Report text available as:

(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?


[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


114th Congress     }                                {    Rept. 114-783
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session        }                                {          Part 1
======================================================================
 
             MODERNIZING GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY ACT OF 2016

                                _______
                                

 September 22, 2016.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Chaffetz, from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 6004]

    The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 6004) to modernize Government 
information technology, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment 
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Committee Statement and Views....................................     6
Section-by-Section...............................................    12
Explanation of Amendments........................................    16
Committee Consideration..........................................    16
Roll Call Votes..................................................    16
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch.....................    17
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the 
  Committee......................................................    17
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    17
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    17
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................    17
Federal Advisory Committee Act...................................    17
Unfunded Mandate Statement.......................................    17
Earmark Identification...........................................    17
Committee Estimate...............................................    18
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate...    18

    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Modernizing Government Technology Act 
of 2016'' or the ``MGT Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.

  (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
          (1) The Federal Government spends nearly 75 percent of its 
        annual information technology funding on operating and 
        maintaining existing, legacy information technology systems. 
        These systems can pose operational risks, including rising 
        costs and inability to meet mission requirements. These systems 
        also pose security risks, including the inability to use 
        current security best practices, such as data encryption and 
        multi-factor authentication, making these systems particularly 
        vulnerable to malicious cyber activity.
          (2) In 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
        designated Improving the Management of IT Acquisitions and 
        Operations to its biannual High Risk List and identified as a 
        particular concern the increasing level of information 
        technology spending on Operations and Maintenance making less 
        funding available for development or modernization. The GAO 
        also found the Government has spent billions on failed and 
        poorly performing IT investments due to a lack of effective 
        oversight.
          (3) The Federal Government must modernize Federal IT systems 
        to mitigate existing operational and security risks.
          (4) The efficiencies, cost savings, and greater computing 
        power, offered by modernized solutions, such as cloud 
        computing, have the potential to--
                  (A) eliminate inappropriate duplication and reduce 
                costs;
                  (B) address the critical need for cyber security by 
                design; and
                  (C) move the Federal Government into a broad, 
                digital-services delivery model that will transform the 
                Federal Government's ability to meet mission 
                requirements and deliver services to the American 
                people.
  (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are the following:
          (1) Assist the Federal Government in modernized Federal 
        information technology to mitigate current operational and 
        security risks.
          (2) Incentivize cost savings in Federal information 
        technology through modernization.
          (3) Accelerate the acquisition and deployment of modernized 
        information technology solutions, such as cloud computing, by 
        addressing impediments in the areas of funding, development, 
        and acquisition practices.

SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF AGENCY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS 
                    MODERNIZATION AND WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

  (a) Information Technology System Modernization and Working Capital 
Funds.--
          (1) Establishment.--There is established in each covered 
        agency an information technology system modernization and 
        working capital fund (in this section referred to as the ``IT 
        working capital fund'') for necessary expenses for the agency 
        described in paragraph (3).
          (2) Source of funds.--Amounts may be deposited into an IT 
        working capital fund as follows:
                  (A) Reprogramming of funds, including reprogramming 
                of any funds available on the date of the enactment of 
                this Act for the operation and maintenance of legacy 
                information technology systems, in compliance with any 
                applicable reprogramming law or guidelines of the 
                Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
                Representatives and the Senate.
                  (B) Transfer of funds, including transfer of any 
                funds available on the date of the enactment of this 
                Act for the operation and maintenance of legacy 
                information technology systems, but only if transfer 
                authority is specifically provided for by law.
                  (C) Amounts made available through discretionary 
                appropriations.
          (3) Use of funds.--An IT working capital fund established 
        under paragraph (1) may be used only for the following:
                  (A) To improve, retire, or replace existing 
                information technology systems to improve efficiency 
                and effectiveness.
                  (B) To transition to cloud computing and innovative 
                platforms and technologies.
                  (C) To assist and support covered agency efforts to 
                provide adequate, risk-based, and cost-effective 
                information technology capabilities that address 
                evolving threats to information security.
                  (D) Reimbursement of funds transferred from the 
                Information Technology Modernization Fund established 
                under section 4, with the approval of the agency Chief 
                Information Officer.
          (4) Existing funds.--An IT working capital fund may not be 
        used to supplant funds provided for the operation and 
        maintenance of any system already within an appropriation for 
        the covered agency at the time of establishment of the IT 
        working capital fund.
          (5) Reprogramming and transfer of funds.--The head of each 
        covered agency shall prioritize funds within the IT working 
        capital fund to be used initially for cost savings activities 
        approved by the covered agency Chief Information Officer, in 
        consultation with the Administrator of the Office of Electronic 
        Government. The head of each covered agency may--
                  (A) reprogram any amounts saved as a direct result of 
                such activities for deposit into the applicable IT 
                working capital fund, consistent with paragraph (2)(A); 
                and
                  (B) transfer any amounts saved as a direct result of 
                such activities for deposit into the applicable IT 
                working capital fund, consistent with paragraph (2)(B).
          (6) Return of funds.--Any funds deposited into an IT working 
        capital fund must be obligated not later than 3 years after the 
        date of such deposit. Any funds that are unobligated 3 years 
        after such date shall be rescinded and reported to the 
        Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
        and the Senate.
          (7) Agency cio responsibilities.--In evaluating projects to 
        be funded from the IT working capital fund, the covered agency 
        Chief Information Officer shall consider, to the extent 
        applicable, guidance established pursuant to section 4(a)(1) to 
        evaluate applications for funding from the Information 
        Technology Modernization Fund that include factors such as a 
        strong business case, technical design, procurement strategy 
        (including adequate use of incremental software development 
        practices), and program management.
  (b) Reporting Requirement.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the 
        head of each covered agency shall submit to the Director the 
        following, with respect to the IT working capital fund for that 
        covered agency:
                  (A) A list of each information technology investment 
                funded with estimated cost and completion date for each 
                such investment.
                  (B) A summary by fiscal year of the obligations, 
                expenditures, and unused balances.
          (2) Public availability.--The Director shall make the 
        information required pursuant to paragraph (1) publicly 
        available on a website.
  (c) Covered Agency Defined.--In this section, the term ``covered 
agency'' means each agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31, United 
States Code.

SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MODERNIZATION FUND AND 
                    BOARD.

  (a) Information Technology Modernization Fund.--
          (1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury an 
        Information Technology Modernization Fund (in this section 
        referred to as the ``Fund'') for technology related activities, 
        to improve information technology, to enhance cybersecurity 
        across the Federal Government, and to be administered in 
        accordance with guidance established by the Director of the 
        Office of Management of Budget.
          (2) Administration of fund.--The Administrator of General 
        Services, in consultation with the Chief Information Officers 
        Council and with the concurrence of the Director, shall 
        administer the Fund in accordance with this subsection.
          (3) Use of funds.--The Administrator of General Services 
        shall, in accordance with the recommendations of the 
        Information Technology Modernization Board established under 
        subsection (b), use amounts in the Fund for the following 
        purposes:
                  (A) To transfer such amounts, to remain available 
                until expended, to the head of an agency to improve, 
                retire, or replace existing information technology 
                systems to enhance cybersecurity and improve efficiency 
                and effectiveness.
                  (B) For the development, operation, and procurement 
                of information technology products, services, and 
                acquisition vehicles for use by agencies to improve 
                Governmentwide efficiency and cybersecurity in 
                accordance with the requirements of the agencies.
                  (C) To provide services or work performed in support 
                of the activities described under subparagraph (A) or 
                (B).
          (4) Credits; availability of funds.--
                  (A) Credits.--In addition to any funds otherwise 
                appropriated, the Fund shall be credited with all 
                reimbursements, advances, or refunds or recoveries 
                relating to information technology or services provided 
                through the Fund.
                  (B) Availability of funds.--Amounts deposited, 
                credited, or otherwise made available to the Fund shall 
                be available until expended and without further 
                appropriation for the purposes described in paragraph 
                (3).
          (5) Reimbursement.--
                  (A) Payment by agency.--For a product or service 
                developed under paragraph (3), the head of an agency 
                that uses such product or service shall pay an amount 
                fixed by the Administrator of General Services in 
                accordance with this subsection.
                  (B) Reimbursement by agency.--The head of an agency 
                shall reimburse the Fund for any transfer made under 
                paragraph (3)(A) in accordance with the terms 
                established in the written agreement described in 
                paragraph (6). Notwithstanding any other provision of 
                law, an agency may make a reimbursement required by 
                this subparagraph from any appropriation available for 
                information technology activities. An obligation to 
                make a payment under an agreement described in 
                paragraph (6) in a future fiscal year shall be recorded 
                pursuant to section 1501 of title 31, United States 
                Code, in the fiscal year in which the payment is due.
                  (C) Prices fixed by administrator of general 
                services.--The Administrator of General Services, in 
                consultation with the Director, shall establish amounts 
                to be paid by an agency and terms of repayment for use 
                of a product or service developed under paragraph (3) 
                at levels sufficient to ensure the solvency of the 
                Fund, including operating expenses. Before making any 
                changes to the established amounts and terms of 
                repayment, the Administrator of General Services shall 
                conduct a review and obtain approval from the Director.
                  (D) Failure to make timely reimbursement.--The 
                Administrator of General Services may obtain 
                reimbursement by the issuance of transfer and 
                counterwarrants, or other lawful transfer documents, 
                supported by itemized bills, if payment is not made by 
                an agency--
                          (i) within 90 days after the expiration of a 
                        repayment period described in the written 
                        agreement described in paragraph (6)(A); or
                          (ii) within 45 days after the expiration of 
                        the time period to make a payment under a 
                        payment schedule for a product or service 
                        developed under paragraph (3).
          (6) Written agreement.--
                  (A) In general.--Before the transfer of funds to an 
                agency under paragraph (3)(A), the Administrator of 
                General Services (in consultation with the Director) 
                and the head of the requisitioning agency shall enter 
                into a written agreement documenting the purpose for 
                which the funds will be used and the terms of 
                repayment. An agreement made pursuant to this 
                subparagraph shall be recorded as an obligation as 
                provided in paragraph (5)(B).
                  (B) Requirement for use of incremental development 
                practices.--For any funds transferred to an agency 
                under paragraph (3)(A), in the absence of compelling 
                circumstances documented by the Administrator of 
                General Services at the time of transfer, such funds 
                shall be transferred only on an incremental basis, tied 
                to metric-based development milestones achieved by the 
                agency, to be described in the written agreement 
                required pursuant to subparagraph (A).
          (7) Reporting requirement.--Not later than 6 months after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall publish 
        and maintain a list of each project funded by the Fund on a 
        public website to be updated not less than quarterly, that 
        includes a description of the project, project status 
        (including any schedule delay and cost overruns), and financial 
        expenditure data related to the project.
  (b) Information Technology Modernization Board.--
          (1) Establishment.--There is established an Information 
        Technology Modernization Board (in this section referred to as 
        the ``Board'') which shall evaluate proposals submitted by 
        agencies for funding authorized under the Fund.
          (2) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Board are 
        the following:
                  (A) Provide input to the Director for the development 
                of processes for agencies to submit modernization 
                proposals to the Board and to establish the criteria by 
                which such proposals are evaluated, which shall include 
                addressing the greatest security and operational risks, 
                having the greatest Governmentwide impact, and having a 
                high probability of success based on factors such as a 
                strong business case, technical design, procurement 
                strategy (including adequate use of incremental 
                software development practices), and program 
                management.
                  (B) Make recommendations to the Administrator of 
                General Services to assist agencies in the further 
                development and refinement of select submitted 
                modernization proposals, based on an initial evaluation 
                performed with the assistance of the Administrator of 
                General Services.
                  (C) review and prioritize, with the assistance of the 
                Administrator of General Services and the Director, 
                modernization proposals based on criteria established 
                pursuant to subparagraph (A).
                  (D) Identify, with the assistance of the 
                Administrator of General Services, opportunities to 
                improve or replace multiple information technology 
                systems with a smaller number of information technology 
                systems common to multiple agencies.
                  (E) Recommend the funding of modernization projects, 
                in accordance with the uses described in subsection 
                (a)(3), to the Administrator of General Services.
                  (F) Monitor, in consultation with the Administrator 
                of General Services, progress and performance in 
                executing approved projects and, if necessary, 
                recommend the suspension or termination of funding for 
                projects based on factors such as failure to meet the 
                terms of the written agreement described in subsection 
                (a)(6).
                  (G) Monitor operating costs of the Fund.
          (3) Membership.--The Board shall consist of 8 voting members.
          (4) Chair.--The Chair of the Board shall be the Administrator 
        of the Office of Electronic Government.
          (5) Permanent members.--The permanent members of the Board 
        shall be the following:
                  (A) The Administrator of the Office of Electronic 
                Government.
                  (B) A senior official from the General Services 
                Administration, who shall be appointed by the 
                Administrator of General Services.
          (6) Additional members of the board.--
                  (A) Appointment.--The other members of the Board 
                shall be appointed as follows:
                          (i) One employee of the National Institute of 
                        Standards and Technology of the Department of 
                        Commerce, appointed by the Secretary of 
                        Commerce.
                          (ii) One employee of the National Protection 
                        and Programs Directorate of the Department of 
                        Homeland Security, appointed by the Secretary 
                        of Homeland Security.
                          (iii) One employee of the Department of 
                        Defense, appointed by the Secretary of Defense.
                          (iv) Three Federal employees primarily having 
                        technical expertise in information technology 
                        development, financial management, 
                        cybersecurity and privacy, and acquisition, 
                        appointed by the Director.
                  (B) Term.--Each member of the Board described in 
                paragraph (A) shall serve a term of one year, which 
                shall be renewable up to three times, at the discretion 
                of the appointing Secretary or Director, as applicable.
          (7) Prohibition on compensation.--Members of the Board may 
        not receive additional pay, allowances, or benefits by reason 
        of their service on the Board.
          (8) Staff.--Upon request of the Chair of the Board, the 
        Director and the Administrator of General Services may detail, 
        on a nonreimbursable basis, any of the personnel of the Office 
        of Management and Budget or the General Services Administration 
        (as the case may be) to the Board to assist it in carrying out 
        its functions under this Act.
  (c) Responsibilities of the Administrator of General Services.--
          (1) In general.--In addition to the responsibilities 
        described in subsection (a), the Administrator of General 
        Services shall support the activities of the Board and provide 
        technical support to, and, with the concurrence of the 
        Director, oversight of, agencies that receive transfers from 
        the Fund.
          (2) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the 
        Administrator of General Services are to--
                  (A) provide direct technical support in the form of 
                personnel services or otherwise to agencies transferred 
                amounts under subsection (a)(3)(A) and for products, 
                services, and acquisition vehicles funded under 
                subsection (a)(3)(B);
                  (B) assist the Board with the evaluation, 
                prioritization, and development of agency modernization 
                proposals;
                  (C) perform regular project oversight and monitoring 
                of approved agency modernization projects, in 
                consultation with the Board and the Director, to 
                increase the likelihood of successful implementation 
                and reduce waste; and
                  (D) provide the Director with information necessary 
                to meet the requirements of subsection (a)(7).
  (d) Agency Defined.--In this section, the term ``agency'' has the 
meaning given that term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

  In this Act:
          (1) Cloud computing.--The term ``cloud computing'' has the 
        meaning given that term by the National Institute of Standards 
        and Technology in NIST Special Publication 800-145 and any 
        amendatory or superseding document thereto.
          (2) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
        the Office of Management and Budget.
          (3) Information technology.--The term ``information 
        technology'' has the meaning given that term in section 3502 of 
        title 44, United States Code.
          (4) Legacy information technology system.--The term ``legacy 
        information technology system'' means an outdated or obsolete 
        system of information technology.

                     Committee Statement and Views


                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 6004, the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act 
of 2016, authorizes two types of funds for the purpose of 
modernizing the federal government's legacy information 
technology (IT) and incentivizing IT savings in federal 
agencies. The bill authorizes Chief Financial Officer Act 
agencies to establish agency-specific IT modernization funds 
and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to oversee a 
government-wide IT modernization fund in the U.S. Department of 
Treasury to be administered by the General Services 
Administration (GSA).

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    H.R. 6004, the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act 
is the result of hearings held by the Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform (Committee) and an investigation by the 
Committee into a federal agency data breach.
    GAO 2015 High Risk Report. On February 11, 2015, the 
Committee held a hearing on the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) 2015 High Risk List Report. For the first time, 
GAO added ``Improving the Management of IT Acquisitions and 
Operations'' to its biannual ``High Risk'' List.\1\ The 2015 
GAO High Risk Report highlighted several general areas of 
concern it deemed critical to improving IT acquisition and 
realizing cost savings, including IT spending on Operations and 
Maintenance (O&M;). GAO found that agencies spent over $80 
billion annually on IT investments, but over 75 percent of the 
$80 billion was spent on legacy IT investments supported by O&M; 
funding. Because there is an increasing amount of O&M; funding 
spent on legacy programs, less funding is available for 
development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-15-290, 2015 GAO High Risk 
Report, (Feb. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Oversight Letter on Legacy IT. In December 2015, the 
Committee sent a bipartisan and bicameral letter to agencies 
requesting information from agencies on: (1) mission-critical 
systems in need of modernization; (2) oldest programming 
languages in use; (3) top five oldest IT hardware/
Infrastructure in use; (4) unsupported software and operating 
systems; (5) the number of decommissioned legacy systems over 
the last five years; and (6) IT staffing information.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Letter from the Hon. Jason Chaffetz, Chairman, H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, Reps. Mark Meadows, Will Hurd, Gerry 
Connolly, Robin Kelly; and Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman S. Comm. on 
Homeland Security and Gov't Affairs and Senators Thomas Carper, Jerry 
Moran, and Tom Udall to federal agencies (Dec. 22, 2015) (Letter and 
agency responses on file with the Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The agency responses varied in level of detail and 
timeliness. Individual agency responses are on file with the 
Committee, but the following paragraphs provide a summary of 
key legacy IT information in five different areas that was 
provided by the agencies in their responses.
    Mission Critical Systems in Need of Modernization. 
Generally, agencies provided dates for modernizing mission 
critical systems in need of modernization, but five agencies 
declined to provide this information for all systems 
identified. Agencies also reported spending a total of nearly 
$23 billion in O&M; costs on these systems over the last three 
years.
    Oldest Programming Languages. Agencies reported over 930 
million lines of code using more than 70 legacy programming 
languages. However, the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
Department of Labor could not provide the number of lines of 
code. The top five legacy programming languages reported (date 
first developed): (1) Active Server Pages (ASP) (2000)--424 
million lines; (2) Common Business Oriented Language (COBOL) 
(1960s)--156 million lines; (3) Fortran (1960s)--136 million 
lines; (4) C (early 1970s), C++ (1979), C# (1999/2000)--62 
million lines; and (5) Assembly Language Code (1950s)--31 
million lines. The Committee also learned that NASA uses 51 
different programming languages. Agencies reported the most 
staff to support the following languages: COBOL (1,085) and 
Fortran (613).
    Infrastructure/Hardware in Need of Modernization. Ten 
agencies did not report a specific date for the modernization 
of at least one of outdated hardware or infrastructure 
identified by the agency.
    Unsupported Software and Operating Systems. Agencies 
reported over 550 unsupported systems or software. The 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) declined to 
provide details on unsupported software due to security 
concerns. The oldest reported unsupported software is a Fortran 
compiler that was last supported in 1991. Agencies also 
reported still using Windows 3.1, NT, 95, and XP. The 
Department of the Treasury reported the largest number of 
unsupported software/OS. DOD only reported two unsupported 
operating systems (OS), Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.
    Decommissioned Legacy Systems. Agencies reported over 3,200 
systems decommissioned over the last five years. The Department 
of State reported the largest number of decommissioned systems 
with 950 systems. DOD reported the oldest system decommissioned 
with the Automated Best Value System (which was initialized in 
the early 1960s).
    IT Staff. Agencies reported 244,000 IT staff (including 
contractors and federal staff). Based on the total number of IT 
staff reported to the Committee, DOD employs 74 percent of the 
reported IT staff. Twelve agencies did not or were not able to 
provide details on contractor staff. Finally, the average age 
of IT staff reported to the Committee was 49.4 years old.
    GAO Report and Committee Hearing on Legacy IT. On May 25, 
2016, the Committee held a hearing, ``Federal Agencies' 
Reliance on Outdated and Unsupported Information Technology: A 
Ticking Time Bomb,'' to discuss legacy IT and the GAO findings 
in a report entitled, ``Federal Agencies Need to Address Aging 
Legacy Systems.''\3\ The Report assessed 26 agencies' IT O&M; 
spending plans for Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 through 2017 and 
reviewed in detail the IT spending and individual investments 
for 12 of these agencies. GAO reported that the federal 
government spent about 75 percent of the total annual IT budget 
(over $80 billion) for FY 2015 on O&M; investments and such 
spending had increased over the past seven fiscal years. GAO 
also reported that federal legacy IT investments are becoming 
increasingly obsolete with outdated software languages and 
hardware parts that are not supported.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-16-468, Federal Agencies Need 
to Address Aging Legacy Systems, (May 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The following are key GAO findings from the Report: (1) 
5,233 of approximately 7,000 federal IT investments are 
spending all of their funds on O&M; activities; (2) O&M; spending 
has increased over the past seven fiscal years; (3) In FY 2015, 
the top 10 IT investments O&M; spending totaled $12.5 billion, 
including: (a) $4.38 billion by HHS for the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services' Medicare Management Information 
System; and (b) $1.25 billion by DOD for the Defense 
Information Systems Network.
    Outdated Programming Languages and Unsupported Hardware. 
GAO also reported that federal legacy IT investments are 
becoming increasingly obsolete with outdated software languages 
and hardware parts that are not supported. GAO found several 
agencies (including the Departments of Agriculture, Homeland 
Security, HHS, Justice, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs (VA)) 
reported using COBOL to program legacy systems. COBOL was first 
developed in the late 1950s and early 1960s. GAO also noted 
that all of the 12 agencies selected for detailed review 
reported using unsupported operating systems and components in 
their FY 2014 Federal Information Security Management Act 
(FISMA) reports. According to GAO, the following Departments 
also reported using 1980s and 1990s Microsoft operating systems 
that have not been supported by the vendor in almost ten years: 
Commerce, DOD, Treasury, HHS, and VA.
    The Report provided examples of legacy investments and 
systems where agencies reported ages of over 50 years old.\4\ 
For example, the IRS reported that the Individual Master File 
(IMF), which is the authoritative data source for individual 
taxpayer information, is over 50 years old. The IMF uses ALC. 
ALC (a.k.a Assembly) is a low level computer code that is 
difficult to create and maintain and operates on an IBM 
mainframe. The IRS Chief Information Officer (CIO) has said 
they are working to modernize the IMF (which was first 
developed in Assembly in the 1960s) and have developed a 
process to translate Assembly code to Java to facilitate this 
modernization.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Some of these systems and investments may have individual 
components newer than the age reported by the agency.
    \5\Committee staff call with Terry Milholland, IRS CIO (May 19, 
2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In another example, DOD reported that its Strategic 
Automated Command and Control System is over 50 years old. This 
system coordinates the operational functions of the U.S. 
nuclear forces and is run on an IBM Series/1 computer (from the 
1970s) and uses 8-inch floppy disks. GAO noted that the 8-inch 
floppy disk was first introduced in the 1970s and only holds 80 
kilobytes of data. A single modern flash drive can hold the 
same amount of data as 3.2 million floppy disks. DOD is 
modernizing this system with updated data storage, port 
expansion, portable terminals, and desktop terminals with a 
scheduled completion date the end of FY 2017.
    Modernization Planning for O&M; Investments. GAO examined 
several O&M; investments that agency CIOs rated as moderate or 
high risk to determine whether agencies had replacement or 
modernization plans. GAO found that of the 23 O&M; investments 
they reviewed agencies did have plans to replace or modernize 
19 of these investments. GAO acknowledged these plans but 
challenged the quality of these plans for 12 of the 19 O&M; 
investments because the plans were general or tentative; and 
did not provide specific timelines, activities to be performed 
or functions to be replaced or enhanced. For example, GAO 
identified two O&M; investments for HHS with moderate risk 
ratings (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare 
Appeals System (moderate) and Trusted Internet Connection 
Investment (moderate) where HHS has general modernization plans 
that lacked detail.
    GAO reported that OMB has recognized the upward trend in 
O&M; spending and has attributed this trend to several factors, 
including: (1) O&M; activities require maintaining legacy 
hardware which costs more over time; (2) costs to maintain 
applications and systems that use older programming languages 
have increased since programmers with these skills are 
increasingly rare and more expensive; and (3) often when there 
is uncertainty as to how to characterize spending, agencies opt 
to characterize such investments as O&M; because these attract 
less oversight, require less documentation and have a lower 
risk of reduced funding.
    Chairman Chaffetz on Legacy IT. During the May 25, 2016 
Committee hearing on legacy IT, Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) 
noted that, ``Federal agencies spend over $80 billion annually 
on IT, with the majority of this spending focused on 
maintaining and operating legacy systems. Such spending on 
legacy IT results in higher costs and security vulnerabilities 
where old software or operating systems are no longer supported 
by vendors the federal . . . government is years and in some 
cases decades behind the private sector.'' Chairman Chaffetz 
also stated that, ``we have a long way to go to get from COBOL 
to the Cloud, but I am committed to helping get us there'' and 
noted that the hearing was an oversight hearing, ``but also 
ultimately about government reform.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Federal Agencies' Reliance on Outdated and Unsupported 
Information Technology: A Ticking Time Bomb Hearing Before the H. Comm. 
on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (May 25, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Testimony of the Federal CIO. On May 25, 2016, in testimony 
before the Committee, federal CIO Tony Scott outlined the 
challenges associated with legacy IT, and described actions the 
Administration had taken to address this problem and explained 
how an IT Modernization Fund (ITMF) could improve the 
situation. Mr. Scott said legacy IT poses significant security 
and operations risks and said ``absent timely action, the cost 
to operate and maintain legacy systems, as well as security 
vulnerabilities and other risks, will continue to grow.'' Mr. 
Scott also described the advantages of the proposed ITMF 
process by saying it was analogous to a corporate capital 
committee in the private sector where IT investments are 
presented with a viable business case that demonstrates 
improved performance and lower costs--for approval.
    Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Data Breach Lessons 
Learned and Legacy IT Recommendation. In September 2016, a 
Majority Committee Staff Report entitled, The OPM Data Breach: 
How the Government Jeopardized Our National Security for More 
than a Generation, included a recommendation to ``modernize 
existing legacy federal information technology assets.'' Based 
on the investigation of the OPM data breach, the Report found 
``there is a pressing need for federal agencies to modernize 
legacy IT in order to mitigate the cybersecurity threat 
inherent in unsupported, end of life IT systems and 
applications.''\7\ The Report illustrated this need for 
modernization by noting that OPM said their legacy systems were 
often not capable of accepting certain types of encryption.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Committee on Oversight & Gov't Reform Majority Staff Report, The 
OPM Data Breach: How the Government Jeopardized Our National Security 
for More than a Generation (Sept. 7, 2016) at 19.
    \8\Id. at 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As a consequence, the Report recommended that, ``[f]ederal 
agencies should utilize existing tools and Congress should 
consider new tools to incentivize the transition from legacy to 
modernized IT solutions'' and noted that ``[s]uch reliance on 
legacy IT can result in security vulnerabilities where old 
software or operating systems are no longer supported by 
vendors and aging IT infrastructure becomes difficult and 
expensive to secure.''\9\ H.R. 6004 authorizes new funding 
tools to jumpstart agency IT modernization efforts and 
incentivize agencies to realize cost savings through 
modernization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Legislation to Address the Challenge of Legacy IT. H.R. 
6004, the Government Modernization Technology (MGT) Act of 
2016, provides tools to address the challenge of legacy IT that 
in conjunction with the enhanced Chief Information Officer 
(CIO) authorities enacted in the Federal IT Acquisition Reform 
Act (FITARA)\10\ should drive agency modernization initiatives. 
H.R. 6004 is intended to build on FITARA and empower and hold 
accountable covered agency CIOs to pursue IT modernization. The 
covered agency CIO refers to the CIO with primary authority 
over the full agency IT portfolio and who reports to the agency 
head or senior management of the covered agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year 2015, P.L. 113-
291, Title VIII, Subtitle D (Dec. 19, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 6004 adopted slightly modified language from two IT 
modernization bills previously introduced in the 114th 
Congress. On April 11, 2016, Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) introduced 
H.R. 4897, the Information Technology Modernization (ITMF) Act 
and on July 14, 2016, Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX) introduced H.R. 
5792, the Modernizing Outdated and Vulnerable Equipment and 
Information Technology Act (MOVE IT). The general concepts of 
these two bills were combined.
    First, H.R. 4897 would have established a centralized IT 
modernization fund in the Treasury to be managed by OMB, with 
the General Services Administration (GSA) to serve in a 
ministerial role supporting an independent ITMF Board of IT 
experts and implement ITMF Board decisions with oversight from 
OMB and the Board. Agencies would apply to the ITMF Board for 
funding with a business case that would demonstrate sound 
design and measurable outcomes, including lower life cycle 
costs and improved security and operational performance. The 
ITMF would be focused on identifying government-wide priorities 
and be available to all executive branch agencies. These 
concepts are carried in H.R. 6004.
    H.R. 6004, section 4(b)(2) describes the ITMF Board 
responsibilities. These responsibilities include identifying 
opportunities to improve or replace multiple IT systems with a 
smaller number of IT systems common to multiple agencies. The 
Committee encourages the ITMF Board to consult with the federal 
CIO Council in their efforts to identify such opportunities. 
Further, the Committee would expect the ITMF Board to focus on 
modernization of existing systems when shifting to IT systems 
that may be leveraged by multiple agencies. The ITMF is 
established as a funding mechanism available to covered agency 
CIOs, through an application process to fund IT projects that 
provide substantial and direct transformation away from legacy 
IT toward more efficient modernized technologies and services. 
Given the critical IT needs of the federal government, the ITMF 
should be used solely to modernize federal IT systems.
    Second, H.R. 5792, the MOVE IT Act, would have established 
IT modernization funds in individual CFO Act agencies to be 
managed by covered agency CIOs. This approach would provide 
covered agency CIOs the opportunity to identify agency IT 
priorities and realize and reinvest savings from agency 
modernization efforts. The MOVE IT approach also promotes 
increased flexibility in managing IT funds by giving agencies 
the opportunity to reprogram or transfer certain funds to 
capitalize the agency IT modernization funds, with appropriate 
oversight from the Appropriations Committees. These concepts 
are included in H.R. 6004.
    H.R. 6004 clarifies the authorized uses of agency IT 
modernization funds in section 3(a)(3). Section 3(a)(3)(D) 
provides agencies the option to use the agency IT modernization 
fund to reimburse the ITMF should the agency have received such 
funding through a successful application to the ITMF Board. 
This language makes clear that such reimbursement to the ITMF 
may only be made with the approval of the covered agency CIO. 
Agency CIOs are expected to exercise independent judgment in 
evaluating whether to use their IT modernization fund to 
reimburse the ITMF. H.R. 6004 also encourages agencies to 
consider, to the extent practicable, guidelines developed by 
OMB and the ITMF Board for purposes of evaluating IT 
modernization projects to be funded by the agency IT 
modernization fund. This provision in H.R. 6004 is not intended 
to establish a mandatory requirement, but it is intended to 
facilitate the sharing of best practices in evaluating IT 
modernization projects.
    H.R. 6004, section 3(b) and section 4(a)(7) establishes 
reporting requirements for individual agency IT modernization 
funds and the ITMF. The Committee considers these reporting 
requirements essential to maintaining transparency on the use 
of these funding mechanisms and expects timely updates of this 
information on a public website. Further, the Committee 
encourages the submission of information on cost savings for 
projects funded through these mechanisms.
    Finally, H.R. 6004 defines legacy information systems to 
mean ``an outdated or obsolete system of information 
technology.'' The Committee acknowledges this is a broad 
definition, but expects covered agency CIOs and the ITMF Board 
to prioritize for modernization legacy IT systems that pose 
significant security and operational risks. Further, a 
significant indicator that an IT system is outdated or 
obsolete--or falls within the definition of legacy IT systems 
in H.R. 6004--is that it is no longer being supported by an 
original vendor or manufacturer.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    H.R. 6004, the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act 
of 2016 was introduced on September 13, 2016 by Representative 
Will Hurd (R-TX) and referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform. In addition, the bill was referred to the 
Committee on Appropriations. There are five original 
cosponsors: Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Chairman Jason Chaffetz 
(R-UT), Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-MD), Rep. Robin Kelly 
(D-IL), and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA). Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) 
and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) are also cosponsors.
    On September 15, 2016, the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform ordered H.R. 6004 favorably reported by voice 
vote, with an amendment.
    In 2016, two related bills were introduced that informed 
the text of H.R. 6004. These related bills are: (1) H.R. 4897, 
Information Technology Modernization Act, which was introduced 
by Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) on April 11, 2016 and referred to 
the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform; and (2) H.R. 
5792, Modernizing Outdated and Vulnerable Equipment and 
Information Technology Act, which was introduced by Rep. Will 
Hurd on July 14, 2016 and referred to the Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform and in addition to the 
Committee on Appropriations.
    On February 11, 2015, the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform held a hearing on the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) 2015 High Risk List Report. For the 
first time, GAO added ``Improving the Management of IT 
Acquisitions and Operations'' to its biannual ``High Risk'' 
List.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\2015 GAO High Risk Report, GAO-15-290 (Feb. 2015) at 39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On May 25, 2016, the Committee on Oversight and Government 
Reform held a hearing to discuss GAO findings in a report 
entitled, ``Federal Agencies Need to Address Aging Legacy 
Systems.''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Federal Agencies Need to Address Aging Legacy Systems, GAO-16-
468 (May 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Section-by-Section


Section 1. Short title

    Designates the short title of the bill as the 
``Modernization Government Technology Act of 2016''.

Section 2. Findings; Purposes

    Makes four findings: (1) the federal government spends 
nearly 75 percent of its annual information technology (IT) 
budget on operating and maintaining existing legacy IT systems. 
These systems can pose operational risks, including rising 
costs and inability to meet mission requirements. These systems 
also pose security risks, including the inability to use 
current security best practices, such as data encryption and 
multi-factor authentication, making such systems particularly 
vulnerable to malicious cyber activity; (2) the GAO designated 
improving the management of IT acquisitions and operations to 
its biannual High Risk List and identified as a particular 
concern the increasing level of IT spending on Operations and 
Maintenance making less funding available for development or 
modernization; (3) the federal government must modernize 
federal IT systems to mitigate existing operational and 
security risks; and (4) the efficiencies, cost savings, and 
greater computing power, offered by modernized solutions, such 
as cloud computing have the potential to (a) eliminate 
duplication and reduce costs, (b) address the critical need for 
cyber security by design, and (c) move the federal government 
into a broad, digital-services delivery model that will 
transform the federal government's ability to meet mission 
requirements and deliver services to the American people.
    Describes three purposes: (1) to assist the federal 
government in modernizing federal IT to mitigate current 
operational and security risks; (2) to incentivize cost savings 
in federal IT through modernization; (3) to accelerate the 
acquisition and deployment of modernized IT solutions, such as 
cloud computing, by addressing impediments in the areas of 
funding, development, and acquisition practices.

Section 3. Establishment of agency information technology systems 
        modernization and working capital funds

    Establishes in each CFO Act agency an IT system 
modernization and working capital fund: (1) for the replacement 
of legacy IT systems; (2) for the transition to cloud computing 
and innovative platforms and technologies subject to a 
transition plan for any project more than $5 million and 
approved by the agency CIO; (3) to assist and support agency 
efforts to provide adequate, risk-based, and cost-effective IT 
capabilities that address evolving threats to information 
security; and (4) for development, modernization, and 
enhancement activities of IT.
    Requires that funds are deposited into the IT working 
capital fund by: (1) reprogramming of funds, including 
reprogramming of funds available on the date of enactment for 
the operation and maintenance of legacy IT systems, in 
compliance with applicable reprogramming laws or guidelines of 
the Appropriations Committees; (2) transferring of funds, 
including funds available on the date of enactment for the 
operation and maintenance of legacy IT systems, but only if 
transfer authority is specifically provided for by law; and (3) 
amounts made available through discretionary appropriations.
    Requires that an agency IT working capital fund may be used 
only to: (1) improve, retire, or replace existing IT systems to 
improve efficiency and effectiveness; (2) transition to cloud 
computing and innovative platforms and technologies; (3) assist 
and support agency efforts to provide adequate, risk-based, and 
cost-effective IT capabilities that address evolving threats to 
information security; and (4) reimburse funds transferred from 
the Information Technology Modernization fund described in 
Section 4 with approval of the agency CIO.
    States an IT working capital fund may not be used to 
supplant funds provided for the operation and maintenance of 
any systems already within an appropriation for the agency at 
the time the IT working capital fund is established.
    Requires the head of each agency to prioritize funds within 
the IT working capital fund to be used initially for cost 
savings activities approved by the agency CIO, in consultation 
with the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government 
(i.e., the federal CIO).
    Authorizes the head of each agency to: (1) reprogram any 
amounts saved as a direct result of such activities for deposit 
into the applicable IT working capital fund; and (2) transfer 
any amounts saved as a direct result of such activities for 
deposit into the applicable IT working capital fund, consistent 
with applicable law and guidelines of the Appropriations 
Committees.
    Requires all funds deposited into an IT working capital 
fund to be obligated not later than three years after the date 
of such deposit and any such funds unobligated 3 years after 
such date shall be returned to the Treasury and reported to the 
Appropriations Committees.
    Requires agency CIOs, in evaluating projects to be funded 
from the agency IT working capital fund, to consider to the 
extent practicable guidance established by OMB, under Section 4 
for evaluating IT projects to be funded by the IT Modernization 
Fund established at Treasury, overseen by OMB, and administered 
by GSA.
    Requires agencies to submit one year after enactment and 
every 6 months thereafter to OMB information on the agency's IT 
working capital fund, including a list of IT investments funded 
by the working capital fund and a summary by fiscal year of the 
obligations, expenditures, and unused balances of the working 
capital fund and requires OMB to make such information 
available on a public website.

Section 4. Establishment of Information Technology Modernization Fund 
        and board

    Establishes in the Treasury an Information Technology 
Modernization Fund (ITMF) for technology-related activities to 
improve IT and to enhance cybersecurity across the federal 
government, and requires the ITMF be administered by GSA, in 
accordance with OMB guidance.
    Requires GSA, in consultation with the federal CIO Council 
and with the concurrence of the Director, to administer the 
ITMF in accordance with the recommendations of the ITMF Board 
and for the following purposes: (1) to transfer such amounts to 
remain available until expended to the head of an agency to 
improve, retire, or replace existing IT systems to enhance 
cybersecurity and improve efficiency and effectiveness; (2) for 
the development, operation, and procurement of IT products, 
services, and acquisition vehicles for agencies' use to improve 
government-wide efficiency and cybersecurity in accordance with 
agencies' requirements; and (3) to provide services or work 
performed in support of the activities described in (1) and 
(2).
    Authorizes all executive branch agencies (5 U.S.C. 551) to 
apply to the ITMF.
    Requires that in addition to funds otherwise appropriated, 
the ITMF shall be credited with all reimbursements, advances, 
or refunds or recoveries relating to IT or services provided 
through the fund and amounts deposited, credited, or otherwise 
made available to the ITMF shall be available until expended 
and without further appropriation.
    Requires agencies to reimburse the ITMF for use of products 
or services funded by the ITMF and to reimburse the ITMF for 
any transfers made to the agency under the terms of a written 
agreement to develop a modernized IT solution.
    Establishes that GSA shall, in consultation with OMB, 
establish amounts to be paid by the agency and terms of 
repayment for use of a product or service funded by the ITMF 
(at levels sufficient to maintain ITMF solvency) and requires 
GSA to obtain approval from OMB before making any changes to 
established amounts and terms of payment.
    Authorizes GSA to obtain agency reimbursement by issuing a 
transfer or counterwarrant or other lawful transfer documents 
if payment is not made by the agency within 90 days after 
expiration of a repayment period or within 45 days after the 
expiration of time to make a payment under an established 
payment schedule.
    Establishes a requirement for a written agreement between 
the head of the agency and GSA, in consultation with OMB, to 
document the purpose of funds used and the terms of repayment 
and requires funds shall be transferred to an agency on an 
incremental basis, tied to metric-based development milestones 
achieved by the agency (as described in the written agreement).
    Requires OMB to publish and maintain a list of each project 
funded by the ITMF on a public website not later than 6 months 
after enactment and to update not less than quarterly details 
of projects funded by the ITMF including a project description, 
project status (including schedule delay and cost overruns) and 
financial expenditure data related to the project.
    Establishes an ITMF Board to evaluate proposals submitted 
by agencies for funding authorized under the ITMF.
    Establishes the following ITMF Board responsibilities: (1) 
provide input to OMB for the development of processes for 
agency submission of modernization proposals to the Board and 
to establish the proposal evaluation criteria which shall 
include addressing the greatest security and operational risks 
having the greatest governmental-wide impact and having a high 
probability of success based on factors such as a strong 
business case, technical design, procurement strategy 
(including adequate use of incremental software development), 
and program management; (2) make recommendations to GSA to 
assist agencies in further development and refinement of select 
submitted modernization proposals; (3) review and prioritize 
with GSA and OMB assistance modernization proposals based upon 
criteria established in paragraph (1); (4) identify with GSA 
assistance opportunities to improve or replace multiple IT 
systems with a small number of IT systems common to multiple 
agencies; (5) recommend the funding of modernization projects; 
(6) monitor, in consultation with GSA, progress and performance 
in executing approved ITMF projects and if necessary recommend 
suspension or termination of funding for projects based on 
factors such as failure to meet the terms of the written 
agreement; and (7) monitor operating costs of the fund.
    Establishes the membership of the ITMF Board to include 
eight voting members with the federal CIO to Chair the Board 
and the permanent members designated as the Chair and a senior 
GSA official to be appointed by the GSA Administrator.
    Additional ITMF Board members who are to serve one-year 
terms that may be renewable up to three times are: (1) one 
employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
of the Department of Commerce to be appointed by the Secretary; 
(2) one employee of the National Protection and Programs 
Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security to be 
appointed by the Secretary; (3) one employee of the Department 
of Defense to be appointed by the Secretary; and (4) three 
federal employees primarily having technical expertise in IT 
development, financial management, cybersecurity and privacy 
and acquisition, appointed by the OMB Director.
    Prohibits ITMF Board members from receiving additional pay, 
allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on the ITMF 
Board.
    Authorizes nonreimbursable details of OPM or GSA staff to 
the ITMF Board, upon request of the ITMF Board chair, to assist 
in carrying out the ITMF Board responsibilities.
    Establishes GSA responsibilities to support the activities 
of the Board and provide technical support to and in 
consultation with the Director, oversight of agencies that 
receive ITMF funding. GSA specific responsibilities are to: (1) 
provide direct technical support in the form of personnel 
services or otherwise to agencies that receive transfers from 
the ITMF; (2) assist the ITMF Board with the evaluation, 
prioritization, and development of agency modernization 
proposals; (3) perform regular project oversight and monitoring 
of approved agency modernization projects, in consultation with 
the ITMF Board and the OMB Director to increase the likelihood 
of successful implementation and reduce waste; and (4) provide 
the Director with information necessary to fulfill reporting 
requirements, including a list of projects funded by the ITMF 
on a public website to be updated not less than quarterly with 
a description of the project, project status and financial 
expenditure data related to the project.

Section 5. Definitions

    Defines Cloud Computing, Director (as Director of OMB), 
Information Technology, and Legacy Information Technology 
System.

                       Explanation of Amendments

    During Full Committee consideration of the bill, Rep. Will 
Hurd (R-TX) offered an amendment that clarifies the role of GSA 
in administering the ITMF and reasserts the primacy under 
FITARA of agency CIO's being fully in charge of the IT budgets 
at their agencies. The Hurd amendment was adopted by voice 
vote.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 15, 2016 the Committee met in open session and 
ordered reported favorably the bill, H.R. 6004, as amended, by 
voice vote, a quorum being present.

                            Roll Call Votes

    No roll call votes were requested or conducted during Full 
Committee consideration of H.R. 6004.

              Application of Law to the Legislative Branch

    Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a 
description of the application of this bill to the legislative 
branch where the bill relates to the terms and conditions of 
employment or access to public services and accommodations. 
This bill modernizes Government information technology. As such 
this bill does not relate to employment or access to public 
services and accommodations.

  Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the descriptive portions of 
this report.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance 
goal and objective of the bill is to modernize Government 
information technology.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program, a program that was included in any 
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program 
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance.

                  Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings

    The Committee estimates that enacting this bill does not 
direct the completion of any specific rule makings within the 
meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551.

                     Federal Advisory Committee Act

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not establish 
or authorize the establishment of an advisory committee within 
the definition of 5 U.S.C. App., Section 5(b).

                       Unfunded Mandate Statement

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded 
Mandate Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement as to 
whether the provisions of the reported include unfunded 
mandates. In compliance with this requirement the Committee has 
received a letter from the Congressional Budget Office included 
herein.

                         Earmark Identification

    This bill does not include any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9 of Rule XXI.

                           Committee Estimate

    At the time of this writing, the Committee had yet to 
receive a formal cost estimate from the Congressional Budget 
Office for H.R. 6004. The Committee notes that the bill does 
not authorize any new appropriations. Section 3 of the bill 
requires agencies to establish new individual information 
technology modernization working capital funds, which may 
involve minimal administrative costs. Further, section 4 of the 
bill requires the establishment of a new centralized 
information technology modernization fund and board. However, 
additional pay for board members is prohibited and board staff 
would be detailed on a non-reimbursable basis.

     Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect 
to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has not 
received a cost estimate for this bill from the Director of 
Congressional Budget Office, and instead has included a 
committee estimate in the section prior to this one.

                                  [all]