and Drug Administration

    The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is a scientific 
regulatory agency whose mission is to promote and protect the 
public health and safety of Americans. FDA's work is a blending 
of science and law. The Food and Drug Administration 
Modernization Act of 1997 [FDAMA] (Public Law 105-115) 
reaffirmed the responsibilities of the FDA: to ensure safe and 
effective products reach the market to a timely way, and to 
monitor products for continued safety after they are in use. In 
addition, FDA is entrusted with two critical functions in the 
Nation's war on terrorism: preventing willful contamination of 
all regulated products, including food, and improving the 
availability of medications to prevent or treat injuries caused 
by biological, chemical or nuclear agents.
    The FDA Foods program has the primary responsibility for 
assuring that the food supply, quality of foods, food 
ingredients and dietary supplements are safe, sanitary, 
nutritious, wholesome, and honestly labeled, and that cosmetic 
products are safe and properly labeled. The variety and 
complexity of the food supply has grown dramatically while new 
and more complex safety issues, such as emerging microbial 
pathogens, natural toxins, and technological innovations in 
production and processing, have developed. This program plays a 
major role in keeping the United States food supply among the 
safest in the world.
    The FDA Drugs programs are comprised of three separate 
areas, Human Drugs, Animal Drugs and Biologics. FDA is 
responsible for the life cycle of the product, including 
premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human, animal 
and biological products to ensure their safety and efficacy. 
For Human Drugs this includes assuring that all drug products 
used for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease are 
safe and effective. Additional procedures include the review of 
investigational new drug applications; evaluation of market 
applications for new and generic drugs, labeling and 
composition of prescription and over-the-counter drugs; 
monitoring the quality and safety of products manufactured in, 
or imported into, the United States; and, regulating the 
advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. The Animal 
Drugs and Feeds Program ensures only safe and beneficial 
veterinary drugs, intended for the treatment and/or prevention 
of diseases in animals and the improved production of food-
producing animals, are approved for marketing.
    The FDA Biologics program assures that blood and blood 
products, blood test kits, vaccines, and therapeutics are pure, 
potent, safe, effective, and properly labeled. The program 
inspects blood banks and blood processors, licenses and 
inspects firms collecting human source plasma, evaluates and 
licenses biologics manufacturing firms and products; lot 
releases licensed products; and monitors adverse events 
associated with vaccine immunization.
    The FDA Devices and Radiological program ensures the safety 
and effectiveness of medical devices and eliminates unnecessary 
human exposure to manmade radiation from medical, occupational, 
and consumer products. In addition, the program enforces 
quality standards under the Mammography Quality Standards Act 
(Public Law 108-365). Medical devices include thousands of 
products from thermometers and contact lenses to heart 
pacemakers, hearing aids, MRIs, microwave ovens, and video 
display terminals.
    FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research in 
Jefferson, Arkansas, serves as a specialized resource, 
conducting peer-review scientific research that provides the 
basis for FDA to make sound science-based regulatory decisions 
through its premarket review and postmarket surveillance. The 
research is designed to define and understand the biological 
mechanisms of action underlying the toxicity of products and 
developing methods to improve assessment of human exposure, 
susceptibility and risk of those products regulated by FDA.

                         salaries and expenses

                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                  Mammography
                                                                              Prescription   Medical     Animal     clinics      Export and
                                                               Appropriation    drug user     device   drug user   inspection  certification     Total
                                                                                  fees      user fees     fees        fees          fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2007.........................................     1,569,244       352,200      43,726     11,604      17,522         8,481     2,002,777
Budget estimate, 2008........................................     1,635,709       339,195      47,500     13,696      18,398         9,500     2,063,998
Committee recommendation.....................................     1,755,135       459,000      48,431     13,696      18,398         9,500     2,304,160
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,755,135,000 
for FDA salaries and expenses. The Committee also recommends 
$459,000,000 in Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee 
collections, of which $14,000,000 is for proposed Direct-to-
Consumer Advertising user fees; $48,431,000 in Medical Device 
User Fee and Modernization Act user fee collections; 
$13,696,000 in Animal Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; 
$18,398,000 in Mammography Quality Standards Act fee 
collections; and $9,500,000 in export and certification fees, 
as assumed in the President's budget. The Committee 
recommendation includes bill language which prohibits FDA from 
developing, establishing, or operating any program of user fees 
authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701.
    The Committee notes that PDUFA and MDUFMA user fees need to 
be reauthorized for fiscal year 2008. PDUFA and MDUFMA 
legislation is currently being negotiated by the appropriate 
authorizing committees. The Committee has included amounts that 
represent the current administration proposal for PDUFA and 
MDUFMA user fees. The Committee will follow the reauthorization 
of these fees and adjust the fee collection amounts if 
necessary.
    The following table reflects the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2007 and budget 
request levels:

                               FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                 2007 enacted     2008 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers and related field activities:
    Foods....................................................          457,105          466,726          522,453
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN].          159,114          154,588          173,842
        Field activities.....................................          297,991          312,138          348,611
                                                              ==================================================
    Human drugs..............................................          315,138          324,438          354,706
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER].......          230,757          242,950          266,069
        Field activities.....................................           84,381           81,488           88,637
                                                              ==================================================
    Biologics................................................          144,547          155,073          158,588
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER]..          116,005          125,763          128,708
        Field activities.....................................           28,542           29,310           29,880
                                                              ==================================================
    Animal drugs.............................................           94,749           94,809           98,513
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM].................           58,355           59,035           60,646
        Field activities.....................................           36,394           35,774           37,867
                                                              ==================================================
    Medical and radiological devices.........................          230,683          240,122          243,255
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Devices and Radiological Health [CDRH]....          172,258          178,265          182,112
        Field activities.....................................           58,425           61,857           61,143
                                                              ==================================================
    National Center for Toxicological Research [NCTR]........           42,056           36,455           46,104
                                                              ==================================================
Other activities.............................................           90,541           88,577          102,007
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
Rent and related activities..................................           67,554           97,976           97,976
                                                              ==================================================
Rental payments to GSA.......................................          126,871          131,533          131,533
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority.        1,569,244        1,635,709        1,755,135
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommendation includes the following 
increases in budget authority for FDA salaries and expenses 
activities: $55,443,000 for cost of living adjustments; 
$48,407,000 for food safety; $33,200,000 for critical path and 
drug safety; $7,561,000 for generic drug review; $4,000,000 for 
pandemic influenza preparedness; $1,000,000 for the Office of 
Women's Health; $13,256,000 for FDA's consolidation at the 
White Oak campus; and $21,828,000 for other rent and rent 
related costs and rental payments to the General Services 
Administration. The Committee recommendation does not include 
base program reductions assumed in the budget request.
    Active Ingredients.--The Committee is concerned about 
recent reports that some human drugs are produced using active 
ingredients from countries that may have regulatory safeguards 
less stringent than the United States. The Committee requests 
that the Food and Drug Administration issue a report, using 
available data sources, within 120 days of enactment of this 
act, that outlines the location of the manufacturer of all 
drugs approved since January 1, 2000; the location of the 
manufacturer of the active ingredient in each of those drugs, 
only as submitted in the original application; the extent to 
which drugs manufactured overseas and commercially distributed 
in the United States are subject to different regulation than 
drugs manufactured and distributed in the United States; and 
the procedures taken when a manufacturer changes the 
procurement of active ingredients for their drugs. The 
Committee further directs that the FDA present this information 
in such as way as to not violate any commercial confidential, 
trade secret, or proprietary information.
    Agricultural Products Food Safety Laboratory.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,359,000 for the FDA's 
contract with New Mexico State University's Physical Sciences 
Laboratory to operate the Food Technology Evaluation 
Laboratory, which conducts evaluation and development of rapid 
screening methodologies, technologies, and instrumentation; and 
provides technology deployment, modeling, and data analysis for 
food safety and product safety, including advanced risk-based 
systems for screening and inspection, to facilitate FDA's 
regulations and responsibilities in food safety, product 
safety, homeland security, bioterrorism, and other initiatives. 
(Domenici, Bingaman/New Mexico State University)
    Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $29,260,000 for Bovine Spongiform 
Encephalopathy [BSE]. The Committee understands that this 
funding will be used to conduct yearly inspections of all 
renderers and feed mills processing products containing 
prohibited materials; extend BSE inspections into targeted 
segments of industries subject to the BSE Feed regulation but 
previously minimally inspected; validate test methods for the 
detection of bovine-derived proteins in animal feed; and 
continue to conduct research on Transmissible Spongiform 
Encephalopathies in FDA's product centers.
    Budget Justification.--The Committee directs the agency to 
submit the fiscal year 2009 budget request in a format that 
follows the same account structure as the fiscal year 2008 
budget request unless otherwise approved by the Committee.
    Childhood Obesity.--The Committee is concerned about the 
rapidly growing rate of childhood obesity. Further, the 
Committee is aware that a predominance of food advertising to 
children is aimed at the purchasing and consumption of food 
products. While the Committee recognizes the efforts of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug 
Administration to increase public awareness of health, such as 
MyPyramid and the Children's Food Pyramid, the Committee 
believes that to effectively aid the public in improving child 
nutrition and overall health, there should be a uniform 
scientifically based set of nutrition guidelines to better 
equip the public when making consumer food choices. Therefore, 
the Committee encourages USDA and FDA to create an inter-agency 
working group, consisting of all government institutions with 
jurisdiction over health and nutrition policy. Through this 
collaboration, a set of clear, concise, and uniform health 
standards for children such as proper portion sizes, healthy 
versus unhealthy nutritional content, and daily recommended 
amounts can be established and made easily available to the 
American public.
    Chloramphenicol.--The Committee continues to have serious 
concerns regarding seafood safety issues posed by banned 
antibiotic contamination in farm-raised shrimp imports. In 
addition, the Committee is concerned that the FDA inspects less 
than 2 percent of shrimp being imported into the United States. 
Therefore, the Committee strongly encourages the FDA to 
develop, in cooperation with State testing programs, a program 
for increasing the inspection of imported shrimp, possibly 
including cold-storage inventories, for banned antibiotics, 
including chloramphenicol.
    Codex Alimentarius.--Within the total funding available, at 
least $2,495,000 is for FDA activities in support of Codex 
Alimentarius.
    Collaborative Drug Safety Research.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $750,000 to continue the collaborative 
research agreement on cardiac biomarkers between FDA, the 
Critical Path Institute, and the University of Utah. The 
Committee notes that this research project has been extremely 
successful and has developed a genetic test that will help 
guide warfarin, a commonly prescribed blood thinner, dosing. It 
is estimated that integrating genetic testing into warfarin 
therapy could allow Americans to avoid 85,000 serious bleeding 
events and 17,000 strokes annually, reducing health care 
spending by approximately $1,100,000,000 annually. (Bennett/
Critical Path Institute and University of Utah)
    Critical Path and Modernizing Drug Safety.--The Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $33,200,000 for FDA's 
critical path and drug safety initiatives. Included in this 
amount is $17,000,000 for critical path and $16,200,000 for 
modernizing drug safety.
    The Committee expects that the critical path funding will 
be used to further the agency's work on the 76 critical path 
opportunities published in 2006 and promote collaborations with 
other government agencies and academia. Of the $17,000,000 
increase provided for critical path, $5,000,000 shall be 
available, on a competitive basis, for contracts or grants to 
universities and non-profit organizations to support individual 
critical path projects. The Committee expects that the critical 
path funding will make the development and review of drug, 
device, and biologics more efficient, help advance discoveries 
through the development pipeline, and reduce the risks to 
patients who use medical products. The Committee understands 
that FDA is already engaged in 40 critical path projects that 
this funding will help further, including identifying gender-
specific biomarkers and biomarkers for diabetes, pre-diabetes, 
cancer, and cardiac, metabolic, and neurological disease; 
developing reliable disease simulation methods for Parkinson's, 
diabetes, cancer, and Alzheimer's disease; improving methods 
for evaluating vaccines and other complex biological products; 
and identifying optimum dosing strategies for drugs such as 
warfarin, which will improve patient safety and save health 
care dollars.
    The Committee expects that the drug safety funding will be 
used to enhance FDA's ability to identify safety issues with 
products already on the market and communicate those safety 
issues to health professionals and the public as well as 
enhance the agency's ability to identify safety issues for 
products under review. The Committee understands that FDA will 
use this funding to upgrade and modernize the Adverse Events 
Reporting System [AERS]; access additional databases for drug 
and biologic safety surveillance and analysis; hire additional 
scientists to evaluate safety information in these databases; 
strengthen the involvement of safety experts throughout the 
drug lifecycle by identifying safety data needs prior to 
product approval and during the design and review of post 
marketing studies; and hire additional experts to review 
proposed risk management plans and evaluate the effectiveness 
of existing risk management plans.
    Dietary Supplements.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$5,360,000 for the CFSAN Adverse Events Reporting System 
[CAERS], of which approximately $1,500,000 is for dietary 
supplements.
    The Committee is encouraged by FDA's activities to enforce 
provisions contained within the Dietary Supplement Health and 
Education Act of 1994 [DSHEA] (Public Law 103-417). The 
Committee has recommended funding to continue enforcement of 
the provisions contained in DSHEA. It is the Committee's intent 
that these funds be prioritized by the agency to step up 
activities against products that are clearly in violation of 
DSHEA.
    FDA has indicated that the ability to identify and analyze 
specific components in ingredients, including botanical 
ingredients, is an essential component of research and 
regulatory programs directed at ensuring the safety and 
effectiveness of dietary supplements. The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,300,000 for review of botanicals in 
dietary supplements. This work is being carried out by FDA in 
collaboration with the National Center for Natural Products 
Research, Oxford, Mississippi. (Cochran/University of 
Mississippi)
    The Committee encourages FDA to dedicate appropriate 
resources to fully implement Public Law 109-462, the Dietary 
Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act. 
The Committee believes the law, scheduled to take effect on 
December 22, 2007, will enhance FDA's efforts to identify 
potential public health issues associated with the use of 
dietary supplements and nonprescription drugs and will enable 
the government, manufacturers, and retailers to respond more 
quickly to potential public health issues.
    Expedited Consideration.--The Committee directs the FDA to 
provide a report within 120 days of enactment of this act on 
the initiatives undertaken by the agency to expedite and 
support the filing of new drug applications seeking approval of 
new combinations of drug products, whose active ingredients 
have all previously been approved as safe and effective drugs 
under section 505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act, or novel single agents that would provide a replacement 
for or other therapeutic alternative to a drug currently on the 
market which is regulated by The Combat Methamphetamine 
Epidemic Act.
    Folic Acid Fortification.--The Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention [CDC] estimates that up to 70 percent of neural 
tube defects [NTDs], such as spina bifida, could be prevented 
if all women of childbearing age consume 400 micrograms of 
folic acid daily, beginning before pregnancy. About 10 years 
ago, FDA revised several standards of identity for enriched 
cereal-grain products to require the addition of folic acid and 
the rate of NTDs has decreased significantly. A recent analysis 
by the CDC found that folate concentrations in the blood among 
non-pregnant women of childbearing age declined slightly from 
1999-2000. This slight decline follows a substantial increase 
in folate concentrations following the initiation of the 
fortification program. The decline has not been associated with 
an increase in rates of NTDs. However, the Committee is 
concerned that some women may not be receiving an adequate 
level of folate to prevent NTDs, and some studies conducted 
since the FDA fortification program began have suggested that 
the current levels of folic acid in enriched cereal-grain 
products should be increased and that such an increase might 
achieve a higher rate of birth defect prevention. The Committee 
is interested in having FDA review the folic acid fortification 
level for enriched grain products and the fortification of corn 
products with folic acid. The Committee requests a report, 
within 120 days of the enactment of this act, on FDA's current 
folic acid fortification standards, the need to review, and 
possibly revise, folic acid standards, and the aspects of the 
fortification issue that FDA would consider in revising the 
standards.
    Food Safety.--The Committee is very concerned that the 
administration's budget requests have not kept up with the 
increasing responsibilities faced by the Food and Drug 
Administration in the area of food safety. The FDA Center for 
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and related field positions 
regulates $417,000,000,000 worth of domestic food and 
$49,000,000,000 in imported foods, and is responsible for 
ensuring that the U.S. food supply is safe, secure, sanitary, 
wholesome, and honestly labeled. As the food supply becomes 
more global, the challenges faced by the FDA increase 
significantly. However, although the number of imported food 
lines subject to FDA review has more than quadrupled since 
1999, FDA is able to inspect less than 2 percent of imported 
foods, the number of field inspectors at the FDA has declined 
by 230 in less than 4 years, and food inspections have also 
dropped nearly in half during that time. The Committee believes 
that this trend is unacceptable. Therefore, the Committee 
recommendation includes $48,407,000 in increases for food 
safety initiatives, which is $37,763,000 above the 
administration's request for food safety. The Committee directs 
FDA to provide detailed quarterly reports on the expenditure of 
these funds, including the numbers of additional staff hired 
and research contracts let.
    Of the increases provided, the Committee directs that no 
less than $21,000,000 should be used to immediately begin to 
reverse the current decline in field inspectors, and to ensure 
that the FDA food safety inspection system is streamlined, 
complementing and expanding coordination efforts both with 
States and with foreign countries that import food into the 
United States. This should include hiring inspectors assigned 
solely to foreign inspection, as well as inspectors assigned 
solely to domestic inspection.
    The Committee further directs that no less than $11,000,000 
should be used to create both Federal and State rapid response 
teams to respond to food safety problems throughout the United 
States. These teams should consist of staff trained 
specifically to rapidly trace back an outbreak to its root 
cause and stationed in significant produce growing areas in the 
United States, so that any time an outbreak occurs, the source 
can be identified as quickly as possible, preventing further 
distribution of the contaminated product. Further, when these 
teams are not actively responding to a food safety occurrence, 
they should be working with growers, processors, packers and 
State and local officials to ensure that FDA guidelines for 
safe food production are understood and implemented.
    The Committee also directs that the FDA should use no less 
than $6,000,000 for increased research on food safety issues, 
including the reduction of microbial contamination of produce 
and new rapid screening methods to identify pathogens in food 
samples as quickly as possible, and as early in the food chain 
as possible. This funding should be used by CFSAN and the 
National Center for Toxicological Research, and should also be 
used to contract with other government and non-governmental 
entities, including academia, to ensure collaboration, 
information-sharing, and to prevent duplicative research so as 
to yield results that will be applicable to growers and 
processors in the shortest timeframe possible.
    Of the additional funding provided for increased research, 
the Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 to create a 
Western Region FDA Center of Excellence at the University of 
California at Davis [UCD]. California and the western States 
provide the majority of the Nation's fruits, vegetables, and 
specialty crops, and lead the Nation in import and export of 
food products. This will be the first FDA Center of Excellence 
to be located in the Western United States. This Center will be 
a cooperative research center with FDA and UCD and will address 
food safety and security areas of focus identified by FDA to be 
of greatest need in the Western United States. (Feinstein, 
Boxer/FDA and University of California at Davis)
    The Committee directs the Food and Drug Administration to 
enter into a contract with the National Academy of Sciences, 
specifically with the Institute of Medicine and the National 
Research Council, for a comprehensive study on gaps in the 
public health protection provided by the food safety system and 
opportunities to fill those gaps. This study should identify 
and analyze specific gaps in protection to illustrate the 
causes of foodborne illness and cost-effective preventive 
measures and be based on credible estimates (using available 
data and analyses) of the incidence, severity, and direct costs 
and economic consequences of foodborne illness. The study 
should include consultation with high-level representatives 
from the government, food industry, consumer groups and other 
stakeholder groups, and should include legislative, regulatory 
and administrative recommendations and estimates of costs of 
such recommendations. The Committee directs that this report be 
completed within one year of funds being made available to the 
National Academy of Sciences.
    Generic Drugs.--The Committee recommendation includes no 
less than $77,161,000 for the generic drugs program at FDA, of 
which $42,461,000 is for the Office of Generic Drugs. This is 
an increase of $7,561,000 above fiscal year 2007. During the 
past 6 years, applications for generic drugs have increased by 
158 percent, from 307 applications in fiscal year 2002 to 793 
applications in fiscal year 2006. In fiscal year 2008, FDA 
estimates it will receive 857 applications. Generic drugs cost 
anywhere between 20 and 70 percent less than their brand name 
counterparts. This increase will allow FDA to hire 
approximately 18 additional reviewers.
    Legacy Drugs.--The Committee supports the FDA's review of a 
means by which drugs marketed outside the present approval 
process, which have been in clinical use for the past 25 years, 
and have no safety concerns, may be more efficiently vetted by 
the agency. Also known as ``Legacy Drugs'', these medicines are 
manufactured in FDA licensed and inspected facilities that 
utilize current Good Manufacturing Practices, are composed of 
FDA approved ingredients, and have been prescribed by doctors 
for decades to alleviate common ailments at a fraction of the 
cost to patients and government programs such as Medicare and 
Medicaid. The Committee encourages FDA to work toward the 
development of a system to certify this unique class of drugs.
    Mammography.--The Committee recommends no less than the 
fiscal year 2007 level in appropriated funds for activities 
related to the Mammography Quality Standards Act. 
Appropriations for this program fund research grants and 
various activities to develop and enforce quality standards for 
mammography services, including a Federal advisory committee, 
accreditation bodies, inspections of government entities and 
facilities that provided 50 percent or more mammography 
screenings with grants provided through the Center for Disease 
Control's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection 
Program, issuance and renewal of certificates, appeal 
procedures, certification of personnel, and imposing sanctions 
for noncompliance.
    The Committee directs the FDA to provide a report within 
120 days of enactment of this act detailing how the 
administration will implement the recommendations made in the 
Institute of Medicine report entitled ``Breast Imaging Quality 
Standards''--released on May 23, 2005, and the congressionally 
mandated Government Accountability Office [GAO] report 
entitled, ``Mammography: Current Nationwide Capacity is 
Adequate, but Access Problems May Exist in Certain Locations'' 
(GAO-06-724)--released in July 2006.
    MedGuide.--The Committee is concerned that FDA's MedGuide 
program is not adequately assisting patients in understanding 
the risks associated with certain medications. The Committee 
also notes that the FDA initially intended the program to 
produce MedGuides for a limited number of prescription products 
every year. However, according to FDA, 240 prescription 
products have MedGuides as of March 2007. This unanticipated 
volume of Medguides creates significant administrative burdens 
for pharmacy providers and has the potential to diminish the 
usefulness of the program by overwhelming patients with 
multiple pages of written material. In order to address these 
concerns, the Committee urges FDA to work with patient groups, 
manufacturers and national pharmacy groups to address 
improvements in the program. Such improvements should include 
procedures to ensure the efficient distribution of MedGuides 
from manufacturers to community pharmacies, flexibility in 
providing MedGuides to patients (including electronic mail 
delivery), formatting modifications to assist with the 
electronic printing of MedGuides, measures to avoid duplicative 
and excessive MedGuides (including the use of a single uniform 
MedGuide for a class of drugs), and other steps to enhance the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the program for patients and 
pharmacies. The Committee urges FDA to submit a report on the 
progress it is making toward these improvements within 120 days 
of enactment of this act, including whether any legislative 
action is needed to enhance the efficiencies in the 
distribution of written prescription information to patients.
    Medical Device Identification.--Currently, there is no 
standardized, unique identifying system for medical devices. 
This gap makes it difficult to recognize compatibility and 
interoperability issues for medical devices, to conduct device 
recalls, and to identify specific devices in adverse event 
reports. The rising number of medical device recalls as well as 
the rapid development of new, complex medical devices, speaks 
to the need to develop a unique device identification system. 
The Committee notes that FDA is exploring implementation of a 
unique device identification [UDI] system. FDA published a 
Request for Comment on August 11, 2006, on how a national UDI 
system should be structured and how it will improve patient 
safety, reduce medical errors, facilitate device recalls, and 
improve device adverse event reporting. The Committee also 
recognizes that because devices are quite different in their 
use and distribution from drugs, the UDI system needs to 
include information to adequately identify the device through 
distribution and use. The Committee is also aware of interest 
in the development of a public-accessible UDI database. The 
Committee encourages FDA to continue to work on the development 
of an appropriate method of identifying medical devices to 
ensure patient safety throughout the life cycle of the device.
    National Center for Food Safety and Technology.--With the 
growing threat of foodborne illness to the public health, the 
Committee believes that collaborative research in food safety 
should continue among Government, academia, and private 
industry. The national model for that collaboration has been 
the National Center for Food Safety and Technology [NCFST] in 
Summit-Argo, Illinois. The Committee recommendation includes 
$2,970,000 for NCFST to continue the important work done there. 
This funding should be exclusive of any initiative funds which 
the FDA may provide in addition to NCFST. (Durbin/National 
Center for Food Safety and Technology)
    Nutrition Information.--The Committee directs FDA to gather 
information on the various guidance systems, including 
nutritional criteria currently in use by the food industry, 
trade organizations, and nonprofit organizations, that use 
front-label logos, such as symbols, signs, emblems or other 
graphic representations that are intended to provide simple, 
standardized nutrition information to the public in graphic 
form. Further, the Committee directs FDA to provide a report, 
within 120 days of the enactment of this act, that describes 
the nutrition symbols and accompanying guidance systems for 
consumers and the current scientific and consumer research on 
the use and effectiveness of such symbols.
    Office of Regulatory Affairs Reorganization.--The Committee 
is aware of FDA's proposal to reorganize the Office of 
Regulatory Affairs' field laboratories. As part of this 
reorganization, the FDA has proposed to close seven 
laboratories, and move the personnel, equipment and other 
resources from those laboratories into six other existing 
laboratories. The Committee is aware of significant concern 
surrounding these proposed laboratory closures, including the 
potential loss of field staff, whose numbers have already 
decreased in recent years, and the loss of laboratory 
capabilities for analyzing food and drug samples. For example, 
several of these laboratories perform specialized functions not 
currently performed at any other FDA labs. The Committee 
directs FDA to work with all interested parties, including FDA 
employees and local, State and Federal officials, as well as to 
hold public meetings on each proposed closure if requested by 
State or local officials, prior to implementing this 
reorganization, and to report to the Committee, prior to the 
laboratory closures, on efforts at each laboratory to both 
retain staff and to ensure that specific laboratory 
capabilities are not diminished or eliminated.
    Pharmacy.--The Committee encourages the FDA to work with 
the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy to develop and 
implement strategies for the integration of pharmacy faculty 
and Doctor of Pharmacy students into patient safety initiatives 
including post-market surveillance, counterfeit drug detection, 
and medication risk/benefit communication.
    Office of Women's Health.--The Committee believes that it 
is imperative for FDA to pay sufficient attention to gender-
based research, ensuring that products approved by the FDA are 
safe and effective for women as well as men. The Committee 
recommendation includes $5,000,000 for the Office of Women's 
Health. The Committee encourages FDA to ensure that the Office 
of Women's Health is sufficiently funded to carry out its 
activities, and to enhance its funding if necessary.
    Orphan Products Grants.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $16,772,000 for the Orphan Products Grants Program 
within the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
    Premarket Reviews.--The Committee is aware that FDA has 
begun to enforce the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act's 
device requirements, including premarket review, for diagnostic 
multivariate index assays for breast cancer and other diseases. 
The Committee encourages FDA to work to ensure that the 
transition to enforcing the act's requirements does not inhibit 
development of products that are important to public health.
    Seafood Economic Integrity.--The Committee recognizes the 
importance of seafood to a healthy diet, but is concerned that 
FDA does not focus sufficient attention on economic integrity 
issues, particularly with respect to mislabeling of species, 
weights, country of origin, and treatment. The Committee 
encourages FDA to work with States to more aggressively combat 
fraud in parts of the seafood industry.
    Seafood Products.--The Committee is concerned that certain 
imported cockle-based seafood products being marketed in the 
United States are mislabeled for species to the detriment of 
U.S. based firms that label correctly and according to FDA 
guidance. The Committee encourages the FDA to enforce their 
guidance to prevent cockles from being imported into the United 
States mislabeled as clams or clam chowder.
    Seafood Safety.--The Committee supports the ongoing work of 
the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference [ISSC] and its 
joint efforts with the FDA and the shellfish industry to 
formulate shellfish safety regulations through the National 
Shellfish Sanitation Program. The Committee recommendation 
includes $198,000 for the Office of Seafood Inspection to 
continue these activities and $248,000 be directed to the ISSC 
for the Vibrio Vulnificus Education Program. (Cochran/
Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Commission)
    Standards of Identity.--The Committee is aware of the 
ongoing debate surrounding increased importation and use of 
milk protein concentrate. The Committee remains concerned with 
FDA's current lack of enforcement of standards of identity as 
it relates to the potential use of milk protein concentrate in 
standardized cheese and the labeling thereof.
    Therapies for Type 1 Diabetes.--The Committee commends the 
FDA for including the development of therapies for type 1 
diabetes in its Critical Path Initiative, and recognizing major 
advances that have given new hope for the rapid development of 
innovative devices and drugs for the management and treatment 
of type 1 diabetes. A fully automated artificial pancreas has 
the potential to alleviate the burden of daily diabetes 
management, and greatly improve patients' health and quality of 
life. Promising new drugs are in clinical trials that, for the 
first time, might halt the progression of new-onset diabetes. 
The Committee strongly encourages the FDA to continue 
collaborative, open discussions with public and private 
stakeholders committed to accelerating the discovery and 
development of therapies to prevent, manage, and cure type 1 
diabetes to ensure that new therapies are made available to the 
public in a timely manner.
    Unified Financial Management System.--The Committee 
recommendation includes no more than $5,729,000 for the Unified 
Financial Management System. The Committee reminds FDA that 
this amount is subject to the reprogramming requirements 
outlined in the general provisions of this act.
    Waste Management Education and Research Consortium.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $98,000 for the FDA to 
continue its support for the Waste Management Education and 
Research Consortium and its work in food safety technology 
verification and education. (Domenici, Bingaman/Waste 
Management Education and Research Consortium)

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2007....................................      $4,950,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................       4,950,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,950,000

    FDA maintains offices and staff in 49 States and in the 
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, including field 
laboratories and specialized facilities, as well as the 
National Center for Toxicological Research complex. Repairs, 
modifications, improvements, and construction to FDA 
headquarters and field facilities must be made to preserve the 
properties, ensure employee safety, meet changing program 
requirements, and permit the agency to keep its laboratory 
methods up to date.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,950,000 for 
FDA buildings and facilities.

                           INDEPENDENT AGENCY


                       Farm Credit Administration


                 limitation on administrative expenses

Limitation, 2007........................................     $44,250,000
Budget estimate, 2008...................................      46,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      46,000,000

    The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent 
agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible 
for the examination and regulation of the banks, associations, 
and other institutions of the Farm Credit System.
    Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the 
planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System 
institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA 
also establishes standards, enforces rules and regulations, and 
approves certain actions of the institutions.
    The administration and the institutions under its 
jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the 
Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181, effective December 
10, 1971. Public Law 99-205, effective December 23, 1985, 
restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory authorities and 
enforcement powers.
    The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to 
make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to 
farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural residences, 
and associations and other entities upon which farming 
operations are dependent, and to modernize existing farm credit 
law to meet current and future rural credit needs.
    The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the 
formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 
[FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and rural 
housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, under 
section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, is 
assigned the responsibility of regulating this entity and 
assuring its safe and sound operation.
    Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by 
assessments collected from the Farm Credit System institutions 
and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural Mortgage 
Corporation.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $46,000,000 on 
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
[FCA]. The Committee recommendation that the limitation does 
not apply to expenses associated with receiverships.

                               TITLE VII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommends the following provisions:
    Section 701. This section makes funds available for the 
purchase, replacement, and hire of passenger motor vehicles.
    Section 702. This section makes funds for certain accounts 
within the Department of Agriculture available until expended.
    Section 703. This section gives the Secretary of 
Agriculture authority to transfer unobligated balances to the 
Working Capital Fund.
    Section 704. This section limits the funding provided in 
the bill to 1 year, unless otherwise specified.
    Section 705. This section limits negotiated indirect costs 
on cooperative agreements between the Department of Agriculture 
and nonprofit organizations to 10 percent.
    Section 706. This section limits indirect costs charged to 
certain grant awards issued by the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service to 20 percent of total Federal 
funds.
    Section 707. This section makes appropriations to the 
Department of Agriculture for the cost of direct guaranteed 
loans available until expended to disburse obligations for 
certain Rural Development programs.
    Section 708. This section makes funds available for the 
expenses and activities of certain advisory committees, panels, 
commissions, and task forces at the Department of Agriculture.
    Section 709. This section prohibits the use of funds to 
establish an inspection panel at the Department of Agriculture.
    Section 710. This section requires Department of 
Agriculture agencies to provide reimbursement to other 
Department of Agriculture agencies for employees detailed for 
longer than 30 days.
    Section 711. This section prohibits the Department of 
Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services 
from transmitting questions or responses as a result of the 
appropriations hearing process to non-Department employees.
    Section 712. This section prohibits the purchase of new 
information technology equipment and equipment in excess of 
$25,000 without the prior approval of the Chief Information 
Officer.
    Section 713. This section prohibits the reprogramming of 
funds for programs, projects, or activities in excess of 
$500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less without the prior 
notification of the Committee on Appropriations.
    Section 714. This section provides funding for the Lost 
River Watershed Project (Byrd/NRCS West Virginia); the Lower 
Hamakua Ditch Watershed Project, the Upcountry Maui Watershed 
Project (Inouye, Akaka/NRCS Hawaii); and authorized watershed 
projects in the State of Missouri. (Bond/NRCS Missouri)
    Section 715. This section prohibits the closing of the Food 
and Drug Administration's St. Louis, Missouri laboratory.
    Section 716. This section permits 30 percent of the funds 
available for competitive research grants to be used to carry 
out a competitive grants program under section 401 of the 
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
1998.
    Section 717. This section provides a funding limitation for 
the environmental quality incentives program.
    Section 718. This section provides a funding limitation for 
the Dam Rehab Program.
    Section 719. This section limits the amount of funding 
available to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for the 
release of commodities under the Bill Emerson Humanitarian 
Trust.
    Section 720. This section modifies the guaranteed 
underwriting loan program.
    Section 721. This section provides $437,000 for the Denali 
Commission to address deficiencies in solid waste management in 
the State of Alaska. The Committee directs the Commission to 
work with the State of Alaska to develop a legal framework for 
a solid waste management authority that can become self-
sustaining and is authorized to establish a revolving loan fund 
to support solid waste projects.
    Section 722. This section prohibits the promulgation of a 
final rule related to animal and plant health programs.
    Section 723. This section makes funds for certain 
conservation programs available until expended to disburse 
certain obligations made in the current fiscal year. This 
section also makes fiscal years 2004-2008 funds for the 
Agricultural Management Assistance Program available until 
expended to disburse obligations.
    Section 724. This section makes certain former Rural 
Utilities Service borrowers eligible for the Rural Economic 
Development loan and grant program.
    Section 725. This section gives the Secretary of 
Agriculture the authority to make funding and other assistance 
available for damage to non-Federal lands damaged by fires 
initiated by the Federal Government, and waives cost-sharing 
requirements.
    Section 726. This section prohibits the Department of 
Agriculture from requiring the recertification of rural Status 
for each electric and telecommunications borrower for certain 
Rural Utilities Service programs.
    Section 727. This section prohibits the use of funds to 
conduct competitive sourcing activities in rural development 
and farm loan programs.
    Section 728. This section provides a rescission for section 
32.
    Section 729. This section prohibits funds from being used 
to pay the administrative expenses of a State agency that 
authorizes new WIC-only vendors. The section also permits the 
Secretary of Agriculture to approve new WIC-only vendors under 
certain circumstances.
    Section 730. This section provides base funding for all 
institutions participating in the expanded food nutrition 
education program.
    Section 731. This section provides funding for the National 
Center for Natural Products Research to construct and/or 
renovate facilities to enhance the research conducted on 
botanicals and dietary supplements at the National Center in 
conjunction with FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied 
Nutrition. This research aids FDA's regulatory mission in 
ensuring the safety and effectiveness of dietary supplements by 
identifying, isolating, and analyzing specific components of 
botanicals and dietary supplements. (Cochran/University of 
Mississippi)
    Section 732. The section provides funding for the planning 
and design of a facility that would allow the creation of 
sterile fruit flies of all varieties of established fruit fly 
pests. The release of sterile fruit flies is currently the most 
effective method of eliminating fruit fly pests, which destroy 
a significant amount of agriculture in warm-weather States. 
Currently, only one such facility exists, and it only has the 
capacity to create a single species of sterile fruit flies, 
although there are at least four species currently known in 
Hawaii. The creation of this new facility would eliminate the 
dependence of the United States on a single foreign fruit fly 
facility and would provide additional species of sterile fruit 
flies to attempt to control and eliminate all known species of 
fruit fly pests. (Inouye/APHIS Hawaii)
    Section 733. This section establishes a transfer limit on 
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    Section 734. This section makes certain service areas 
eligible for financing through the Rural Utilities Service.
    Section 735. This section repeals section 9012 of Public 
Law 110-28.
    Section 736. This section requires the Rural Utilities 
Service to determine borrower interest rates for Water and 
Waste Disposal direct loans in the same manner as in fiscal 
year 2007.
    Section 737. This section allows the Department to use 
Salaries and Expenses funds to purchase media materials for 
program utilization.
    Section 738. This section makes certain locations eligible 
for certain Rural Development programs.
    Section 739. This section establishes a forestry pilot 
program for lands affected by Hurricane Katrina.
    Section 740. This section provides agricultural disaster 
assistance through the Livestock Compensation Program and the 
Emergency Conservation Program.
    Section 741. This section authorizes travel relating to 
commercial sales of agricultural and medical goods to Cuba.
    Section 742. This section establishes a timeline for the 
implementation of Country of Origin Labeling.

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2008, for purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177) or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-119), the following 
information provides the definition of the term ``program, 
project, and activity'' for departments and agencies under the 
jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related 
Agencies Subcommittee. The term ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items identified in the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations 
Act, 2008, the House and Senate Committee reports, and the 
conference report and accompanying joint explanatory statement 
of the managers of the committee of conference.
    If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2008 pursuant to 
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 or Public Law 100-119 to 
all items specified in the explanatory notes submitted to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in support 
of the fiscal year 2008 budget estimates, as amended, for such 
departments and agencies, as modified by congressional action, 
and in addition:
    For the Agricultural Research Service the definition shall 
include specific research locations as identified in the 
explanatory notes and lines of research specifically identified 
in the reports of the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees.
    For the Natural Resources Conservation Service the 
definition shall include individual flood prevention projects 
as identified in the explanatory notes and individual 
operational watershed projects as summarized in the notes.
    For the Farm Service Agency the definition shall include 
individual, regional, State, district, and county offices.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
recommended amendment 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.
    The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 
which currently lack authorization for fiscal year 2008:
  --The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 provides 
        authorizations for a number of programs funded under 
        this act. This act is currently under consideration for 
        reauthorization;
  --Rare Diseases Orphan Product Development Act of 2002;
  --Medical Device User Fee Act;
  --Prescription Drug User Fee Act;
  --Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on June 14, 2007, 
the Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 1859) 
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, and for other 
purposes, subject to amendment and subject to 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 29-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Byrd
Mr. Inouye
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. Cochran
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Allard
Mr. Alexander

 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 the bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italics; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

TITLE 7--AGRICULTURE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 55--DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 2258. Purchase of newspapers

    The Department of Agriculture is authorized to subscribe 
for such newspapers as may be necessary to carry out its 
authorized work[: Provided, That purchases under this authority 
shall not be made unless provision is made therefor in the 
applicable appropriation and the cost thereof is not in excess 
of limitations prescribed therein].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 22--FOREIGN RELATIONS AND INTERCOURSE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 79--TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 7209. Requirements relating to certain travel-related transactions 
                    with Cuba

[(a) Authorization of travel relating to commercial sale of 
                    agricultural commodities

    [The Secretary of the Treasury shall promulgate regulations 
under which the travel-related transactions listed in 
subsection (c) of section 515.560 of title 31, Code of Federal 
Regulations, may be authorized on a case-by-case basis by a 
specific license for travel to, from, or within Cuba for the 
commercial export sale of agricultural commodities pursuant to 
the provisions of this chapter.]
    (a) Authorization of Travel Relating to Commercial Sales of 
Agricultural and Medical Goods.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
shall promulgate regulations under which the travel-related 
transactions listed in paragraph (c) of section 515.560 of 
title 31, Code of Federal Regulations, are authorized by 
general license for travel to, from, or within Cuba for the 
marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods pursuant 
to the provisions of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   U.S. TROOP READINESS, VETERANS' CARE, KATRINA RECOVERY, AND IRAQ 
ACCOUNTABILITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007, PUBLIC LAW 110-28

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



TITLE IX--AGRICULTURAL ASSISTANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 9002. LIVESTOCK ASSISTANCE.

    (a) Livestock Compensation Program.--
            (1) Availability of assistance.--There are hereby 
        appropriated to the Secretary of Agriculture such sums 
        as are necessary, to remain available until expended, 
        to carry out the livestock compensation program 
        established under subpart B of part 1416 of title 7, 
        Code of Federal Regulations, as announced by the 
        Secretary on February 12, 2007 (72 Fed. Reg. 6443), to 
        provide compensation for livestock losses between 
        January 1, 2005 and [February 28, 2007] December 31, 
        2007, due to a disaster, as determined by the Secretary 
        (including losses due to blizzards that started in 2006 
        and continued into January 2007). However, the payment 
        rate for compensation under this subsection shall be 61 
        percent of the payment rate otherwise applicable under 
        such program. In addition, section 1416.102(b)(2)(ii) 
        of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations (72 Fed. Reg. 
        6444) shall not apply.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (5) * * *
                    (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                    (B) Natural disaster declaration.--The term 
                ``natural disaster declaration'' means--
                            (i) a natural disaster declared by 
                        the Secretary between January 1, 2005 
                        and [February 28, 2007] December 31, 
                        2007, under section 321(a) of the 
                        Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
                        Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a));
                            (ii) a major disaster or emergency 
                        designated by the President between 
                        January 1, 2005 and [February 28, 2007] 
                        December 31, 2007, under the Robert T. 
                        Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
                        Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et 
                        seq.); or

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Livestock Indemnity Payments.--
            (1) Availability of assistance.--There are hereby 
        appropriated to the Secretary of Agriculture such sums 
        as are necessary, to remain available until expended, 
        to make livestock indemnity payments to producers on 
        farms that have incurred livestock losses between 
        January 1, 2005 and [February 28, 2007] December 31, 
        2007, due to a disaster, as determined by the Secretary 
        (including losses due to blizzards that started in 2006 
        and continued into January 2007) in a disaster county. 
        To be eligible for assistance, applicants must meet all 
        eligibility requirements established by the Secretary 
        for the program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (5) * * *
                    (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                    (B) Natural disaster declaration.--The term 
                ``natural disaster declaration'' means--
                            (i) a natural disaster declared by 
                        the Secretary between January 1, 2005 
                        and [February 28, 2007] December 31, 
                        2007, under section 321(a) of the 
                        Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
                        Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a));
                            (ii) a major disaster or emergency 
                        designated by the President between 
                        January 1, 2005 and [February 28, 2007] 
                        December 31, 2007, under the Robert T. 
                        Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
                        Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et 
                        seq.); or

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 9012. CONTRACT WAIVER.

    [In carrying out crop disaster and livestock assistance in 
this title, the Secretary shall require forage producers to 
have articipated in a crop insurance pilot program or the Non-
Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program during the crop year 
for which compensation is received.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                            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 2008: Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development,
 Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies:
    Mandatory...............................................       69,055       72,661       55,661   \1\ 55,661
    Discretionary...........................................       18,709       18,709       20,072   \1\ 19,871
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2008....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 67,370
    2009....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        8,510
    2010....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        1,069
    2011....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          241
    2012 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          150
Financial assistance to State and local governments for                NA       26,113           NA       25,677
 2008.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2008
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+ or
                                                                                                                                  -)
             Item                     2007              Budget        House allowance      Committee    -----------------------------------------------------
                                  appropriation   estimate        deg.         recommendation         2007              Budget            House
                                                                                                           appropriation   estimate  allowance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------

TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

  Production, Processing, and
           Marketing

Office of the Secretary.......            5,097             18,355             5,309              +212           -13,046

Executive Operations:
    Chief Economist...........           10,487             11,347            10,847              +360              -500
    National Appeals Division.           14,466             15,056            15,056              +590   ................
    Office of Budget and                  8,270              9,035             9,035              +765   ................
     Program Analysis.........
    Homeland Security staff...              931              2,412             2,252            +1,321              -160
    Office of the Chief                  16,361             17,024            16,723              +362              -301
     Information Officer......
        Common computing                107,971   .................  ................         -107,971   ................
         environment..........
    Office of the Chief                   5,850             30,863             6,076              +226           -24,787
     Financial Officer........
    Working capital fund......            1,891   .................  ................           -1,891   ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Executive                  166,227             85,737            59,989          -106,238           -25,748
       Operations.............

Office of the Assistant                     818                897               861               +43               -36
 Secretary for Civil Rights...
Office of Civil Rights........           20,020             23,147            20,706              +686            -2,441
Office of the Assistant                     673                739               709               +36               -30
 Secretary for Administration.
Agriculture buildings and              (185,919)          (216,837)         (199,016)         (+13,097)         (-17,821)
 facilities and rental
 payments.....................
    Payments to GSA...........          146,257            156,590           156,590           +10,333   ................
    Building operations and              39,662             60,247            42,426            +2,764           -17,821
     maintenance..............
Hazardous materials management           11,887             12,200             5,200            -6,687            -7,000
Departmental administration...           23,008             24,608            23,913              +905              -695
Office of the Assistant                   3,795              4,099             3,936              +141              -163
 Secretary for Congressional
 Relations....................
Office of Communications......            9,474              9,720             9,720              +246   ................
Office of the Inspector                  80,052             83,998            81,627            +1,575            -2,371
 General......................
Office of the General Counsel.           39,227             41,721            40,764            +1,537              -957
Office of the Under Secretary               596                654               626               +30               -28
 for Research, Education, and
 Economics....................

Economic Research Service.....           75,193             82,544            76,532            +1,339            -6,012
National Agricultural                   147,253            167,699           167,699           +20,446   ................
 Statistics Service...........
    Census of Agriculture.....          (36,249)           (54,325)          (54,325)         (+18,076)  ................

Agricultural Research Service:
    Salaries and expenses.....        1,128,943          1,021,517         1,154,174           +25,231          +132,657
    Buildings and facilities..  ................            16,000            40,100           +40,100           +24,100
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural             1,128,943          1,037,517         1,194,274           +65,331          +156,757
       Research Service.......

Cooperative State Research,
 Education, and Extension
 Service:
    Research and education              671,419            562,518           700,849           +29,430          +138,331
     activities...............
    Native American                     (12,000)           (11,880)          (11,880)            (-120)  ................
     Institutions Endowment
     Fund.....................
    Extension activities......          450,346            431,125           458,537            +8,191           +27,412
    Integrated activities.....           55,234             20,120            12,948           -42,286            -7,172
    Outreach for socially                 5,940              6,930             5,940   ................             -990
     disadvantaged farmers....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Cooperative State        1,182,939          1,020,693         1,178,274            -4,665          +157,581
       Research, Education,
       and Extension Service..

Office of the Under Secretary               721                792               759               +38               -33
 for Marketing and Regulatory
 Programs.....................

Animal and Plant Health
 Inspection Service:
    Salaries and expenses.....          846,230            945,550           911,742           +65,512           -33,808
    Buildings and facilities..            4,946              8,931             4,946   ................           -3,985
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Animal and Plant           851,176            954,481           916,688           +65,512           -37,793
       Health Inspection
       Service................

Agricultural Marketing
 Service:
    Marketing Services........           74,937             74,988            80,145            +5,208            +5,157
    (Limitation on                      (62,211)           (61,233)          (61,233)            (-978)  ................
     administrative expenses,
     from fees collected).....
    Funds for strengthening              16,425             16,798            16,798              +373   ................
     markets, income, and
     supply (transfer from
     section 32)..............
        Discretionary                    20,000             20,000            10,000           -10,000           -10,000
         appropriations.......
    Payments to states and                1,334              1,334             3,834            +2,500            +2,500
     possessions..............
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural               112,696            113,120           110,777            -1,919            -2,343
       Marketing Service......

Grain Inspection, Packers and
 Stockyards Administration:
    Salaries and expenses.....           37,785             44,385            39,115            +1,330            -5,270
    Limitation on inspection            (42,463)           (42,463)          (42,463)  ................  ................
     and weighing services....

Office of the Under Secretary               600                659               632               +32               -27
 for Food Safety..............

Food Safety and Inspection              892,136            930,120           930,620           +38,484              +500
 Service......................
    Lab accreditation fees....           (1,000)  .................  ................          (-1,000)  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Production,              4,976,235          4,874,722         5,067,746           +91,511          +193,024
       Processing, and
       Marketing..............
                               =========================================================================================================================
   Farm Assistance Programs

Office of the Under Secretary               632                695               666               +34               -29
 for Farm and Foreign
 Agricultural Services........

Farm Service Agency:
    Salaries and expenses.....        1,030,193          1,228,662         1,160,662          +130,469           -68,000
    (Transfer from export                  (343)              (359)             (349)              (+6)             (-10)
     loans)...................
    (Transfer from Public Law            (3,207)            (2,761)           (2,749)            (-458)             (-12)
     480).....................
    (Transfer from ACIF)......         (303,309)          (311,737)         (310,230)          (+6,921)          (-1,507)
    (Transfer from farm         ................            (4,660)           (4,660)          (+4,660)  ................
     storage loan program
     account).................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, transfers from         (306,859)          (319,517)         (317,988)         (+11,129)          (-1,529)
       program accounts.......
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and            (1,337,052)        (1,548,179)       (1,478,650)        (+141,598)         (-69,529)
       expenses...............

    State mediation grants....            4,208              4,000             4,750              +542              +750
    Grassroot source water                3,713   .................            3,713   ................           +3,713
     protection program.......
    Dairy indemnity program...              100                100               100   ................  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Farm Service          1,038,214          1,232,762         1,169,225          +131,011           -63,537
       Agency.................

Agricultural Credit Insurance
 Fund Program Account:
    Loan authorizations:
        Farm ownership loans:
            Direct............         (207,642)          (223,857)         (223,857)         (+16,215)  ................
            Guaranteed........       (1,386,000)        (1,200,000)       (1,247,400)        (-138,600)         (+47,400)
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........       (1,593,642)        (1,423,857)       (1,471,257)        (-122,385)         (+47,400)

        Farm operating loans:
            Direct............         (643,500)          (629,595)         (579,150)         (-64,350)         (-50,445)
            Unsubsidized             (1,138,500)        (1,000,000)       (1,024,650)        (-113,850)         (+24,650)
             guaranteed.......
            Subsidized                 (271,886)          (250,000)         (271,886)  ................         (+21,886)
             guaranteed.......
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........       (2,053,886)        (1,879,595)       (1,875,686)        (-178,200)          (-3,909)

            Indian tribe land            (2,000)            (3,960)           (3,960)          (+1,960)  ................
             acquisition loans
            Boll weevil                (100,000)           (59,400)         (100,000)  ................         (+40,600)
             eradication loans
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan            (3,749,528)        (3,366,812)       (3,450,903)        (-298,625)         (+84,091)
               authorizations.

    Loan subsidies:
        Farm ownership loans:
            Direct............            8,700              9,962             9,962            +1,262   ................
            Guaranteed........            8,039              4,800             4,990            -3,049              +190
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........           16,739             14,762            14,952            -1,787              +190

        Farm operating loans:
            Direct............           75,225             79,896            73,494            -1,731            -6,402
            Unsubsidized                 28,121             24,200            24,797            -3,324              +597
             guaranteed.......
            Subsidized                   27,379             33,350            36,270            +8,891            +2,920
             guaranteed.......
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........          130,725            137,446           134,561            +3,836            -2,885

        Indian tribe land                   423                125               125              -298   ................
         acquisition..........
        Boll weevil                       1,900   .................  ................           -1,900   ................
         eradication..........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Loan                   149,787            152,333           149,638              -149            -2,695
           subsidies..........

    ACIF expenses:
        Salaries and expense            303,309            311,737           310,230            +6,921            -1,507
         (transfer to FSA)....
        Administrative                    7,920              7,920             7,920   ................  ................
         expenses.............
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, ACIF expenses          311,229            319,657           318,150            +6,921            -1,507
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Agricultural           461,016            471,990           467,788            +6,772            -4,202
           Credit Insurance
           Fund...............
              (Loan                  (3,749,528)        (3,366,812)       (3,450,903)        (-298,625)         (+84,091)
               authorization).
                               =========================================================================================================================
          Total, Farm Service         1,499,230          1,704,752         1,637,013          +137,783           -67,739
           Agency.............
                               =========================================================================================================================
Risk Management Agency:
    Administrative and                   76,658             79,062            78,833            +2,175              -229
     operating expenses.......
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, Farm Assistance          1,576,520          1,784,509         1,716,512          +139,992           -67,997
       Programs...............
                               =========================================================================================================================
         Corporations

Federal Crop Insurance
 Corporation:
    Federal crop insurance            4,379,256          4,818,099         4,818,099          +438,843   ................
     corporation fund.........
Commodity Credit Corporation
 Fund:
    Reimbursement for net            23,098,328         12,983,000        12,983,000       -10,115,328   ................
     realized losses..........
    Hazardous waste management           (5,000)            (5,000)           (5,000)  ................  ................
     (limitation on expenses).
Farm Storage Facility Loans
 Program Account:
    Salaries and expenses:
        Farm Service Agency     ................             4,660             4,660            +4,660   ................
         (transfer to FSA)....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Corporations.       27,477,584         17,805,759        17,805,759        -9,671,825   ................
                               =========================================================================================================================
          Total, title I,            34,030,339         24,464,990        24,590,017        -9,440,322          +125,027
           Agricultural
           Programs...........
              (By transfer)...         (306,859)          (319,517)         (317,988)         (+11,129)          (-1,529)
              (Loan                  (3,749,528)        (3,366,812)       (3,450,903)        (-298,625)         (+84,091)
               authorization).
              (Limitation on           (109,674)          (108,696)         (108,696)            (-978)  ................
               administrative
               expenses)......
                               =========================================================================================================================
    TITLE II--CONSERVATION
           PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary               742                822               781               +39               -41
 for Natural Resources and
 Environment..................

Natural Resources Conservation
 Service:
    Conservation operations...          763,360            801,825           862,996           +99,636           +61,171
    Watershed surveys and                 6,056   .................  ................           -6,056   ................
     planning.................
    Watershed and flood         ................  .................           33,450           +33,450           +33,450
     prevention operations....
    Watershed rehabilitation             31,309              5,807            20,000           -11,309           +14,193
     program..................
    Resource conservation and            51,088             14,653            53,150            +2,062           +38,497
     development..............
    Healthy forests reserve     ................             2,476             2,476            +2,476   ................
     program..................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Natural Resources          851,813            824,761           972,072          +120,259          +147,311
       Conservation Service...
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, title II,                  852,555            825,583           972,853          +120,298          +147,270
       Conservation Programs..
                               =========================================================================================================================
 TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT
           PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary               632                695               666               +34               -29
 for Rural Development........

Rural Development:
    Rural community                     737,135   .................  ................         -737,135   ................
     advancement program......
        (Transfer out)........         (-25,740)  .................  ................         (+25,740)  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                  737,135   .................  ................         -737,135   ................
           community
           advancement program

    RD expenses:
        Salaries and expenses.          161,298            208,194           175,302           +14,004           -32,892
        (Transfer from RHIF)..         (452,927)          (434,890)         (462,521)          (+9,594)         (+27,631)
        (Transfer from MHRP)..  ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
        (Transfer from RDLFP).           (4,774)            (4,576)           (4,861)             (+87)            (+285)
        (Transfer from RETLP).          (38,623)           (37,009)          (39,405)            (+782)          (+2,396)
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Transfers          (496,324)          (476,475)         (506,787)         (+10,463)         (+30,312)
           from program
           accounts...........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, RD expenses..         (657,622)          (684,669)         (682,089)         (+24,467)          (-2,580)
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                  898,433            208,194           175,302          -723,131           -32,892
           Development........
                               =========================================================================================================================
Rural Housing Service:
    Rural Housing Insurance
     Fund Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Single family            (1,129,391)  .................       (1,129,391)  ................      (+1,129,391)
             direct (sec. 502)
                Unsubsidized         (3,644,224)        (4,848,611)       (3,561,111)         (-83,113)      (-1,287,500)
                 guaranteed...
                               -------------------
                  Subtotal,          (4,773,615)        (4,848,611)       (4,690,502)         (-83,113)        (-158,109)
                   Single
                   family.....

            Housing repair              (34,652)           (22,855)          (34,652)  ................         (+11,797)
             (sec. 504).......
            Rental housing              (99,000)  .................          (70,000)         (-29,000)         (+70,000)
             (sec. 515).......
            Site loans (sec.             (5,000)            (5,045)           (5,045)             (+45)  ................
             524).............
            Multi-family                (99,000)          (200,000)         (150,000)         (+51,000)         (-50,000)
             housing
             guarantees (sec.
             538).............
            Multi-family                 (1,485)            (1,408)           (1,485)  ................             (+77)
             housing credit
             sales............
            Single family               (10,000)           (10,000)          (10,000)  ................  ................
             housing credit
             sales............
            Self-help housing            (4,998)  .................           (5,000)              (+2)          (+5,000)
             land develop.
             (sec. 523).......
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan            (5,027,750)        (5,087,919)       (4,966,684)         (-61,066)        (-121,235)
               authorizations.

        Loan subsidies:
            Single family               113,278   .................          105,824            -7,454          +105,824
             direct (sec. 502)
                Unsubsidized             42,641             10,070            42,495              -146           +32,425
                 guaranteed...
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,             155,919             10,070           148,319            -7,600          +138,249
                   Single
                   family.....

            Housing repair               10,240              6,461             9,796              -444            +3,335
             (sec. 504).......
            Rental housing               45,213   .................           29,827           -15,386           +29,827
             (sec. 515).......
            Multi-family                  7,663             18,800            14,100            +6,437            -4,700
             housing
             guarantees (sec.
             538).............
            Multi-family                    673                523               552              -121               +29
             housing credit
             sales............
            Single family                    48   .................  ................              -48   ................
             housing credit
             sales............
            Self-help housing               123   .................              142               +19              +142
             land develop.
             (sec. 523).......
            Multi-family                  8,910   .................  ................           -8,910   ................
             housing
             preservation.....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan               228,789             35,854           202,736           -26,053          +166,882
               subsidies......

        RHIF administrative             452,927            434,890           462,521            +9,594           +27,631
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)..................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Housing          681,716            470,744           665,257           -16,459          +194,513
           Insurance Fund.....
              (Loan                  (5,027,750)        (5,087,919)       (4,966,684)         (-61,066)        (-121,235)
               authorization).
                               =========================================================================================================================
        Rental assistance
         program:
            (Sec. 521)........          608,100            567,000           490,950          -117,150           -76,050
            (Sec.                         7,920   .................            6,000            -1,920            +6,000
             502(c)(5)(D))....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Rental             616,020            567,000           496,950          -119,070           -70,050
               assistance
               program........

    Rural housing voucher                15,840   .................           15,500              -340           +15,500
     program..................
    Multifamily housing         ................            27,800            15,000           +15,000           -12,800
     revitalization program
     account..................
    MHRP administrative         ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
     expenses (transfer to RD)
MHRP revolving loans..........  ................  .................            2,923            +2,923            +2,923
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Multifamily                 15,840             27,800            33,423           +17,583            +5,623
       housing revitalization.

    Mutual and self-help                 33,660              9,500            38,000            +4,340           +28,500
     housing grants...........
    Rural housing assistance             43,603             39,000            40,590            -3,013            +1,590
     grants...................
    Farm labor housing program
     account:
        (Loan authorization)..          (38,117)           (13,520)          (27,739)         (-10,378)         (+14,219)
        Loan subsidy..........           18,277              5,849            12,000            -6,277            +6,151
        Grants................           13,860              4,000            10,000            -3,860            +6,000
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Farm Labor              32,137              9,849            22,000           -10,137           +12,151
           Housing Program
           Account............

    Rural community program
     account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Community
             facility:........
                Direct........  ................          (302,414)         (297,000)        (+297,000)          (-5,414)
                Guaranteed....  ................          (210,000)         (207,900)        (+207,900)          (-2,100)
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan   ................          (512,414)         (504,900)        (+504,900)          (-7,514)
                   authorizati
                   ons........

        Loan subsidies and
         grants:
            Commmunity
             facility:
                Direct........  ................            16,784            16,484           +16,484              -300
                Guaranteed....  ................             7,728             7,651            +7,651               -77
                Grants........  ................  .................           17,000           +17,000           +17,000
            Rural Community     ................  .................            6,287            +6,287            +6,287
             Development
             Initiative grants
            Tribal college      ................  .................            4,000            +4,000            +4,000
             grants...........
            Economic impact     ................  .................           16,000           +16,000           +16,000
             initiative grants
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan       ................            24,512            67,422           +67,422           +42,910
               subsidies and
               grants.........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, grants          109,400             82,861           168,012           +58,612           +85,151
               and payments...
                               =========================================================================================================================
              Total, Rural            1,422,976          1,148,405         1,363,642           -59,334          +215,237
               Housing Service
                  (Loan              (5,065,867)        (5,613,853)       (5,499,323)        (+433,456)        (-114,530)
                   authorizati
                   on)........
                               =========================================================================================================================
Rural Business--Cooperative
 Service:
    Rural Development Loan
     Fund Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)..          (33,870)           (33,772)          (33,870)  ................             (+98)
        Loan subsidy..........           14,927             14,485            14,527              -400               +42
        Administrative                    4,774              4,576             4,861               +87              +285
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)..................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                   19,701             19,061            19,388              -313              +327
           Development Loan
           Fund...............

    Rural Economic Development
     Loans Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)..          (24,752)           (33,077)          (33,077)          (+8,325)  ................
        Direct subsidy........            5,406   .................  ................           -5,406   ................
        Mandatory subsidy (NA)  ................            (7,472)           (7,472)          (+7,472)  ................
    Rural economic development          (10,000)           (10,000)          (10,000)  ................  ................
     grants (NA)..............
    Rural cooperative
     development grants:
        Cooperative                       3,753              4,455             4,455              +702   ................
         development..........
        Appropriate technology              936   .................            3,000            +2,064            +3,000
         transfer for rural
         areas................
        Cooperative research                495   .................  ................             -495   ................
         agreement............
        Value-added                      20,295             15,000            17,475            -2,820            +2,475
         agricultural product
         market development...
        Grants to assist                  1,239              1,473             1,473              +234   ................
         minority producers...
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                   26,718             20,928            26,403              -315            +5,475
           Cooperative
           development grants.

    Rural empowerment zones              11,088   .................           10,000            -1,088           +10,000
     and enterprise
     communities grants.......
    Renewable energy program:
        (Loan authorization)..         (176,512)          (195,470)         (176,512)  ................         (-18,958)
        Loan subsidy..........           11,456             18,941            17,104            +5,648            -1,837
        Grants................           11,385             15,000            11,385   ................           -3,615
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Renewable               22,841             33,941            28,489            +5,648            -5,452
           energy program.....

    Rural Business Program
     Account:
        (Guaranteed business    ................        (1,000,000)       (1,000,000)      (+1,000,000)  ................
         and industry loans)..
        Guaranteed business     ................            43,200            43,200           +43,200   ................
         and industry subsidy.
        Grants:
            Rural business      ................  .................           38,000           +38,000           +38,000
             enterprise.......
            Rural business      ................  .................            2,000            +2,000            +2,000
             opportunity......
            Delta regional      ................  .................            3,000            +3,000            +3,000
             authority........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Rural      ................            43,200            86,200           +86,200           +43,000
               Business
               Program Account
                               =========================================================================================================================
              Total, Rural               85,754            117,130           170,480           +84,726           +53,350
               Business--Coope
               rative Service.
                  (Loan                (235,134)        (1,262,319)       (1,243,459)      (+1,008,325)         (-18,860)
                   authorizati
                   on)........
                               =========================================================================================================================
Rural Utilities Service:
    Rural Electrification and
     Telecommunications Loans
     Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Electric:
                Direct, 5               (99,000)          (100,000)         (100,000)          (+1,000)  ................
                 percent......
                 Direct,               (100,764)  .................  ................        (-100,764)  ................
                 Municipal
                 rate.........
                Direct, FFB...       (2,700,000)        (4,000,000)       (6,500,000)      (+3,800,000)      (+2,500,000)
                Direct,                (990,000)  .................  ................        (-990,000)  ................
                 Treasury rate
                Guaranteed           (1,500,000)  .................       (1,000,000)        (-500,000)      (+1,000,000)
                 underwriting.
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,          (5,389,764)        (4,100,000)       (7,600,000)      (+2,210,236)      (+3,500,000)
                   Electric...

            Telecommunications
             :
                Direct, 5              (145,000)          (145,000)         (145,000)  ................  ................
                 percent......
                Direct,                (419,760)          (250,000)         (250,000)        (-169,760)  ................
                 Treasury rate
                Direct, FFB...         (125,000)          (295,000)         (295,000)        (+170,000)  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,            (689,760)          (690,000)         (690,000)            (+240)  ................
                   Telecommuni
                   cations....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan        (6,079,524)        (4,790,000)       (8,290,000)      (+2,210,476)      (+3,500,000)
                   authorizati
                   ons........

        Loan subsidies:
            Electric:
                Direct, 5                 2,119                120               120            -1,999   ................
                 percent......
                Direct,                   1,522   .................  ................           -1,522   ................
                 Municipal
                 rate.........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,               3,641                120               120            -3,521   ................
                   Electric...

            Telecommunications
             :
                Direct, 5                   537                116               116              -421   ................
                 percent......
                Direct,                     126              1,675             1,675            +1,549   ................
                 Treasury rate
                Direct, FFB...  ................             1,829             1,829            +1,829   ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,                 663              3,620             3,620            +2,957   ................
                   Telecommuni
                   cations....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan             4,304              3,740             3,740              -564   ................
                   subsidies..

        RETLP administrative             38,623             37,009            39,405              +782            +2,396
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)..................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                   42,927             40,749            43,145              +218            +2,396
           Electrification and
           Telecommunications
           Loans Program
           Account............
              (Loan                  (6,079,524)        (4,790,000)       (8,290,000)      (+2,210,476)      (+3,500,000)
               authorization).
                               =========================================================================================================================
Distance learning,
 telemedicine, and broadband
 program:
    Loan authorizations:
        Broadband                      (495,000)          (300,000)         (495,000)  ................        (+195,000)
         telecommunications...
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Loan                  (495,000)          (300,000)         (495,000)  ................        (+195,000)
           authorizations.....

    Loan subsidies and grants:
        Distance learning and
         telemedicine:
            Grants............           29,700             24,750            34,750            +5,050           +10,000
        Broadband
         telecommunications:
            Direct............           10,643              6,450            10,643            +4,193   ................
            Grants............            8,910   .................            8,910   ................           +8,910
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan                49,253             31,200            54,303            +5,050           +23,103
               subsidies and
               grants.........

    Rural water and waste
     disposal program account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Direct............  ................        (1,080,239)       (1,080,234)      (+1,080,234)              (-5)
            Guaranteed........  ................           (75,000)          (75,000)         (+75,000)  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan       ................        (1,155,239)       (1,155,234)      (+1,155,234)              (-5)
               authorization..

        Loan subsidies and
         grants:
            Direct subsidy....  ................           153,394            73,564           +73,564           -79,830
            Water and waste     ................           345,920           437,748          +437,748           +91,828
             grants...........
            Solid waste         ................             3,465             3,465            +3,465   ................
             management grants
            Emergency           ................  .................           13,692           +13,692           +13,692
             Community Water
             Assistance grants
            Individual water    ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
             well grants......
            Water and waste     ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
             financing
             revolving fund...
            High energy cost    ................  .................           22,000           +22,000           +22,000
             grants...........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan       ................           502,779           550,469          +550,469           +47,690
               subsidies and
               grants.........
                               =========================================================================================================================
              Total, Rural               92,180            574,728           647,917          +555,737           +73,189
               Utilities
               Service........
                  (Loan              (6,574,524)        (6,245,239)       (9,940,234)      (+3,365,710)      (+3,694,995)
                   authorizati
                   on)........
                               =========================================================================================================================
              Total, title            2,499,975          2,049,152         2,358,007          -141,968          +308,855
               III, Rural
               Economic and
               Community
               Development
               Programs.......
                  (By                  (496,324)          (476,475)         (506,787)         (+10,463)         (+30,312)
                   transfer)..
                  (Loan             (11,875,525)       (13,121,411)      (16,683,016)      (+4,807,491)      (+3,561,605)
                   authorizati
                   on)........
                               =========================================================================================================================
    TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD
           PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary               597                655               628               +31               -27
 for Food, Nutrition and
 Consumer Services............

Food and Nutrition Service:
    Child nutrition programs..        7,614,523          7,592,797         7,662,215           +47,692           +69,418
        Transfer from section         5,731,073          6,304,475         6,235,057          +503,984           -69,418
         32...................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Child               13,345,596         13,897,272        13,897,272          +551,676   ................
           nutrition programs.

    Special supplemental              5,204,430          5,386,597         5,720,000          +515,570          +333,403
     nutrition program for
     women, infants, and
     children (WIC)...........

    Food stamp program:
        Expenses..............       33,463,137         35,053,973        35,017,973        +1,554,836           -36,000
        Armed forces provision            1,000   .................  ................           -1,000   ................
        Reserve...............        3,000,000          3,000,000         3,000,000   ................  ................
        Nutrition assistance          1,557,397          1,621,250         1,621,250           +63,853   ................
         for Puerto Rico and
         Samoa................
        The emergency food              140,000            140,000           140,000   ................  ................
         assistance program...
        CSFP transitional       ................            21,000   ................  ................          -21,000
         benefit..............
            CSFP outreach       ................             2,000   ................  ................           -2,000
             grant............
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Food            38,161,534         39,838,223        39,779,223        +1,617,689           -59,000
               stamp program..

    Commodity assistance
     program:
        Commodity supplemental          107,202   .................          128,000           +20,798          +128,000
         food program.........
        Farmers market                   19,800             19,800            20,000              +200              +200
         nutrition program....
        Emergency food                   49,500             49,500            50,000              +500              +500
         assistance program...
        Pacific island and                1,070              1,070             1,070   ................  ................
         disaster assistance..
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Commodity              177,572             70,370           199,070           +21,498          +128,700
           assistance program.

    Nutrition programs                  140,252            148,926           147,426            +7,174            -1,500
     administration...........
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and                57,029,384         59,341,388        59,742,991        +2,713,607          +401,603
       Nutrition Service......
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV,               57,029,981         59,342,043        59,743,619        +2,713,638          +401,576
       Domestic Food Programs.
                               =========================================================================================================================
  TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE
     AND RELATED PROGRAMS

Foreign Agricultural Service:
    Salaries and expenses,              156,220            168,209           167,391           +11,171              -818
     direct appropriation.....
    (Transfer from export                (3,433)            (4,985)           (4,985)          (+1,552)  ................
     loans)...................
    (Transfer from Public Law              (166)  .................  ................            (-166)  ................
     480).....................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and              (159,819)          (173,194)         (172,376)         (+12,557)            (-818)
       expenses program level.

Public Law 480 Program and
 Grant Accounts:
    Title II--Commodities for
     disposition abroad:
        Program level.........       (1,214,711)        (1,219,400)       (1,219,400)          (+4,689)  ................
        Appropriation.........        1,214,711          1,219,400         1,219,400            +4,689   ................

    Salaries and expenses:
        Foreign Agricultural                166   .................  ................             -166   ................
         Service (transfer to
         FAS).................
        Farm Service Agency               3,207              2,761             2,749              -458               -12
         (transfer to FSA)....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............            3,373              2,761             2,749              -624               -12
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Public Law
           480:
              Program level...       (1,214,711)        (1,219,400)       (1,219,400)          (+4,689)  ................
              Appropriation...        1,218,084          1,222,161         1,222,149            +4,065               -12
                               =========================================================================================================================
CCC Export Loans Program
 Account (administrative
 expenses):
    Salaries and expenses
     (Export Loans):
        General Sales Manager             3,433              4,985             4,985            +1,552   ................
         (transfer to FAS)....
        Farm Service Agency                 343                359               349                +6               -10
         (transfer to FSA)....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, CCC Export               3,776              5,344             5,334            +1,558               -10
           Loans Program
           Account............

McGovern-Dole international              99,000            100,000           100,000            +1,000   ................
 food for education and child
 nutrition program grants.....
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, title V, Foreign         1,477,080          1,495,714         1,494,874           +17,794              -840
       Assistance and Related
       Programs...............
          (By transfer).......           (3,599)            (4,985)           (4,985)          (+1,386)  ................
                               =========================================================================================================================
TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND
 FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
           SERVICES

 Food and Drug Administration

Salaries and expenses, direct         1,569,244          1,635,709         1,755,135          +185,891          +119,426
 appropriation................
    Prescription Drug User Fee         (352,200)          (339,195)         (459,000)        (+106,800)        (+119,805)
     Act......................
    Medical Device User Fee             (43,726)           (47,500)          (48,431)          (+4,705)            (+931)
     Act......................
    Animal Drug User Fee Act..          (11,604)           (13,696)          (13,696)          (+2,092)  ................
    Generic drug user fee.....  ................           (15,701)  ................  ................         (-15,701)
    Reinspection fees (user     ................           (23,276)  ................  ................         (-23,276)
     fees) (leg. prop) NA.....
    Food export fees (user      ................            (3,741)  ................  ................          (-3,741)
     fees) (leg. prop) NA.....
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................       (1,976,774)        (2,051,801)       (2,276,262)        (+299,488)        (+224,461)

    Mammography clinics user            (17,522)           (18,398)          (18,398)            (+876)  ................
     fee (outlay savings).....
    Export and color                     (8,481)            (9,500)           (9,500)          (+1,019)  ................
     certification............
    Payments to GSA...........         (126,871)          (131,533)         (131,533)          (+4,662)  ................

Buildings and facilities......            4,950              4,950             4,950   ................  ................
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and Drug            1,574,194          1,640,659         1,760,085          +185,891          +119,426
       Administration.........
                               =========================================================================================================================
     INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Farm Credit Administration              (44,250)           (46,000)          (46,000)          (+1,750)  ................
 (limitation on administrative
 expenses)....................
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, title VI, Related        1,574,194          1,640,659         1,760,085          +185,891          +119,426
       Agencies and Food and
       Drug Administration....
                               =========================================================================================================================
 TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Denali Commission.............              743   .................              437              -306              +437
Section 32 (rescission) (sec.           -37,601            -65,452          -331,000          -293,399          -265,548
 xxx).........................
Specialty crop grants (sec.               6,930   .................  ................           -6,930   ................
 736).........................
Healthy Forest Reserve........            2,476   .................  ................           -2,476   ................
Food stamp program employment           -11,200   .................  ................          +11,200   ................
 & training (rescission)......
ARS buildings and facilities    ................           -16,000   ................  ................          +16,000
 (rescission).................
Hawaii APHIS facility.........  ................  .................              200              +200              +200
National Center for Natural     ................  .................            5,000            +5,000            +5,000
 Products Research............
Across-the-board Pay Raise      ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
 (H.J. Res. 20, Sec. 111)
 (outlays)....................
Emergency Conservation program  ................  .................           10,000           +10,000           +10,000
Hardwoods Trees...............  ................  .................            1,000            +1,000            +1,000
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Total, title VII,                 -38,652            -81,452          -314,363          -275,711          -232,911
       General provisions.....
                               =========================================================================================================================
      Grand total.............       97,425,472         89,736,689        90,605,092        -6,820,380          +868,403
          Appropriations......      (97,474,273)       (89,818,141)      (90,936,092)      (-6,538,181)      (+1,117,951)
          Emergency             ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
           Appropriations.....
          Rescissions.........         (-48,801)          (-81,452)        (-331,000)        (-282,199)        (-249,548)
      (By transfer)...........         (806,782)          (800,977)         (829,760)         (+22,978)         (+28,783)
      (Loan authorization)....      (15,625,053)       (16,488,223)      (20,133,919)      (+4,508,866)      (+3,645,696)
      (Limitation on                   (153,924)          (154,696)         (154,696)            (+772)  ................
       administrative
       expenses)..............
                               =========================================================================================================================
        RECAPITULATION

Title I--Agricultural programs       34,030,339         24,464,990        24,590,017        -9,440,322          +125,027
    Mandatory.................      (27,494,109)       (17,817,997)      (17,817,997)      (-9,676,112)  ................
    Discretionary.............       (6,536,230)        (6,646,993)       (6,772,020)        (+235,790)        (+125,027)
Title II--Conservation                  852,555            825,583           972,853          +120,298          +147,270
 programs (discretionary).....
Title III--Rural economic and         2,499,975          2,049,152         2,358,007          -141,968          +308,855
 community development
 programs (discretionary).....
Title IV--Domestic food              57,029,981         59,342,043        59,743,619        +2,713,638          +401,576
 programs.....................
    Mandatory.................      (51,506,130)       (53,712,495)      (53,676,495)      (+2,170,365)         (-36,000)
    Discretionary.............       (5,523,851)        (5,629,548)       (6,067,124)        (+543,273)        (+437,576)
Title V--Foreign assistance           1,477,080          1,495,714         1,494,874           +17,794              -840
 and related programs
 (discretionary)..............
Title VI--Related agencies and        1,574,194          1,640,659         1,760,085          +185,891          +119,426
 Food and Drug Administration
 (discretionary)..............
Title VII--General provisions           -38,652            -81,452          -314,363          -275,711          -232,911
 (discretionary)..............
Other appropriations            ................  .................  ................  ................  ................
 (discretionary)..............
                               -------------------
      Total...................       97,425,472         89,736,689        90,605,092        -6,820,380          +868,403
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------