- TXT
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
Tip
?
Calendar No. 474
114th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 114-259
======================================================================
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2017
_______
May 19, 2016--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Moran, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 2956]
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2956)
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other purposes,
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
New obligational authority
Total of bill as reported to the Senate.................$148,253,346,000
Amount of 2016 appropriations........................... 140,965,695,000
Amount of 2017 budget estimate.......................... 169,876,786,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2016 appropriations................................. +7,287,651,000
2017 budget estimate................................ -21,623,440,000
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Breakdown by Title............................................... 4
Overview and Summary of the Bill................................. 5
Reports to Congress.............................................. 6
Title I:
Agricultural Programs:
Production, Processing, and Marketing:
Office of the Secretary.............................. 7
Executive Operations................................. 10
Office of the Chief Information Officer.............. 11
Office of the Chief Financial Officer................ 12
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights... 12
Office of Civil Rights............................... 13
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities................. 13
Hazardous Materials Management....................... 14
Office of Inspector General.......................... 14
Office of the General Counsel........................ 15
Office of Ethics..................................... 15
Office of the Under Secretary for Research,
Education, and Economics........................... 16
Economic Research Service............................ 16
National Agricultural Statistics Service............. 16
Agricultural Research Service........................ 22
National Institute of Food and Agriculture........... 23
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs................................ 29
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service........... 30
Agricultural Marketing Service....................... 35
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards
Administration..................................... 38
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety........ 39
Food Safety and Inspection Service................... 39
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign
Agricultural Services.............................. 41
Farm Service Agency.................................. 41
Risk Management Agency............................... 45
Corporations:
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund.............. 46
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund.................... 46
Title II:
Conservation Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment............................................ 49
Natural Resources Conservation Service................... 49
Title III:
Rural Development Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development...... 53
Rural Housing Service.................................... 54
Rural Community Facilities Program Account............... 59
Rural Business--Cooperative Service...................... 60
Rural Utilities Service.................................. 65
Title IV:
Domestic Food Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and
Consumer Services...................................... 69
Food and Nutrition Service............................... 69
Title V: Foreign Assistance and Related Programs: Foreign
Agricultural Service........................................... 77
Title VI:
Related Agency and Food and Drug Administration:
Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug
Administration......................................... 81
Independent Agency: Farm Credit Administration........... 93
Title VII: General Provisions.................................... 94
Program, Project, and Activity................................... 97
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 97
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 98
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 99
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 100
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................ 101
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 of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs.... 23,065,823 30,718,168
Title II: Conservation programs... 863,754 1,015,375
Title III: Rural economic and 2,770,977 2,836,651
community development programs...
Title IV: Domestic food programs.. 109,796,981 109,721,128
Title V: Foreign assistance and 1,868,468 2,006,883
related programs.................
Title VI: Related agencies and 2,729,596 2,771,766
Food and Drug Administration.....
Title VII: General provisions..... -129,904 -816,625
-------------------------------------
Total, new budget 140,965,695 148,253,346
(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].
The discretionary programs and activities of USDA and FDA
that are supported by this bill include high priority
responsibilities entrusted to the Federal Government and its
partners to protect human health and safety, contribute to
economic recovery, and achieve policy objectives strongly
supported by the American people. The ability to provide for
these measures is made difficult by growing pressure on
available levels of discretionary spending as a consequence of
the overall public debate on Federal spending, revenues, and
size of the Federal debt.
Too often, the USDA programs funded by this bill are
confused with farm subsidies and other mandatory spending more
properly associated with multi-year farm bills. In contrast,
this bill provides annual funding for programs familiar to all
Americans such as protecting food safety through the Food
Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and Drug
Administration, which also plays a vital role in maintaining
the safety of the Nation's blood supply and availability of
safe and effective medical products and other components of our
health system. This bill also provides funding to fight against
the introduction and spread of noxious or infectious and often
invasive pests and disease that threaten our plant and animal
health environments, as well as funding for many other missions
of dire importance to the American people.
In the context of overall pressures on spending and the
competing priorities that the Committee faces, this bill as
reported provides the proper amount of emphasis on
agricultural, rural development, and other programs and
activities funded by the bill. It is consistent with the
subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2017.
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.
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 directs that all studies and reports be provided to
the Committee as electronic documents 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.
TITLE I
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Production, Processing, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $45,555,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 64,403,000
Committee recommendation................................ 54,150,000
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 $54,150,000
for the Office of the Secretary. The Committee recommendation
includes the following accounts under the Office of the
Secretary: Office of the Secretary; Office of Tribal Relations;
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination; Office
of Advocacy and Outreach; Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Administration; Departmental Administration; Office of
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations; and Office of
Communications. The following table reflects the amount
provided by the Committee for each office and activity:
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary...................................... 5,051 10,178 10,178
Office of Tribal Relations................................... 502 755 505
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination....... 1,496 1,592 1,592
Office of Advocacy and Outreach.............................. 1,209 11,220 4,220
Office of Assistance Secretary for Administration............ 804 807 807
Departmental Administration.................................. 25,124 27,420 25,396
Office of Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations.... 3,869 3,919 3,919
Office of Communications..................................... 7,500 8,512 7,533
--------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................. 45,555 64,403 54,150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertising Transparency.--The Committee is aware that
agencies funded through this bill do a variety of different
types of advertising. The Committee directs the agencies to
clearly state within the text, audio, or video used for
advertising or educational purposes, including emails or
advertising/posting on the Internet, that the communications
are printed, published, or produced and disseminated at U.S.
taxpayer expense.
Biobased Products.--The Committee recognizes the
opportunity that exists for biobased products to be used in
food packaging and the food service industry. Bioplastics made
from renewable resources such as canola can play an important
role in this effort. The Committee encourages USDA to continue
to work with companies bringing these types of products to
market under the BioPreferred label.
Century Farms.--The Committee encourages the Secretary to
recognize farms that have been in operation for 100 years, with
prioritization for small, family farms, and encourages the
establishment of a National Century Farms Designation.
Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] Obligations and
Commitments.--The Secretary is directed to notify the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in writing
15 days prior to the obligation or commitment of any emergency
funds from the CCC.
Cotton.--The Committee remains committed to ensuring a
long-term and sustainable solution to problems facing American
cotton farmers and commends the Secretary for exploring ways in
which to provide relief with respect to the 2015 crop year.
While the Committee is disappointed that the Secretary declined
Congressional requests to designate cottonseed as an oilseed
under the authority granted under the 2014 Farm Bill, the
Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to work with
Congress and industry to find a path forward on providing an
adequate safety net for cottonseed.
Drought Relief.--The Committee continues its directive for
USDA to provide quarterly reports to the Senate and House
Committees on Appropriations detailing USDA's efforts to
provide drought relief to States where all or the majority of
counties are declared to be in a drought disaster, as well as
any unmet needs or backlogs for USDA drought relief programs.
Multi-Agency Transparency.--The Committee expresses support
for increasing transparency within all agencies of the
Department of Agriculture. The agencies are encouraged to
disclose costs associated with analyses required by the
National Environmental Policy Act.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility [NBAF].--Upon its
completion, NBAF will serve as the Nation's primary research
facility to counter foreign animal diseases and will enable the
phase out of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center [PIADC]. As
such, it is critical to develop a robust plan that ensures a
qualified workforce, assesses the transition of existing
research and development [R&D;] efforts, and considers any new
capabilities that may be necessary for future operations at
NBAF. While the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] is
responsible for the PIADC facilities, the R&D; activities
continue to be managed by USDA. Similarly, while DHS is
responsible for building NBAF, the Committee understands that
virtually all of the R&D; activities will be under USDA
auspices. Therefore, the Committee encourages DHS and USDA to
work together on a plan for the future operation of NBAF,
including consideration of the appropriate agency to manage the
facility.
Outreach to Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and
Ranchers.--The Committee supports the efforts of the Office of
Advocacy and Outreach to increase the accessibility of USDA
programs to underserved constituents, and notes that
$10,000,000 in mandatory funds is available to assist socially
disadvantaged and veteran farmers and ranchers in owning and
operating farms and ranches to meet the growing need for
financial, production, management, and other assistance to
those communities and address workforce shortages.
Additionally, the Committee recommendation includes an increase
of $3,000,000 in discretionary funding for these activities.
Resource Conservation and Development Councils.--Since
1964, the Resource Conservation and Development [RC&D;] Councils
have worked at the grassroots level with local leaders to plan,
develop, and carry out programs for land and water conservation
and management. The Committee encourages the Secretary to
consider the maximum practical use of RC&D; Councils, where such
RC&D; Councils meet agency performance requirements, in the
delivery of USDA programs and services.
Transitional Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture.--The
Department is encouraged to help maintain diversity in
commercial agriculture by providing due support for
significant-scale tropical and subtropical agricultural
operations that are in transition due to economic hardship.
Vector Control.--The Department is encouraged to use its
technical expertise in pest management to support Federal
efforts to control Aedes aegypti, the primary vector for Zika,
dengue, and chikungunya, all of which have now been reported in
the United States. The Department may extend its technical
support to include field trials, if appropriate, in physically
isolated locales where cases of these diseases have already
been reported.
Veteran Farming Career and Therapeutic Initiatives.--The
Committee recognizes that nearly 40 percent of the Nation's
farms are operated and owned by farmers over the age of 65,
there will be a demand for 1 million new farmers over the next
15 years and 800,000 servicemembers are expected to transition
out of the military in the coming years. Nearly half of Iraq
and Afghanistan veterans return to rural communities and while
many express a desire to have careers in farming or ranching,
only 2 percent of these rural veterans currently work in
agriculture. The Committee is encouraged by USDA's goal to
develop and deepen the pipeline that will create paths for
veterans transitioning from military service to careers in
agriculture. Funding for the Food and Agriculture Resilience
Program for Military Veterans [FARM-Vets] affirms the
Committee's commitment to explore career opportunities, promote
individual and community economic development, as well as,
develop initiatives that engage veterans experiencing post-
traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury with proven and
promising agricultural, animal, environmental, and
horticultural therapies. With as many as one in five veterans
who served in Operations Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom
experiencing post-traumatic stress, the Committee urges the
Department to seek opportunities that converge veteran
agribusiness training and access to behavioral healthcare. The
Committee recommendation provides $5,000,000 within the Office
of the Secretary and $2,500,000 for FARM-Vets to advance
initiatives and support programs that offer educational or
vocational training in agriculture, provide behavioral health
services by licensed providers and create pathways to
employment in agribusiness.
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 department-wide services.
Activities under the executive operations include the Office of
the Chief Economist, the National Appeals Division, and the
Office of Budget and Program Analysis.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $17,777,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 17,592,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,917,000
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, and cost-benefit analysis related to domestic and
international food and agriculture issues, provides policy
direction for renewable energy development, conducts analyses
of climate change impacts on agriculture and forestry, 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 $16,917,000
for the Office of the Chief Economist.
Policy Research.--The Committee recommendation includes
$4,000,000 for policy research under 7 U.S.C. 3155 for entities
with existing institutional capacity to conduct complex
economic and policy analysis and a lengthy and well-documented
record of conducting policy analysis for the benefit of the
Department of Agriculture, the Congressional Budget Office, or
the Congress. To maximize resources, the Committee expects the
Department to focus efforts on entities that have developed
models, databases, and staff necessary to conduct in-depth
analysis of impacts of agriculture or rural development policy
proposals on rural communities, farmers, agribusiness,
taxpayers, and consumers.
NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $13,317,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 13,481,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,481,000
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 $13,481,000
for the National Appeals Division.
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $9,392,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 9,525,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,525,000
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 department-wide coordination
of the preparation and processing of regulations and
legislative programs and reports.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,525,000 for
the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.
Office of the Chief Information Officer
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $44,538,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 65,716,000
Committee recommendation................................ 49,917,000
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, Kansas City, Missouri and Washington, DC. Direct ADP
operational services are also provided to the Office of the
Secretary, the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of
Communications, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and
Departmental Management.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $49,917,000
for the Office of the Chief Information Officer. This amount
also includes not less than $33,000,000 to support
cybersecurity requirements of the Department, which is an
increase of $5,000,000 for increased cybersecurity tools to
meet the growing demands of cyber security threats and known
vulnerability risks.
Software Licenses.--The Committee encourages the
Department's Chief Information Officer to perform periodic
automated inventories of software licenses in use across the
Department. The Department should compare those usage numbers
to its purchased licenses and seek to increase efficiency
wherever it identifies discrepancies. The Department is to
consider using this information to obtain department-wide
acquisitions as opposed to component-specific purchases of
licenses.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $6,028,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 9,119,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,119,000
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 strategic planning 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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,119,000 for
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, including an
increase of $2,000,000 for implementation of the Digital
Accountability and Transparency Reporting Act.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $898,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
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 $901,000 for
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.
Office of Civil Rights
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $24,070,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 24,750,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,342,000
The Office of Civil Rights provides overall leadership
responsibility for all department-wide civil rights activities.
These activities include employment opportunity as well as
program nondiscrimination policy development, analysis,
coordination, and compliance. The Office is responsible for
providing leadership in facilitating the fair and equitable
treatment of USDA employees, and for monitoring program
activities to ensure that all USDA programs are delivered in a
nondiscriminatory 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 $24,342,000
for the Office of Civil Rights.
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $64,189,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 84,365,000
Committee recommendation................................ 74,365,000
Department headquarters presently operates in a two-
building, Government-owned complex in downtown Washington, DC,
the George Washington Carver Center in Beltsville, Maryland,
and in leased buildings in the metropolitan Washington, DC,
area. Under an arrangement with the General Services
Administration, USDA operates, maintains, and repairs these
facilities, in lieu of rental payments. 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 $74,365,000
for Agriculture Buildings and Facilities.
Hazardous Materials Management
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,618,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 3,633,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,633,000
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, cleanup, monitor, and inspect for
hazardous materials in areas under the Department's
jurisdiction.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,633,000 for
Hazardous Materials Management, including the requested
increase for cleanup efforts at high-priority sites that pose
the greatest threats to human life and safety.
Office of Inspector General
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $95,738,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 100,998,000
Committee recommendation................................ 99,378,000
The Office of Inspector General [OIG] was established
October 12, 1978, by the Inspector General Act of 1978 (Public
Law 95-452). This act expanded and provided specific
authorities for the activities of OIG 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 $99,378,000
for the Office of Inspector General. The recommendation also
includes funding for OIG 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, 2016.................................... $44,383,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 49,599,000
Committee recommendation................................ 45,010,000
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;
nonlitigation 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 $45,010,000
for the Office of the General Counsel.
Office of Ethics
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,654,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 4,617,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,715,000
The Office of Ethics is the centralized and consolidated
office implementing USDA's ethics program throughout the
Department. The Office provides ethics services to all
employees at the Department concerning advice, training, and
guidance about compliance with conflict of interest and
impartiality rules. This includes complying with the
requirements of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge
Act, Public Law 112-105 (the STOCK Act), and the Office of
Government Ethics regulatory requirements (5 CFR parts 2634
through 2641).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,715,000 for
the Office of Ethics.
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $893,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
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;
National Institute of Food and Agriculture; Economic Research
Service; and National Agricultural Statistics Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and
Economics.
Industrial Hemp.--The Committee urges the Secretary to
clarify the Agency's authority to award Federal funds to
research projects deemed compliant with Section 7606 of the
Agricultural Act of 2014.
Pollinators.--The Committee directs the Department to
coordinate its research efforts and to institute longitudinal,
in-the-field studies along major migratory bee routes, and to
develop associated sensor and analytical technologies to
identify the key factors causing honey bee loss.
Economic Research Service
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $85,373,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 91,278,000
Committee recommendation................................ 86,757,000
The Economic Research Service [ERS] provides economic and
other social science research and analysis for public and
private decisions on agriculture, food, the environment, and
rural America. The information that 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 $86,757,000
for the Economic Research Service.
Organic Data Analysis.--The organic industry has grown at a
tremendous rate over the past several years, and accurate data
for the production, pricing and marketing of organic products
is essential. Therefore, the Committee encourages ERS to
continue and expand the efforts relating to organic data
analysis.
National Agricultural Statistics Service
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $168,443,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 176,639,000
Committee recommendation................................ 169,639,000
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.
NASS 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 $169,639,000
for the National Agricultural Statistics Service.
Chemical Use Data Series.--The Committee believes that the
Chemical Use Data Series provides timely, valuable information
on fertilizer and chemical use data on major field crops and
selected specialty crops. The Committee encourages the National
Agricultural Statistics Service to continue funding the
collection and analysis of chemical use data as well as
practices such as integrated pest management. The Committee
directs the National Agricultural Statistics Service to
continue collecting Fruit Chemical Use data and Vegetable
Chemical Use data in alternating years.
Organic Data Collection.--The Committee believes the
Organic Production Survey is essential to the growth of the
organic industry, and should be conducted on a regular basis to
properly assess the characteristics, trends, and changes in the
sector. The Committee expects NASS to incorporate funding for
an annual organic production survey into its internal budgeting
process.
Agricultural Research Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,143,825,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,161,340,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,177,938,000
The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for
conducting basic, applied, and developmental research through
its major program areas of New Products/Product Quality/Value
Added; Livestock/Crop Production; Food Safety; Livestock/Crop
Protection; Human Nutrition; and Environmental Stewardship. 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 USDA'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 and transfer
solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority
and provide information access and dissemination to ensure
high-quality, safe food and other agricultural products; assess
the nutritional needs of Americans; sustain a competitive
agricultural economy; enhance the natural resource base and the
environment; and provide economic opportunities for rural
citizens, communities, and society as a whole.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,177,938,000
for salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research Service.
The Committee does not concur with the President's budget
request regarding the termination of research programs. The
Committee expects extramural research to be funded at no less
than the fiscal year 2016 levels.
Aerial Application Research.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the ARS Aerial Application Technology Program.
The program conducts innovative research making aerial
applications more efficient, effective and precise. Research
for aerial application serves the public good as a vital tool
for the future, as agriculture strives to meet the food, fiber,
and bio-energy demands of a growing population.
Agricultural Genomics.--The Committee provides $1,500,000
for agricultural genomic research to expand the knowledge of
public and private sector entities and persons concerning
genomes for species of importance to the food and agriculture
sectors in order to maximize the return on the investment in
genomics of agriculturally important species.
Agroforestry.--Agroforestry can provide on-farm financial
and environmental benefits while also addressing the regional
and national-scale issues of clean water, wildlife habitat, and
hypoxia. Agroforesters manage trees with crops, livestock, and
pasture to combine the best of both agriculture and forestry.
Recognizing the importance of agroforestry to farm practices
and the environment, the Committee recommendation includes no
less than the fiscal year 2016 level to develop integrated
strategies to manage multifunctional agricultural landscapes
that combine trees with agricultural and horticultural crops,
forages and grazing livestock for optimal economic,
environmental, and natural resources benefits.
Alfalfa Research.--The Committee notes that research into
alfalfa seed and alfalfa forage systems holds the potential to
increase yields, increase milk production, and improve
genetics, and encourages ARS to support research focused on
alfalfa improvement. Research should focus on using tools to
accelerate and enhance existing breeding programs focused on
improving yield and quality parameters; developing innovative
harvesting and utilization systems; developing new markets for
co-products; and quantifying environmental benefits from
alfalfa-based systems.
ARS Field Stations.--The Committee recognizes the
successful utilization of authorities granted previously in
annual appropriations acts to further the cooperation between
industry and the Canal Point, Florida, Sugarcane Field Station.
However, the Committee is concerned that this partnership is
jeopardized by requirements that have nothing to do with the
functionality of facilities. The Committee directs ARS to
resolve these issues, thus allowing this model partnership to
continue.
Classical Plant Breeding.--The Committee is aware of the
need to enhance classical plant breeding, and encourages ARS to
invest in research to improve genetic resources and cultivars
for the benefit of U.S. producers, seed companies, processors
and consumers. This research should focus on breeding improved
germplasm and varieties with higher yields, improved disease
and pest resistance and resilience to weather extremes.
Additionally, methods and tools should be developed to enable
classical breeders to choose better breeding parents and speed
up variety development.
Cotton Ginning.--The Committee recognizes the importance of
pollution abatement, improving fiber quality, ginning
efficiency, cotton seed and other byproducts, and provides an
additional $1,500,000 to expand research in cotton ginning and
innovation by existing laboratories.
Cover Crops Research and Outreach.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of developing profitable and
practicable cover crop options for use in dairy, grain, and
vegetable production systems, including for use in no-till
organic systems and as forages. Therefore, the Committee
recommendation includes $750,000 for ARS to support research
with the purposes of improving measures of soil health and
resiliency, varietal development, optimizing dairy forage
species combinations, timing and strategies for cover crop
seeding and termination, forage integration into organic dairy
systems, and mitigation of environmental and extreme rainfall
impacts on water quality and soil security for diverse cover
crop systems.
Emerging Cereal Rust Diseases.--The Committee is aware that
emerging cereal rust diseases are a threat to domestic and
world food supplies. Therefore, the Department should continue
to dedicate funding to speed efforts to combat cereal rust
disease, including development of Ug99-resistant wheat
varieties.
Forage Production Systems.--The Committee recommendation
includes no less than the fiscal year 2016 level to develop
management practices that improve the production efficiency of
grazing operations in temperate pastures.
Forest Products.--The Committee recognizes the important
role of the forests products sector to the U.S. economy. The
need to create new and improved value-added products and
renewable energy from our Nation's wood supply is critical to
the sustainability of the national economy. The Committee
recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year 2016 level
to support research on wood quality improvement and improvement
in forest products evaluation standards and valuation
techniques. ARS shall conduct this research in consultation
with the Forest Products Laboratory.
Genomes to Fields.--The Committee encourages ARS to expand
the Germplasm Enhancement of Maize [GEM] project and has
provided $1,250,000 to complement the existing USDA maize
germplasm programs and support the emerging large-scale public
sector effort to investigate the interaction of maize genome
variation and environments, known as the Genomes to Fields
project.
Human Nutrition Research.--The Committee remains concerned
about the high rates of obesity in this country, and believes
that research into human nutrition is important to help prevent
childhood obesity and the medical issues obesity brings. The
Committee recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year
2016 level to expand research regarding the growth, health
promotion, diet, immune function, and disease prevention of the
developing child.
Leafy Green Vegetables.--The Committee encourages ARS to
support the research and development of leafy green vegetables,
including vertically stacked farming production at scale, with
improved taste, texture, size, appearance and nutritional
content in order to increase consumption, particularly by
children and adolescents.
National Agricultural Library.--The Committee encourages
the Agricultural Research Service to maintain its focus on
agriculture-related legal issues within the National
Agricultural Library. The Committee notes that as the
agriculture sector faces increasing fiscal stress, there is a
necessity that agriculture-related legal issues be addressed on
an increasingly frequent basis. Further, agricultural-related
legal issues are increasingly complex and the impact of these
legal issues continues to broaden in scope. Therefore, the
Committee recommends that the National Agricultural Library
maintain the Agricultural Law Information Partnership.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility Workforce
Development.--The Committee notes that significant resources
have been invested in the new National Bio and Agro-Defense
Facility [NBAF] and is concerned about the potential shortage
of qualified scientists, including DVM-PhDs, when the facility
opens in 2022. The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000
for ARS to develop the necessary mechanisms to ensure a viable
and qualified scientific workforce is available, and to
implement a program to recruit and train scientists, and other
technical positions, focused on pathology, virology,
immunology, entomology, epidemiology, microbiology, and
computational biology for productive USDA careers at NBAF.
Nutrition Research and Aging.--Food and nutrition play a
central role in U.S. health, environment, and economic
development. In fact, diet-related disease has become America's
largest single cause of premature death and disability. More
research is needed to address the needs of all Americans, with
a particular focus on the elderly, the fastest growing segment
of the population. Therefore, the Agricultural Research Service
is encouraged to prioritize human nutrition research to explore
the relationship between nutrition, physical activity, and
healthy and active aging.
Office of Pest Management Policy.--The Committee recognizes
the critical role that the Office of Pest Management Policy
[OPMP] plays in fulfilling USDA's statutory role in the
interagency consultative process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The importance of OPMP's
mission has increased commensurately with the increased actions
undertaken by EPA, and the Committee provides $3,000,000 for
OPMP to fulfill its obligations on behalf of USDA.
Poultry Research.--The Committee recognizes the important
role of the poultry sector to the U.S. economy. The Committee
provides $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level to
expand the research capacity for poultry production and health.
Research Assistance.--The Committee encourages the
Agricultural Research Service to provide direct, place-based
assistance to 1862 Institutions in States that do not have
Agricultural Research Service facilities to address the
research priorities of such States, such as invasive plant
species and insects that cause significant impacts to
agriculture, aquaculture, and communities in such States and to
assist in the development of specialty and horticultural crops
to increase food security and expand marketing opportunities
for small farmers.
Research Facilities.--The Committee notes the delivery of
the report pursuant to a provision in the report accompanying
the Fiscal Year 2016 Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriation Act, which directed ARS to submit a report
containing recommendations to better utilize Federal labs in
cooperation with land-grant universities. It is concerning,
however, that the report contained no such recommendations and
many issues regarding the underutilization of established labs
remain unresolved. The Committee therefore directs ARS, in
consultation with land-grant universities and Center Directors,
to submit a report to the Committee by January 30, 2017, that
includes an assessment of the current utilization of each ARS
facility, the views of land-grant universities and/or Center
Directors, and specific recommendations to better utilize
Federal labs to explore new scientific opportunities that
benefit the Nation's food and agriculture system.
Safe and Abundant Water Supplies.--The Committee recognizes
the importance of a coordinated approach to the management of
water supplies as water demands increase in drought prone areas
and elsewhere. The Committee recommendation includes an
increase of $5,000,000 for research to enhance agricultural
production despite increased competition for water resources
and declining water availability.
Sage Steppe Restoration Science.--The Committee includes an
increase of $1,000,000 for ARS to advance sagebrush habitat
restoration science in the Northern Great Basin including
cooperative research, testing and deploying precision
restoration methods to restore habitat impacted by significant
disturbance such as wildfire and invasive species.
Sclerotinia.--The Committee is aware of the economic
importance of controlling sclerotinia, which affects
sunflowers, soybeans, canola, edible beans, peas, and lentils
and encourages ARS to continue both core research and
cooperative projects of the National Sclerotinia Initiative.
Shellfish Research.--The Committee encourages the
Agricultural Research Service to increase its investment in
partnerships with research institutions on research to improve
shellfish survival and growth rates and to classify and
preserve natural genetic variation.
Small Grains Genomic Initiative.--The Committee recognizes
that ARS small grains genotypic research provides a critical
resource to facilitate the application of genomic information
and DNA marker technologies to the improvement and breeding of
barley and wheat, with a current major need to update to next-
generation genotypic to accelerate marker-assisted breeding.
Adequate resources are also needed to enhance barley and wheat
quality phenotyping, doubled haploid research and small grains
genomic research, and the Committee supports the Small Grains
Genomic Initiative.
Sorghum Genetic Database.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of phenotyping and genotyping that allows breeders
to understand which genes are responsible for improvements in
drought tolerance and yield. The Committee recommends an
increase of $1,650,000 to further facilitate the partnership
between ARS and the Department of Energy on sorghum genome
mapping--particularly the creation of an easily-accessed
database to house the information generated from the ongoing
genetic sequencing research which will facilitate further crop
development efforts.
Sustainable Water Use Research.--The alluvial plain within
the Lower Mississippi River Basin is one of most productive
agricultural regions in the United States. The Committee
remains concerned with the unsustainable use of water in the
Alluvial Aquifer as a result of increasing water withdrawals
and stagnant recharging. The Committee provides an increase of
$4,500,000 million for research to improve the recharge
capabilities of the Alluvial Aquifer and to develop new
conservation and irrigation techniques to reduce water usage in
agriculture production.
Tropical and Subtropical Research.--Research on Tropical
and Subtropical crops is critical as the presence of and
destruction by invasive pests such as fruit flies, coffee berry
borer, and plant viruses increase and threaten crop security in
the Pacific and Insular Areas, and the Committee encourages ARS
to support this research.
U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative [USWBSI].--The
Committee recognizes that fusarium head blight is a major
threat to agriculture, inflicting substantial yield and quality
losses throughout the U.S. The Committee supports research
carried out through the USWBSI. The Committee recommendation
includes an additional $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2016
level to conduct further research on reducing the impact of
fusarium head blight on wheat and barley.
Wheat and Sorghum Research.--The Committee recognizes the
potential impact heat and drought can have on the yield and
quality of wheat and sorghum and the need for new cultivars to
adapt to changing climatic conditions. The Committee provides
an increase of $1,000,000 for research to improve the
productivity and quality of wheat and sorghum during uncertain
growing seasons resulting from extended droughts and increased
temperatures. Within this increase, funding is included to
initiate gene flow research to advance the durability and
sustainability of fitness traits in sorghum.
Agricultural Research Service
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $212,101,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 94,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 64,300,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $64,300,000
for Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and Facilities.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Section 7511(f)(2) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy
Act of 2008 amends the Department of Agriculture Reorganization
Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6971) by establishing an agency to be
known as the National Institute of Food and Agriculture [NIFA].
The Secretary transferred to the Director of NIFA, effective
October 1, 2009, all authorities administered by the
Administrator of the Cooperative State, Research, Education and
Extension Service. 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, 2016.................................... $819,685,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 836,915,000
Committee recommendation................................ 851,496,000
Research and Education programs administered by NIFA are
USDA's principal entree to the university system of the United
States for the purpose of conducting agricultural research and
education programs as authorized by the Hatch Act of 1887, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative
Forestry Act of 1962, as amended (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.); the
Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 450i); the National Agricultural, Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7
U.S.C. 3101 et seq.); the Equity in Educational Land-Grant
Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note); the Agricultural
Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (Public
Law 105-185), as amended; the Food, Agriculture, Conservation
and Trade Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-624); the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171); and the
Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246).
Through these authorities, USDA participates with State and
other cooperators to encourage and assist the State
institutions in the conduct of agricultural research and
education through the State Agricultural Experiment Stations of
the 50 States and the territories; by approved Schools of
Forestry; the 1890 Land-Grant Institutions and Tuskegee
University and West Virginia State University; 1994 Land-Grant
Institutions; by Colleges of Veterinary Medicine; and other
eligible institutions. The appropriated funds provide Federal
support for research and education programs at these
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 $851,496,000
for research and education activities of the National Institute
of Food and Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for research and education activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hatch Act..................................... 7 U.S.C. 361a-i................................ 243,701
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act..... 16 U.S.C. 582a through a-7..................... 33,961
Research at 1890 Institutions (Evans-Allen 7 U.S.C. 3222.................................. 54,185
Program).
Payments to the 1994 Institutions............. 534(a)(1) of Public Law 103-382................ 3,439
Education Grants for 1890 Institutions........ 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)............................... 19.336
Education Grants for Hispanic-Serving 7 U.S.C. 3241.................................. 9,219
Institutions.
Education Grants for Alaska Native and Native 7 U.S.C. 3156.................................. 3,194
Hawaiian-Serving Institutions.
Research Grants for 1994 Institutions......... 536 of Public Law 103-382...................... 1,801
Capacity Building for Non Land-Grant Colleges 7 U.S.C. 3319i................................. 5,000
of Agriculture.
Resident Instruction and Distance Education 7 U.S.C. 3362 and 3363......................... 2,000
Grants for Insular Areas.
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative...... 7 U.S.C. 450i(b)............................... 375,000
Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment............ 7 U.S.C. 3151a................................. 5,000
Veterinary Services Grant Program............. 7 U.S.C. 3151b................................. 2,500
Food and Agriculture Resiliency Program for 7 U.S.C. 2662(e)............................... 2,500
Military Veterans.
Continuing Animal Health and Disease Research 7 U.S.C. 3195.................................. 4,000
Program.
Supplemental and Alternative Crops............ 7 U.S.C. 3319d................................. 825
Multicultural Scholars, Graduate Fellowship 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)............................... 9,000
and Institutions Challenge Grants.
Secondary and 2-year Post-Secondary Education. 7 U.S.C. 3152(j)............................... 900
Aquaculture Centers........................... 7 U.S.C. 3322.................................. 4,000
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education 7 U.S.C. 5811, 5812, 5831, and 5832............ 27,000
Farm Business Management...................... 7 U.S.C. 5925f................................. 1,450
Sun Grant Program............................. 7 U.S.C. 8114.................................. 3,000
Improved Pest Control:
Minor Crop Pest Management (IR-4)......... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)............................... 11,913
Alfalfa Forage and Research Program....... 7 U.S.C. 5925.................................. 2,250
Special Research Grants:7 U.S.C. 450i(c):
Global Change/UV Monitoring............... ............................................... 1,405
Potato Research........................... ............................................... 2,250
Aquaculture Research...................... ............................................... 1,350
----------------
Total, Special Research Grants........ ............................................... 5,005
================
Necessary Expenses of Research and Education
Activities:
Grants Management System.................. ............................................... 7,830
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ............................................... 13,487
Expenses for Research and Education
Activities.
----------------
Total, Necessary Expenses............. ............................................... 21,317
================
Total, Research and Education ............................................... 851,496
Activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.--The Committee
recommendation includes $375,000,000 for the Agriculture and
Food Research Initiative [AFRI].
Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 specifies priority areas with the Agriculture and Food
Research Initiative [AFRI], including an emphasis on
conventional (classical) plant and animal breeding. The
Committee strongly concurs with the intent of this section, and
continuing its fiscal year 2016 guidance, encourages the agency
to create a distinct funding stream within the AFRI program for
development of publically available, regionally adapted
cultivars that are bred specifically to meet unique regional
soil, climate, and cropping system conditions, for the benefit
of U.S. producers, seed companies, processors and consumers.
The Committee further directs the agency to report its progress
in meeting this requirement.
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 15 percent of the
competitive research grant funds be used for USDA's
agricultural research enhancement awards program, including
USDA-EPSCoR.
Alfalfa and Forage Research.--The Committee notes that
research into alfalfa seed and alfalfa forage systems holds the
potential to increase yields, increase milk production, and
improve genetics. The Committee recommendation includes
$2,250,000 to support research into the improvement of yields,
water conservation, creation of new uses, and the development
of new storage and harvest systems.
Aquaculture Disease Research.--The Committee encourages
USDA to support aquaculture disease and vaccine research,
including research on coldwater aquaculture vaccines. There is
currently no national facility for pathogen testing. Research
into finfish vaccines and pathogens has the potential to
accelerate the growth of sustainable U.S. aquaculture, reduce
the trade deficit attributable to imported seafood, and reduce
the pressure on overfished species.
Aquaculture Research.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the domestic aquaculture industry to the U.S.
economy. The Committee recommendation includes $1,350,000 for
aquaculture research to address issues related to genetics,
disease, systems, and economics.
Cereal Crop Research.--Research on cereal crops has
historically been conducted by USDA and public universities,
and the Committee recognizes the importance of continuing
investment in cereal crop research. The Committee strongly
encourages USDA to provide funding for cereal crop research in
the areas of genetic and genomic research, plant pest research,
and improved production systems.
Countering Seafood Fraud.--The Committee remains concerned
about countering economic fraud and improving food safety of
the U.S. food supply. The Committee is concerned that adequate
technology is not yet available to provide for appropriate
sampling of the food supply. The Committee believes NIFA should
conduct research to develop technologies that will provide
rapid, portable and facile screening of fish species at port
sites, wholesale, and retail centers.
Food Safety.--The Committee recommends that NIFA prioritize
research on funding for new food safety technologies relating
to the Nation's meat supply that helps researchers, producers,
and manufacturers.
Lowbush Blueberries.--The Committee directs NIFA to work
with research institutions to develop and refine predictive
models and monitoring technologies for native and invasive
pests for incorporation into integrated pest management
programs for naturally seeded, native berry crops to increase
the margin of food safety and product quality.
Organic Research.--USDA's National Organic Standards Board
[NOSB] has identified key organic research priorities, many of
which would help to address challenges that have limited the
growth in organic production in this country. The Committee
encourages NIFA to give strong consideration to the NOSB
organic research priorities when crafting the fiscal year 2017
RFAs for AFRI and the Organic Transition Program.
Regional Research Priorities.--The Committee encourages
NIFA to consider providing funding within AFRI to assist with
State and regional research priorities, with USDA oversight and
review.
Seafood.--The Committee encourages USDA, in partnership
with universities with established domestic shrimp farming
programs, to support the development of a domestic industry
that will help ensure the safety and quality of the Nation's
seafood supply, promote environmentally sustainable
aquaculture, create new opportunities for U.S. agriculture, and
forge new markets for U.S. grain and oilseed products and
technology services.
Specialty Crop Research Initiative.--The Committee
emphasizes the important role of the Specialty Crop Research
Initiative in addressing the critical needs of the specialty
crop industry through research and extension activities, and
encourages NIFA to prioritize proposals for and enhance its
overall commitment to identifying and addressing threats to
pollinators from pests and diseases.
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education.--The
Committee is strongly supportive of the SARE program and
directs USDA to ensure that research, education and extension
activities carried out within SARE remain intact.
Veterinary Corps.--Veterinarians fulfilling the terms of a
contract under USDA's Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment
Program, authorized by the National Veterinary Medical Services
Act, shall be members of the National Veterinary Medical
Services Corps and members who have fulfilled the terms of
their contract shall be alumni of the Corps.
Zoonotic Disease Research.--Federal and State animal health
officials have made eradicating livestock diseases with
significant wildlife reservoirs a national animal health
priority. This need is reflected in the Agricultural Act of
2014 which made the research and development of surveillance
methods, vaccines, vaccination delivery systems or diagnostic
tests a priority research area under the Competitive, Special,
and Facilities Research Grant Act particularly for bovine
brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis. The Committee recognizes
the need for this research and encourages the agency to make
competitive grants available to study improved management tools
for zoonotic livestock diseases with significant wildlife
reservoirs.
HISPANIC-SERVING AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ENDOWMENT FUND
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,000,000
Section 7129 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008, provides for the establishment of an endowment fund for
the Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities
[HSACU]. The Hispanic/Latino community is the fastest-growing
sector of the American population. This investment in the
Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities is
needed to ensure institutions can effectively compete for NIFA
competitive grants.
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, shall distribute the adjusted
income as follows: 60 percent of the adjusted income shall be
distributed among the Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges
and Universities on a pro rata basis based on the Hispanic
enrollment count of each institution; and 40 percent shall be
distributed in equal shares to the Hispanic-Serving
Agricultural Colleges and Universities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000
for the Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities
Endowment Fund.
NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $11,880,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 11,880,000
Committee recommendation................................ 11,880,000
The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized
by Public Law 103-382, the Equity in Educational Land-Grant
Status Act, provides an endowment for the 1994 land-grant
institutions (34 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, 2016.................................... $475,891,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 501,859,000
Committee recommendation................................ 476,230,000
Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
Lever Act of May 8, 1914, as amended. 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
and 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 $476,230,000
for extension activities of the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for extension activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c) and 7 U.S.C. 343(b) and (c) and 208(c) of Public 300,000
Cooperative Extension. Law 93-471.
Extension Services at 1890 Institutions....... 7 U.S.C. 3221.................................. 45,620
Extension Services at 1994 Institutions....... 7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3)............................. 4,446
Facility Improvements at 1890 Institutions.... 7 U.S.C. 3222b................................. 19,730
Renewable Resources Extension Act............. 16 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.......................... 4,060
Rural Health and Safety Education Programs.... 7 U.S.C. 2662(i)............................... 1,500
Food and Animal Residue Avoidance Database 7 U.S.C. 7642.................................. 1,250
Program.
Women and Minorities in STEM Fields........... 7 U.S.C. 5925.................................. 400
Food Safety Outreach Program.................. 7 U.S.C. 7625.................................. 5,000
Smith-LeverAct, Section 3(d):
Food and Nutrition Education.............. 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 67,934
Farm Safety and Youth Farm Safety 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 4,610
Education Programs.
New Technologies for Agricultural 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 1,550
Extension.
Children, Youth, and Families at Risk..... 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 8,395
Federally Recognized Tribes Extension 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 3,039
Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Section 3(d)..................... ............................................... 85,528
Necessary Expenses of Research and Education
Activities:
Agriculture in the K-12 Classroom......... ............................................... 552
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ............................................... 8,144
Expenses for Research and Education
Activities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Necessary Expenses............. ............................................... 8,696
Total, Extension Activities........... ............................................... 476,230
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $30,900,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 35,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 36,000,000
Section 406, as amended, 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 $36,000,000
for integrated activities of the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for integrated activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methyl Bromide Transition Program............. 7 U.S.C. 7626.................................. 2,000
Organic Transition Program.................... 7 U.S.C. 7626.................................. 4,000
Regional Rural Development Centers............ 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)............................... 2,000
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative....... 7 U.S.C. 3351.................................. 8,000
Crop Protection/Pest Management............... 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 20,000
----------------
Total, Integrated Activities............ ............................................... 36,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potato Research.--To minimize the application of pesticides
and to maximize the yield and quality of harvested potatoes,
the Committee directs the Secretary to support pest management
programs in potato growing States. Such programs help
scientists track potential pest outbreaks and provide growers
and industry professionals with current information on specific
and timely treatments. Additionally, the programs help identify
serious diseases, such as late blight disease, in their early
stages, allowing for preventive measure to be put into place
quickly to avoid crop losses.
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $893,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in
carrying out laws 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 $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory
Programs.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $894,415,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,196,000
Committee recommendation................................ 939,286,000
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:
Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness/Response.--The
agency monitors plant and animal health worldwide, and sets
import polices to prevent the introduction of foreign plant and
animal pests and diseases. Domestically, the agency works
cooperatively to conduct plant and animal health monitoring
programs, pursue eradication, or limit the spread of the
threat. The agency also conducts diagnostic laboratory
activities that support disease prevention, detection, control,
and eradication programs. In addition, the agency protects
agriculture from detrimental animal predators, and through its
regulatory structure helps advance genetic research while
protecting against the release of harmful organisms.
Safe Trade and International Technical Assistance.--The
agency helps resolve technical trade issues to ensure the
smooth and safe movement of agricultural commodities into and
out of the United States. The agency negotiates animal and
plant health certification requirements and assists U.S.
exporters meet foreign regulatory demands. In addition, the
agency assists developing countries in improving their
safeguarding systems, to protect the United States from
emerging plant and animal pests and diseases.
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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $939,286,000
for salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service. The Committee does not concur with the
proposed program reductions to absorb a percentage of statutory
pay increases for agency employees and provides an additional
$7,245,000 to fully cover increases in pay.
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 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safeguarding and International Technical Assistance:
Animal Health Technical Services......................... 35,339 36,941 35,438
Aquatic Animal Health.................................... 2,253 2,282 2,287
Avian Health............................................. 55,340 55,597 55,642
Cattle Health............................................ 91,500 92,215 92,339
Equine, Cervid and Small Ruminant Health................. 19,500 19,658 19,685
National Veterinary Stockpile............................ 3,973 5,723 5,723
Swine Health............................................. 24,800 24,971 25,001
Veterinary Biologics..................................... 16,417 16,560 16,585
Veterinary Diagnostics................................... 36,540 31,843 39,832
Zoonotic Disease Management.............................. 9,523 19,523 14,622
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Animal Health................................ 295,185 305,313 307,154
==================================================
Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated)........ 27,900 29,827 29,913
Cotton Pests............................................. 11,520 8,270 11,520
Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystems Pests.................. 8,826 8,902 8,915
Pest Detection........................................... 27,446 27,636 27,669
Plant Protection Methods Development..................... 20,686 20,870 20,902
Specialty Crop Pests..................................... 158,000 146,076 158,000
Tree & Wood Pests........................................ 54,000 45,933 54,000
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Plant Health................................. 308,378 287,514 310,919
==================================================
Wildlife Damage Management............................... 101,177 85,919 102,085
Wildlife Services Methods Development.................... 18,856 19,070 19,107
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Wildlife Services............................ 120,033 104,989 121,192
==================================================
Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement............. 16,224 16,410 16,442
Biotechnology Regulatory Services........................ 18,875 18,996 19,017
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Regulatory Services.......................... 35,099 35,406 35,459
==================================================
Contingency Fund......................................... 470 476 477
Emergency Preparedness & Response........................ 16,966 44,155 44,175
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Emergency Management......................... 17,436 44,631 44,652
==================================================
Subtotal, Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness/ 776,131 777,853 819,376
Response..............................................
==================================================
Safe Trade and International Technical Assistance:
Agriculture Import/Export................................ 15,099 19,751 16,247
Overseas Technical & Trade Operations.................... 22,114 22,227 22,247
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Safe Trade................................... 37,213 41,978 38,494
==================================================
Animal Welfare:
Animal Welfare........................................... 28,410 28,696 28,746
Horse Protection......................................... 697 705 706
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Animal Welfare............................... 29,107 29,401 29,452
==================================================
Agency Management:
APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure.............. 4,251 4,251 4,251
Physical/Operational Security............................ 5,146 5,146 5,146
Rent and DHS security payments........................... 42,567 42,567 42,567
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Agency Management............................ 51,964 51,964 51,964
==================================================
Total, Direct Appropriation............................ 894,415 901,196 939,286
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Quarantine Inspection.--The Committee
recognizes that prevention of infestations of pests and
diseases is much more cost effective than subsequent control or
eradication. This is an important Federal responsibility and
the Committee provides $29,913,000 for the agricultural
quarantine inspections [AQI] function, including pre-departure
and interline inspections.
The Committee directs APHIS to consult with the
Transportation Security Administration [TSA] and within 120
days of enactment prepare a report on the costs, benefits, and
any security issues related to consolidating APHIS and TSA
inspection stations, and requirements for collocating
operations, including changes to statutory authorities and
accommodations needed to maintain the integrity of both
inspection operations.
Antibiotic Resistance.--The Committee provides a $5,000,000
increase under Zoonotic Disease Management for data collection,
sampling, surveillance, testing, and other activities
associated with antibiotic resistant bacteria.
Bee Pests.--The Committee remains concerned with declining
bee populations and the tragic implications for pollination of
U.S. agriculture. The Committee directs the agency to continue
priority work with other Federal and State agencies and the
public to manage, suppress, and eradicate varroa mites, small
hive beetles, and other pests and diseases contributing to
colony collapse disorder.
Bovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis.--Prior to finalizing
the proposed rule on Brucellosis and Bovine Tuberculosis,
Update to General Provisions (Docket No. APHIS-2011-0044), the
Committee urges USDA-APHIS to develop and submit to the
Committee a detailed report on the amount of Federal and state
funding required to carry-out the various provisions of the
proposed rule.
Brucellosis.--The Committee encourages APHIS to work with
relevant local, State, and Federal agencies to improve
communication and utilize sound science to develop effective
strategies for managing brucellosis in the Greater Yellowstone
area.
Ceratocystis Disease.--The Department is directed to study
reported recent outbreaks of Ceratocystis in the State of
Hawai'i and report within 90 days of enactment recommended
actions for response and management.
Chronic Wasting Disease.--The national deer farming
industry is adapting to a 2012 interim final rule that
established a national, voluntary herd certification program
[HCP] that provides uniform herd certification standards and
will support the domestic and international marketability of
U.S. cervid herds. The Committee believes the industry requires
funding support to ensure that the newly implemented chronic
wasting disease HCP is successful. Therefore, APHIS should
spend no less than $3,000,000 for cervid health activities.
Within the funds provided, APHIS should give consideration to
indemnity payments if warranted.
Citrus Imports.--The Committee is aware that APHIS has
proposed a rule to allow the importation of lemons from
Argentina into the United States. The Committee is concerned
that the U.S. citrus industry is already facing significant
threats from introduced diseases and pests and notes that
citrus canker and black spot are two diseases of ongoing
concern affecting Argentina's citrus production. The Committee
therefore directs APHIS to conduct a site visit in Argentina
this fall in order to complete a comprehensive pest and disease
risk assessment and provide an opportunity for the U.S. citrus
industry to review the results of such visits. The Committee is
also concerned that the proposed rule could result in an
economic impact exceeding $100,000,000 annually. If that is
demonstrated to be the case based on comments made on the
proposed rule, the Committee directs APHIS to conduct this
rulemaking according to the procedures required for economic
significance as referenced in section 6(a)(3)(C) of Executive
Order 12866 before finalizing the rule.
Emergency Preparedness and Response.--The Committee
provides an increase of $27,209,000 to implement lessons
learned from the recent avian influenza outbreak including
increasing veterinarians and animal health technicians, health,
safety and biosecurity officers and developing resources and
technologies for the early detection of foreign animal diseases
and improved response options.
Feral Swine Management.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the National Feral Swine Damage Management
Program in reducing adverse ecological and economic impacts
caused by feral swine. The Committee provides an additional
$5,400,000 in support of APHIS efforts to decrease these
invasive pests' damage and risk to agriculture, natural
resources, and property.
Gypsy Moth Eradication.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of supporting eradication and containment of the
European and Asian gypsy moth in the Western United States.
These pests pose a considerable threat to both deciduous and
conifer forests, which are essential to the economic and
environmental well-being of the region. If moth populations are
allowed to establish themselves, it is costly and difficult to
eliminate these pests and would devastate forests.
National Animal Health Laboratory Network [NAHLN].--Funding
for the NAHLN shall be administered in consultation with the
NAHLN Coordinating Council.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Human Capital Development.--
The Committee notes that significant resources have been
invested in the new National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility
[NBAF] and is concerned about projected staffing shortages of
qualified veterinary diagnosticians and scientists for the
NBAF, which is slated for full operation in 2022. The Committee
provides an additional $3,000,000 to APHIS to ensure necessary
steps are taken to develop a qualified workforce that are
subject matter experts in foreign, emerging and zoonotic
diseases capable of developing, validating and conducting
needed diagnostics, performing epidemiologic studies, and
completing bioinformatics analyses.
Pacific Ants Prevention Plan.--The Committee encourages
APHIS to work with its partners to revise the Pacific Ants
Prevention Plan to effectively combat invasive ants throughout
the Pacific Region.
Peer-Reviewed Accreditation.--The Committee notes APHIS's
collaboration with accrediting organizations in the
establishment and operation of the Zoo and Aquarium Hazards
Preparedness, Response and Recovery Fusion Center. The Center's
role in facilitating and enhancing collaboration between the
emergency management community and the greater managed wildlife
community will assist in emergency preparedness and response
for a wide range of circumstances including natural disasters
and animal disease outbreaks. This effort is commended and is
expected and encouraged to continue.
West Nile Virus.--The Committee remains concerned with the
threats to human and animal health posed by West Nile virus and
recognizes that a critical strategy for addressing these
threats is necessary to prevent the infection and transmission
by known vectors, including farm-raised alligators. The
Committee encourages APHIS to further investigate West Nile
virus and other infectious diseases affecting farm raised
alligators and develop treatments and methods to prevent
infection and transmission.
Wildlife Damage Management.--APHIS is responsible for
providing Federal leadership in managing problems caused by
wildlife. The Committee provides $102,085,000 for wildlife
damage control to maintain priority initiatives, including
preventing the transport of invasive snakes and other harmful
species.
The Committee maintains support for assistance to
aquaculture producers to help mitigate wildlife depredation,
particularly as it pertains to fish-eating and disease-carrying
birds. The Committee provides an additional $1,000,000 for
damage management efforts and the development of methods to
assist producers in combatting the persistent threat and
economic hardship caused by cormorants, pelicans, and other
birds.
The Committee provides $26,000,000 for the National Rabies
Management Program to fortify existing barriers and advance
prevention and eradication efforts.
The Committee is aware of the economic loss sunflower
growers can incur due to blackbird infestations, and encourages
Wildlife Services to do further research into the use of bird
repellents to minimize blackbird depredation.
Wildlife Services Education and Training.--The Committee is
aware of the wide range of hazardous procedures and materials
utilized by APHIS personnel in the conduct of daily duties. In
addition, a recent comprehensive study noted the critical need
to provide standardized safety training, certification, and
database management for tracking, to ensure the safest working
environment possible. As such, the Committee provides
$2,000,000 within Wildlife Damage Management to maintain a
National Training Academy focused on those areas of greatest
concern such as pyrotechnics, firearms, hazardous materials,
immobilization and euthanasia drugs, pesticides, animal care
and handling, land vehicles, watercraft, and zoonotic diseases.
Wildlife Services Methods Development.--The Committee
appreciates the important work done by the National Wildlife
Research Center and its affiliated field locations to resolve
problems caused by the interaction of wild animals and society.
The Committee provides $19,107,000 to ensure continued
development of technical and scientific information on wildlife
damage management.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,175,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 3,175,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,175,000
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 recommendation includes an appropriation of
$3,175,000 for buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service. This funding is necessary to allow
APHIS to maintain existing facilities, and perform critically
needed repairs to and replacements of building components, such
as heating, ventilation and air-conditioning on a prioritized
basis at APHIS facilities. The Committee notes that due to the
environmentally sensitive nature of many APHIS facilities,
closure of a facility could result if APHIS is unable to
complete the required repairs.
Agricultural Marketing Service
MARKETING SERVICES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $81,223,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 81,933,000
Committee recommendation................................ 82,933,000
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, 1635-1638); 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-499t); the Egg Products Inspection Act (21
U.S.C. 1031-1056); and section 32 of the Act of 1935 (Public
Law 74-320, 7 U.S.C. 612c).
Programs administered by this agency include the market
news services, standardization, grading, classing, shell egg
surveillance services, transportation services, wholesale
farmers and alternative market development, grant payments to
States for marketing activities, the Federal administration of
marketing agreements and orders, commodity purchases,
Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, the Plant Variety
Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.), and market protection
and promotion activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $82,933,000
for Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program.--The
Committee directs USDA to act to the full extent of its
authority in administering the National Organic Certification
Cost-Share Program, including reimbursing State organic program
fees, as well as costs associated with transitional
certification.
Organic Data Initiative.--The Committee encourages AMS and
NASS to coordinate activities related to expanding organic
price reporting and organic data collection.
Organic Livestock Proposed Rule.--The Committee is aware
that USDA released a proposed rule on April 7, 2016, titled
``National Organic Program: Organic Livestock and Poultry
Practices.'' The Committee directs the Secretary to ensure that
all comments are taken into consideration, including those from
producers adversely impacted by the proposal's new compliance
requirements, when finalizing the proposed rule.
Sunset Review Process.--The Committee is aware of the
National Organic Standards Board sunset review process for
reviewing substances on the National List. It is important that
this process includes sound science and robust stakeholder
participation. The Committee expects the National Organic
Program and USDA to fully consider all currently available
scientific information during the sunset review and rulemaking
procedures.
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Limitation, 2016........................................ $60,982,000
Budget limitation, 2017................................. 61,227,000
Committee recommendation................................ 61,227,000
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, and tobacco. 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.), and other
provisions of law are designed to facilitate commerce and
protect participants in the industry.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation of $61,227,000 on
administrative expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY
(SECTION 32)
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $20,489,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 20,705,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,705,000
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 2016-2017:
ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD--PFISCAL YEARS 2016-2017
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 Fiscal year 2017 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30% of Customs Receipts)................... 10,316,645 10,929,841 10,929,841
Less Transfers:
Food and Nutrition Service............................ -8,969,178 -9,462,665 -9,462,665
Commerce Department................................... -145,811 -145,175 -145,175
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Transfers.................................... -9,114,989 -9,607,840 -9,607,840
Prior Year Appropriation Available, Start of Year......... 223,344 125,000 125,000
Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS (F&V;)................. -122,000 -125,000 -125,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority, Farm Bill......................... 1,303,000 1,322,001 1,322,001
Rescission of Current Year Funds.......................... -215,636 -231,443 -237,443
Appropriations Temporarily Reduced - Sequestration........ -77,384 -79,557 -79,557
Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to -125,000 -125,000 -125,000
FNS).....................................................
-----------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority, Appropriations Act................ 884,980 886,000 880,000
=====================================================
Less Obligations:
Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities).... 465,000 465,000 465,000
State Option Contract................................. 5,000 5,000 5,000
Removal of Defective Commodities...................... 2,500 2,500 2,500
Emergency Surplus Removal............................. 118,500 206,000 206,000
Disaster Relief....................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000
Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases..... 107,500 ................ ................
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program..................... 40,000 44,000 44,000
Estimated Future Needs................................ 87,192 102,355 98,355
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Commodity Procurement........................ 830,692 829,855 825,855
Administrative Funds:
Commodity Purchase Support............................ 33,799 35,440 33,440
Marketing Agreements and Orders....................... 20,489 20,705 20,705
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Administrative Funds......................... 54,288 56,145 54,145
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Obligations................................... 884,980 886,000 880,000
=====================================================
Unobligated Balance, End of Year.......................... ................ ................ ................
Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to 125,000 125,000 125,000
FNS).....................................................
Balances, Collections and Recoveries Not Available........ ................ ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total End of Year Balances.......................... 125,000 125,000 125,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds
of $20,705,000 for the formulation and administration of
marketing agreements and orders.
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 of 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, 2016.................................... $1,235,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,235,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,235,000
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. Matching grants
are awarded on a competitive basis 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 $1,235,000 for
Payments to States and Possessions for Federal-State marketing
projects and activities.
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $43,057,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 43,482,000
Committee recommendation................................ 43,482,000
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 $43,482,000
for salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration.
LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES
Limitation, 2016........................................ $55,000,000
Budget limitation, 2017................................. 57,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 57,500,000
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 $57,500,000 on
inspection and weighing services expenses.
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $816,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 819,000
Committee recommendation................................ 819,000
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 processed egg products. The Office has
oversight and management responsibilities for the Food Safety
and Inspection Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $819,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,014,871,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,030,405,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,033,806,000
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 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 $1,033,806,000
for the Food Safety and Inspection Service [FSIS]. The
Committee finds the implementation schedule set forth by FSIS
for revised inspections processes unrealistically rapid and
provides additional funds to accomplish this transition in a
more feasible manner.
Game Birds.--The Committee directs the FSIS to provide a
report on the impact of defining games birds, such as quail, as
amendable in Federal code in regard to inspection.
Humane Slaughter.--The Committee directs FSIS to continue
to provide annual reports to the Committee on the
implementation of objective scoring methods undertaken by FSIS
to enforce the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.
The Committee also directs FSIS to ensure that personnel
hired with funding previously provided specifically for Humane
Methods of Slaughter Act enforcement focus their attention on
overseeing compliance with humane handling rules for live
animals as they arrive and are offloaded and handled in pens,
chutes, and stunning areas and that all inspectors receive
robust training.
Inspections.--Adequate import reinspection and foreign
country equivalence are of great importance to food safety and
fair trade. Upon the date of enactment of this act, the
Committee directs FSIS to reinspect all imported Siluriformes
fish and fish product shipments, just as all imported meat and
poultry products from equivalent countries that export product
to the United States are reinspected. The Committee further
directs FSIS to complete a determination of equivalence for the
Siluriformes inspection program in a foreign country exporting
Siluriformes fish and fish products to the United States not
later than 180 days after the end of the 18-month transition
period described in the preamble of the final rule entitled
``Mandatory Inspection of Fish of the Order Siluriformes and
Products Derived From Such Fish'' issued on December 2, 2015
(80 Fed. Reg. 75590 et seq.).
The following table represents the Committee's specific
recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as
compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget request levels:
FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food safety inspection:
Federal..................................................... 898,795 914,098 917,499
State....................................................... 60,976 61,568 61,568
International............................................... 16,744 16,487 16,487
Codex Alimentarius.......................................... 3,776 3,672 3,672
PHDCIS...................................................... 34,580 34,580 34,580
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 1,014,871 1,030,405 1,033,806
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural
Services
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $898,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
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), commodity programs, farm loans, disaster
assistance, crop insurance, and some conservation and energy
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 $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign
Agricultural Services.
Farm Service Agency
The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established October 13,
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, 2016......................................... 1,200,180 309,880 1,510,060
Budget estimate, 2017........................................ 1,209,751 309,610 1,519,361
Committee recommendation..................................... 1,210,412 309,610 1,520,022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, Food for Peace 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 $1,520,022,000
for salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency, including
a direct appropriation of $1,210,412,000. The Committee
supports the mission of FSA and the important services that
they provide across the country; therefore, the Committee does
not accept the full decrease for information technology as
proposed in the budget. The Committee also provides for pay
costs for Federal and non-Federal employees, $5,000,000 for
personnel and physical security programs across county offices,
$2,000,000 for New Beginning and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers,
and $90,000 to support a certified training program for veteran
farmers to be prequalified for FSA Direct Farm Ownership loans
as proposed in the budget.
Continuous Conservation Reserve Program.--The Secretary is
strongly encouraged to, within the total acreage made available
for enrollment in the conservation reserve program and without
reducing the periodic availability of general signup, enroll,
to the maximum extent practicable, acreage for activities
included in the State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement practice
or other similar administratively established wetland and
habitat practices that benefit priority fish and wildlife
species identified in State, regional, and national
conservation initiatives with a priority for initiatives that
provide large blocks of cover ideal for wildlife nesting.
Information Technology.--The Committee remains dedicated to
ensuring FSA has reliable and functioning IT systems because it
is critical that farmers and ranchers have access to the tools
they need to succeed. The Committee has invested significant
taxpayer dollars to modernize outdated systems and continues to
provide resources above the budget request. The Committee
continues statutory language that allows funds for IT to be
obligated only after the Secretary meets certain reporting
requirements. The Committee understands a third-party analysis,
required in the fiscal year 2016 bill, will be released soon
and looks forward to working with the agency on those
recommendations.
National Agriculture Imagery Program.--The Committee
recommends that funding shall be allocated to purchase imagery
products to meet programmatic requirements.
STATE MEDIATION GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $3,404,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 3,404,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,904,000
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. 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 $3,904,000 for
State Mediation Grants.
The Committee recognizes the rapidly growing complexity of
American agriculture and as agriculture practices, markets, and
technologies continue to evolve, new challenges and potential
conflicts arise. Accordingly, the Committee directs the
Secretary to review ways that the State Mediation Programs can
address new issues impacting agricultural producers, including
issues involving agricultural leases, right-to-farm laws, and
family farm transitions.
GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2017...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 6,500,000
This program is intended to assist in the protection of
groundwater through State rural water associations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,500,000 for
Grassroots Source Water Protection.
DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 500,000
Under the program, the Department makes indemnification
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products
who, through no fault of their own, suffer income 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 such sums as
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2017 to be $500,000,
for indemnity payments to dairy farmers.
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is
used to provide direct and guaranteed farm ownership, farm
operating, conservation, Indian highly fractioned land, 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 and to establish Beginning Farmer and Rancher
Individual Development grant accounts.
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.
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.--Made to Indian
tribal members to purchase highly fractionated lands, as
authorized by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a total loan level of
$6,655,053,000 for programs within the Agricultural Credit
Insurance Fund Program Account. The Committee includes funding
to waive application fees for veteran farmers, as proposed in
the budget.
Loan Programs.--The Committee continues to support FSA loan
programs that ensure farmers and ranchers have access to credit
to maintain and improve their operations. The Committee is
aware of the heightened operating loan activity in fiscal year
2016 and notes the statutory authority allowing program level
increases that do not require additional budget authority. The
Committee will continue to monitor program demand in the coming
months and directs FSA to provide timely estimates for future
needs.
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
2016 and the budget request levels:
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Ownership:
Direct................................................... 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
Guaranteed............................................... 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Farm Operating:
Direct................................................... 1,252,004 1,460,047 1,460,047
Guaranteed unsubsidized.................................. 1,393,443 1,432,430 1,432,430
Emergency Loans.............................................. 34,667 22,576 22,576
Indian Tribe Land Acquisition................................ 2,000 20,000 20,000
Conservation Loans:
Guaranteed............................................... 150,000 150,000 150,000
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans........................ 10,000 10,000 10,000
Boll Weevil Eradication...................................... 60,000 60,000 60,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 programs under
credit reform:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Operating:
Direct................................................... 53,961 62,198 62,198
Guaranteed unsubsidized.................................. 14,352 15,327 15,327
Emergency Loans.............................................. 1,262 1,262 1,262
Individual Development Account Grants........................ ............... 1,500 1,500
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans........................ ............... 2,550 2,550
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk Management Agency
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $74,829,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 66,615,000
Committee recommendation................................ 75,750,000
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 Agricultural Act of
2014 (Public Law 113-79).
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 $75,750,000
for the Risk Management Agency.
The Committee recognizes that there are many research
priorities that competitive funding may be used to address,
including the feasibility of insurance programs to cover
business interruption due to integrator bankruptcy and
catastrophic loss in the poultry industry. The Committee
encourages RMA to support research into these priorities.
CORPORATIONS
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $7,870,934,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 8,849,090,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,849,090,000
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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as
may be necessary, estimated to be $8,849,090,000 in fiscal year
2017 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); the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246); and the Agricultural
Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79).
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, 2016.................................... $6,871,132,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 13,476,854,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,476,854,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2017 to be
$13,476,854,000, for the payment to reimburse the Commodity
Credit Corporation for net realized losses.
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Limitation, 2016........................................ $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 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 the
Commodity Credit Corporation's hazardous waste management
program.
TITLE II
CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $898,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 901,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
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 $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment.
Innovative Financing for Restoration Projects.--The
Committee recognizes the challenge of managing millions of
acres of land that increasingly need forest health restoration
treatments to reduce wildfire, restore forest ecosystems and
provide economic support to communities. The Committee further
recognizes that Federal funding to address these needs is
increasingly constrained. The Under Secretary for Natural
Resources and Environment, in consultation with the Forest
Service and National Conservation Resources Service and other
affected agencies, is directed to evaluate the feasibility of
innovative financing mechanisms that could leverage non-Federal
investments in forest health restoration projects on private
and public lands, and to provide a report on such mechanisms to
the Committee within 60 days of enactment. Such mechanisms
could include financing agreements that include contributions
from entities benefiting from corollary benefits of forest
health restoration such as water providers or hydropower
electricity providers who benefit from increased water flows.
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, 2016.................................... $850,856,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 860,374,000
Committee recommendation................................ 864,474,000
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.
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 assemble, test, and encourage
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 inventory the Nation's basic soil resources
and determine 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 $864,474,000
for Conservation Operations. The Committee recommendation
includes $759,211,000 for Conservation Technical Assistance,
$80,802,000 for Soil Surveys, $9,380,000 for Snow Survey and
Water Forecasting, and $9,481,000 for Plant Materials Centers.
Acre-for-Acre Wetlands Mitigation.--The Secretary is
encouraged to use mitigation with the conversion of a natural
wetland and equivalent wetlands functions at a ratio not to
exceed a ratio of 1-to-1 acreage.
Pollinator Health and Monarch Recovery.--The Committee
reiterates its concern for the need to address threats posed to
pollinator health, and urges the Department to continue to
support the Fish and Wildlife Service's Monarch Conservation
Strategy. The Committee directs NRCS to leverage resources,
relationships and partnerships, including with non-governmental
organizations that are perceived positively by the private land
and agriculture communities and that possess experience working
directly with agricultural producers and other conservation
partners. The Committee recommends the Department continue to
support monarch conversation on private lands in fiscal year
2017 and expects to see a multi-year recovery effort
undertaken, focusing on the deployment of conservation
practices.
Puget Sound Federal Caucus.--The Committee commends the
Natural Resources Conservation Service for signing the Puget
Sound Federal Caucus Memorandum of Understanding on February
28, 2014. The recovery and cleanup of Puget Sound is essential
to our Nation's economy and continued coordination and sharing
of expertise among Federal partners is critical to furthering
current efforts. The Committee directs the Natural Resources
Conservation Service to work with its counterparts in the Puget
Sound Federal Caucus to renew and strengthen the MOU prior to
its expiration on March 27, 2017.
Salinity, Soil Health and Conservation Planning.--The
Committee encourages the Natural Resources Conservation Service
to work in partnership with one or more states, conservation
districts, and, as appropriate, salinity control associations
to investigate and address salinity issues to improve soil
health and water quality. The Committee encourages NRCS to
utilize existing programs to support producers' voluntary
implementation of conservation practices that directly address
salinity control, including soil salinity investigations,
producer assistance to implement saline soil reclamation
methods, and implementation of soil salinity management systems
and soil conservation practices.
Technical Assistance.--The Committee directs NRCS to
maintain a record of total technical assistance dollars for the
past 3 years and annually in the future, and provide the data
to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, and the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. This report
should differentiate mandatory and discretionary allocations.
WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION OPERATIONS
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $150,000,000
The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public
Law 566, 83d Cong.) (16 U.S.C. 1000-1005, 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, and to further
the conservation and proper utilization of land in authorized
watersheds.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $150,000,000
for the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations Program.
The Committee recognizes the critical challenges facing
rural water resource management and protection and supports
needed investments in watershed operations that have been
absent since fiscal year 2010. These Federal-State-local
partnerships are uniquely positioned to identify critical
watershed protection and flood prevention needs in rural
communities and implement projects that deliver multiple
streams of benefits for homes, businesses, and transportation
infrastructure and natural resources. In selecting projects for
funding, the Committee expects the Agency to balance the needs
of addressing the project backlog, remediation of existing
structures, and new projects.
WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $12,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
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 2803 of Public Law 110-246.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the
Watershed Rehabilitation 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 and field
offices.
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $893,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 896,000
Committee recommendation................................ 896,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
provides direction and coordination in carrying out laws 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 $896,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development.
Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels.--The Committee is
concerned with the interim rule proposed by the Department
under the Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels program
(section 9005 of the Energy title of the farm bill, Public Law
113-79), which is intended to promote the development of
different qualifying advanced fuel categories. The Committee is
concerned that the allocation formula for distribution of
section 9005 funds among the qualified fuel categories is
inequitable, disproportionate, and inconsistent with the
purpose and intent of the section 9005 program. The Committee
urges the Department to administer the section 9005 program in
a way that is fuel and technology-neutral. Consistent with
these objectives, the Committee directs USDA to propose
amendments to the interim rule to ensure that any final rule to
implement section 9005 provides for a more equitable and
proportional allocation of funding among the qualified advanced
biofuels and the energy pathways they represent.
RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation................................................ 225,835 230,679 226,283
Transfer from:
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account........ 417,854 426,821 417,854
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Program 34,707 36,451 34,707
Account.................................................
Rural Development Loan Program Account................... 4,468 4,564 4,468
--------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Development salaries and expenses......... 682,864 698,515 683,312
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 $683,312,000 for salaries and
expenses of Rural Development. The Committee maintains the
fiscal year 2016 funding level for Strikeforce, but no
resources are provided for the numerous new initiatives
proposed.
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.
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2016 (budget authority)................. $505,567,000
Budget estimate, 2017 (budget authority)................ 517,120,000
Committee recommendation (budget authority)............. 510,203,000
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, farm labor 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
low-cost rental housing and related facilities in rural areas.
These loans are repayable in terms up to 30 years.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $510,203,000
for the Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account [RHIF].
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 2017, as well as for administrative expenses. The
following table presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to
the 2016 levels and the 2017 budget request:
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Levels:
Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct............................................... 900,000 900,000 900,000
Guaranteed........................................... 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
Housing repair (sec. 504)................................ 26,278 26,277 26,278
Direct rental housing (sec. 515)......................... 28,398 33,074 40,000
Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538)..................... 150,000 230,000 230,000
Site development loans (sec. 524)........................ 5,000 5,000 5,000
Credit sales of acquired property........................ 10,000 10,000 10,000
Self help land development loans (sec. 523).............. 5,000 5,000 5,000
Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)...................... 23,855 23,857 23,857
--------------------------------------------------
Total, loan levels..................................... 25,148,531 25,233,208 25,240,135
==================================================
Loan Subsidies and Grants:
Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct............................................... 60,750 60,930 60,930
Housing repair (sec. 504)................................ 3,424 3,663 3,663
Direct rental housing (sec. 515)......................... 8,414 9,790 11,840
Site development (sec. 524).............................. ............... 111 111
Self help land development (sec. 523).................... ............... 417 417
Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)...................... 6,789 7,052 7,052
Farm labor housing grants (sec. 516)..................... 8,336 8,336 8,336
--------------------------------------------------
Total, loan subsidies and grants....................... 87,713 90,299 92,349
==================================================
Administrative expenses...................................... 417,854 426,821 417,854
==================================================
Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses...... 505,567 517,120 510,203
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Efficiency.--The Committee recognizes opportunities
to reduce costs for rural housing and save taxpayer money by
embracing energy efficiency standards in rural housing, with
measures such as air sealing, and installing insulation, window
films, and roofs.
Housing Repair Program.--The Committee commends the Rural
Housing Service [RHS] for its efforts to reform the Section 504
Housing Repair program in order to serve more very-low income
families in need. The Committee directs the RHS to report to
the Committee within 120 days of enactment on recommendations
to modernize the program, including updates to loan and grant
limits which have not kept pace with modern home repair costs.
The RHS should also include recommendations on how it can
flexibly allocate Section 504 loans and grants on a need basis.
Maturing Mortgages.--The Committee is very concerned about
the alarming number of multi-family housing mortgages scheduled
to mature in the next few years. As these mortgages mature,
projects and units will be removed from USDA's affordable rural
housing program, placing very low income rural residents in
jeopardy of untenable rent increases and possible eviction. In
spite of numerous requests from the Committee, the Department
has failed to identify and develop potential solutions to this
looming crisis.
The Secretary is directed to engage affordable housing
advocates, project owners, tenants, and others as practicable,
to find acceptable and effective long term solutions that will
retain projects in the affordable rural housing program. The
need for affordable rural housing is too great to allow the
program to expire.
The Committee is providing short-term, stop gap assistance
designed to delay the loss of affordable units pending
development of comprehensive long-term solutions. This
assistance has three components: increased direct section 515
loans; regulatory relief from onerous, self-imposed
requirements; and a pilot project to provide technical
assistance to facilitate transfers of projects to new owners.
Section 515 loans are increased by $11,602,000 to $40,000,000.
In addition to essential repairs and rehabilitation, this
funding is to be used for transfers to new owners, and for re-
amortizations and other servicing actions that will trigger
new, extended restricted use agreements retaining the
properties in the program. Regulatory relief involves allowing
non-profit entities and public housing authorities to earn
rates of return on investment [ROI] comparable to other
entities, and to allow reimbursement of costs associated with
asset management fees of up to $7,500 per property annually.
The Committee also includes $1,000,000 for a pilot program to
provide technical assistance to facilitate transfers of
properties to non-profits and other new owners. Requirements to
transfer these properties are cumbersome and onerous, so
dedicated technical assistance will smooth and accelerate those
transactions.
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,389,695,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,405,033,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,405,033,000
Rental assistance is authorized under section 521(a)(2) of
the Housing Act of 1949, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1490a). 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 the Rural
Housing Service section 515 rural rental housing program 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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,405,033,000
for the Rental Assistance Program.
Rental Assistance.--The Committee remains very concerned
with USDA's ability to estimate accurately the needs to renew
expiring Rental Assistance [RA] agreements that support very
low and low income rural households. Crises stemming from
inaccurate requests, as happened in fiscal year 2016, that put
very-low income households in jeopardy of untenable rent
increases and possible eviction, will not be tolerated. USDA is
now relying on a new, project-based, forecasting tool to
determine future RA needs. The Committee directs the Secretary,
within 120 days of enactment, to perform a detailed analysis of
the accuracy of this tool and to report its findings to the
Committee. Any inadequacies found in the forecasting tool
should be reported immediately.
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $37,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 37,362,000
Committee recommendation................................ 40,000,000
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 Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program includes
funding for housing vouchers and a demonstration program for
the preservation and revitalization of affordable multi-family
housing projects. Rural Development's multi-family housing
portfolio faces dual pressures for loan prepayments and repair/
rehabilitation stemming from inadequate reserves resulting in
deferred property maintenance.
Provision of affordable rental housing can be accomplished
more economically by revitalizing existing housing stock rather
than funding new construction. The Multi-family Housing
Revitalization Program 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 to meet the most urgent
local needs for tenant protection and project revitalization.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,000,000
for the Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program, including
$18,000,000 for vouchers and $22,000,000 for a housing
preservation demonstration program.
MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $27,500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 18,493,000
Committee recommendation................................ 27,500,000
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 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 $27,500,000
for Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants.
RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $32,239,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 28,701,000
Committee recommendation................................ 32,239,000
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 $32,239,000
for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program.
The following table compares the grant program levels
recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2016 levels and
the budget request:
RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very low-income housing repair grants........................ 28,701 28,701 28,701
Housing preservation grants.................................. 3,538 ............... 3,538
--------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................. 32,239 28,701 32,239
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends that the Rural Housing Service
prioritize funding for communities with unique weather patterns
in need of replacing antiquated heating systems with more
efficient technologies.
Rural Community Facilities Program Account
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $42,278,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 37,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 42,278,000
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 quasi-public 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, fire and rescue facilities, and educational
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 $42,278,000
for the Rural Community Facilities Program Account.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget
request levels:
RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Community facilities direct loans........................ 2,200,000 2,200,000 2,200,000
Community facilities guaranteed loans.................... 148,305 ............... 156,250
--------------------------------------------------
Total loan levels...................................... 2,348,305 2,200,000 2,356,250
==================================================
Budget authority:
Community facilities guaranteed loans.................... 3,500 ............... 3,500
Community facilities grants.............................. 25,000 25,000 25,000
Economic initiative grants............................... 5,778 ............... 5,778
Rural community development initiative................... 4,000 4,000 4,000
Tribal college grants.................................... 4,000 8,000 4,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total budget authority................................. 42,278 37,000 42,278
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $62,687,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 90,779,000
Committee recommendation................................ 63,883,000
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.
Rural business development grants were authorized by the
Agricultural Act of 2014 and can be made to governmental and
nonprofit entities, and Indian tribes. Up to 10 percent of
appropriated funds may be used to: identify and analyze
business opportunities; identify, train, and provide technical
assistance to existing or prospective rural entrepreneurs and
managers; assist in the establishment of new rural businesses
and the maintenance of existing businesses; conduct economic
development planning, coordination and leadership development;
and establish centers for training, technology, and trade. The
balance of appropriated funding may be used for projects that
support the development of business enterprises that finance or
facilitate: the development of small and emerging private
business enterprise; the establishment, expansion, and
operation of rural distance learning networks; the development
of rural learning programs; and the provision of technical
assistance and training to rural communities for the purpose of
improving passenger transportation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,883,000
for the Rural Business Program Account.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget
request levels:
RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Business and industry guaranteed loans loan levels....... 919,765 892,244 919,765
Budget authority:
Business and industry guaranteed loans................... 35,687 35,779 36,883
Rural business development grants........................ 24,000 30,000 24,000
Delta Regional Authority grants.......................... 3,000 ............... 3,000
Rural child poverty demonstration........................ ............... 25,000 ...............
--------------------------------------------------
Total budget authority................................. 62,687 90,779 63,883
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Business Program Account.--The Committee recommends
$500,000 for transportation technical assistance.
The Committee directs that of the $4,000,000 recommended
for grants to benefit Federally Recognized Native American
Tribes, $250,000 shall be used to implement an American Indian
and Alaska Native passenger transportation development and
assistance initiative.
INTERMEDIARY RELENDING PROGRAM FUND
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 Fiscal year 2017 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level...................................... 18,889 18,889 18,889
Direct loan subsidy....................................... 5,217 5,476 5,476
Administrative expenses................................... 4,468 4,564 4,468
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses... 9,685 10,040 9,944
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
113-79, the Agricultural Act of 2014.
Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (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 2017, as well as for administrative
expenses.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,944,000 for
the Intermediary Relending Program Fund.
RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan
level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 level................................. 33,077
Fiscal year 2017 request............................... 85,000
Committee recommendation............................... 33,077
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 credit 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 recommends a loan program level of
$33,077,000, to be funded from earnings on the Cushion of
Credit and fees on guaranteed underwriting loans made pursuant
to section 313A of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936.
RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $22,050,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 22,250,000
Committee recommendation................................ 22,300,000
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 $22,300,000
for Rural Cooperative Development Grants.
Of the funds recommended, $2,750,000 is for the Appropriate
Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program.
The Committee has included language in the bill that not
more than $3,000,000 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 $10,750,000 for
value-added agricultural product market development grants.
RURAL MICROENTERPRISE INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $4,904,000
Committee recommendation................................................
This program, authorized by section 379E of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981 et
seq.), provides loans and grants to intermediaries that assist
micro-entrepreneurs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommendation does not include funding for
the Rural Microenterprise Investment Program.
RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $500,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 18,515,000
Committee recommendation................................ 352,000
The Rural Energy for America Program is authorized under
section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107). This program may fund energy audits,
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 $352,000 for
the Rural Energy for America Program.
The following table provides the Committee's recommendation
as compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget request levels:
RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level............................................ 7,576 75,754 7,576
Guaranteed loan subsidy......................................... 500 3,515 352
Grants.......................................................... .............. 15,000 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Efficiency Coordination.--To better utilize the
energy efficiency and renewable energy programs available
through the Rural Energy for America Program, USDA is directed
to submit a report to the Committee no later than 120 days
after enactment of this act detailing how the Rural Development
agencies make information about its energy programs accessible
to rural communities and how U.S. funds are being leveraged for
energy efficiency investments in rural areas.
HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for
the Healthy Food Financing Initiative.
RURAL BUSINESS INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $6,577,000
Committee recommendation................................................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommendation does not include funding for
the Rural Business Investment 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.
RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $522,365,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 461,593,000
Committee recommendation................................ 546,090,000
The water and waste disposal program is authorized by
sections 306, 306A, 309A, 306C, 306D, 306E, 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 quasi-public 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 $546,090,000
for the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account.
The Committee recommends $66,500,000 for water and waste
disposal systems grants for Native Americans, including Native
Alaskans, and the Colonias. The Committee recognizes the
special needs and problems for delivery of basic services to
these populations, and encourages the Secretary to distribute
these funds in line with the fiscal year 2014 distribution, to
the degree practicable. In addition, the Committee makes up to
$16,897,000 available for the circuit rider program.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget
request levels:
RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 Fiscal year 2017 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Water and waste disposal direct loans................. 1,200,000 803,802 1,200,000
Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans............. 50,000 ................ 50,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total loan levels................................... 1,250,000 803,802 1,250,000
=====================================================
Budget authority:
Water and waste disposal direct loans................. 31,320 34,885 52,080
Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans............. 275 ................ 240
Water and waste disposal grants....................... 364,380 350,234 364,380
Solid waste management grants......................... 4,000 1,000 4,000
Water well systems grants............................. 993 500 993
Colonias and AK/HI/Native American grants............. 64,000 42,544 66,500
Water and waste water revolving funds................. 1,000 500 1,000
High energy cost grants............................... 10,000 ................ 10,000
Circuit rider......................................... 16,397 13,000 16,897
Emergency community water assistance grants........... 10,000 5,000 10,000
Technical assistance grants........................... 20,000 13,930 20,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, budget authority............................. 522,365 461,593 546,090
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 2017, 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 2016 and budget request levels:
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
Electric:
Direct FFB........................................... 5,500,000 6,500,000 5,500,000
Guaranteed underwriting.............................. 750,000 ............... 750,000
Telecommunications:
Direct, Treasury Rate................................ 346,667 345,056 345,000
Direct, Treasury Rate--Modification.................. ............... 11,000 ...............
Direct, FFB.......................................... 345,000 345,000 345,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total loan authorization............................... 6,941,667 7,201,056 6,940,000
==================================================
Total budget authority................................. 104 14,071 3,071
==================================================
Administrative expenses...................................... 34,707 36,451 34,707
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Loan Servicing Flexibility.--The Committee is
concerned that the RUS may not have available a full range of
loan servicing tools necessary to service effectively its
electric loan portfolio that is now approaching
$45,000,000,000. Specifically, RUS's ability to refinance
existing electric loans is severely limited. This loan
portfolio is too important to rural electric cooperatives and
their rural customers for RUS not to have accessible all of the
servicing options that are needed and are typically available
to a lender. The Secretary is directed to report to the
Committee within 60 days of enactment on: current restrictions
on electric loan refinancing; potential benefits to electric
cooperatives and rural customers of refinancing loans; benefits
to the program of expanding refinancing abilities; expected
demands; and estimated costs of electric loan refinancing.
DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM LOANS AND GRANTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan and grant levels:
Distance learning and Telemedicine Program:
Grants............................................... 22,000 34,950 22,000
Broadband program:
Treasury rate loans...................................... 20,576 ............... 27,043
Treasury rate loans budget authority..................... 4,500 ............... 4,500
Grants................................................... 10,372 39,492 10,372
--------------------------------------------------
Total DLT and Broadband Program level.................. 52,948 74,442 59,415
==================================================
Total DLT and Broadband Budget authority............... 36,872 74,442 36,872
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
healthcare through technology and increasing educational
opportunities for rural students. These funds are available for
loans and grants.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,872,000
for the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program.
Funds recommended for the RUS broadband program are intended to
promote broadband availability in those areas where there is
not otherwise a business case for private investment in a
broadband network. The Committee encourages RUS to focus
expenditures on projects that bring broadband service to
currently unserved households.
The Committee is concerned about the longstanding, unmet
health needs in the Mississippi River Delta. The Committee
recommendation includes $3,000,000 to address critical
healthcare needs in the region, as authorized by section 379G
of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
Broadband Grants.--Of the funds recommended, $10,372,000 in
grants shall be made available to support broadband
transmission for rural areas.
Broadband Program.--Recognizing the positive changes the
Agricultural Act of 2014 made to the Rural Broadband Access
Loans and Loan Guarantees programs, the Committee continues to
encourage the Department to implement a comprehensive rural
broadband strategy including investment in advanced networks
that will meet the needs of a 21st century economy. However,
the Committee is concerned that the Department of Agriculture
has not prioritized funding on cost-effectiveness on a per-
household basis or on the affordability of the service being
provided to consumers as factors in the awards process. The
Committee believes that the best way to ensure that funds under
this program are spent to promote affordable broadband
availability in those unserved and underserved areas, where
there is not otherwise a business case for private investment,
is to prioritize awards that reach as many unserved and
underserved Americans as possible for each dollar spent and to
ensure that affordable service is provided by award recipients.
As such, the Committee directs the Department of Agriculture to
develop criteria for the consideration of awards under this
program that include the cost-effectiveness of award proposals
on a per-household basis and the affordability of broadband
service to potential subscribers.
Community Connect Service Definition.--The Committee is
concerned that the Community Connect Program's Minimum
Broadband Service benchmark is not in step with current needs
and industry standards, and the Committee encourages USDA to
increase the program's Minimum Broadband Service definition.
These changes will enable more rural communities that lack
adequate broadband service to engage with the Rural Utilities
Service and will encourage providers to improve their
connectivity.
TITLE IV
DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $811,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 814,000
Committee recommendation................................ 814,000
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 nutrition assistance activities. The Office
has oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and
Nutrition Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $814,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and
Consumer Services.
Food and Agriculture Service Learning Program.--Recognizing
the widespread need for children and schools to access food and
agriculture education, the Committee encourages USDA to provide
funding, through existing resources, for the Food and
Agriculture Service Learning Program, authorized under section
4209 of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
Interagency Partnerships.--The Committee commends USDA for
its work to support access to combating hunger and eliminating
barriers to healthy food access through innovative interagency
partnerships. The Committee encourages USDA to continue these
partnerships, particularly the new Summer VISTA partnership
program.
Nutrition Program Efficiency.--The Committee encourages the
Secretary to focus process and technology improvement grants
within the Food and Nutrition Service [FNS] to expand public-
private partnerships to increase food security in a cost-
efficient and accountable manner.
Potable Water.--The Committee is aware of the statutory
requirement to make potable water available to children free of
charge during meal service. The Committee encourages USDA to
provide guidance to schools in order to assure this requirement
is being met and to report back to the Committee on these
efforts.
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, postpartum, 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.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 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 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 Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program.
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 low-income elderly
persons age 60 and over.
TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State
agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of
donated commodities.
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
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $22,149,746,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 23,230,733,000
Committee recommendation................................ 23,201,733,000
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 $23,201,733,000 for the Child
Nutrition Programs.
Crediting System for Nutrition Programs.--The Committee
recognizes that the current crediting system used by Food and
Nutrition Service in administering the school lunch program and
the School Breakfast Program is in need of reform. The
crediting system has historically provided significant service
to school food authorities and suppliers to the National School
Lunch and the School Breakfast Program. However, the program
has not been updated to keep pace with innovation in the
marketplace. New products that provide additional nutrition to
program participants have entered the marketplace but school
food authorities are not receiving proper crediting due to the
fact that the system is outdated. For example, Greek yogurt
receives the same protein crediting as other products with less
protein. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall review the system of crediting
and submit to the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee
on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a report
that describes the results of the review.
The Committee's recommendation provides for the following
annual rates for the child nutrition programs.
TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Child nutrition programs 2017 budget Committee
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program.................. 12,756,627 12,756,627
School Breakfast Program.............. 4,486,347 4,486,347
Child and Adult Care Food Program..... 3,446,278 3,446,278
Summer Food Service Program........... 628,484 628,484
Special Milk Program.................. 9,236 9,236
State Administrative Expenses......... 279,058 279,058
Commodity Procurement................. 1,428,089 1,428,089
Team Nutrition/HUSSC/CMS.............. 17,004 17,004
Food Safety Education................. 2,897 2,897
Coordinated Review.................... 10,000 10,000
Computer Support...................... 11,941 11,941
CACFP Training and Technical 34,129 34,129
Assistance...........................
CNP Studies and Evaluation............ 23,328 23,328
Farm to School Team................... 4,168 4,168
Payment Accuracy...................... 11,147 11,147
School Meal Equipment Grants.......... 35,000 30,000
Summer EBT Demonstration.............. 26,000 23,000
SFSP Non-Congregate Feeding 10,000 ...............
Demonstration........................
Direct Certification Grants........... 10,000 ...............
State Exchange Demonstration.......... 1,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee expects FNS to utilize the National Food
Service Management Institute to carry out the food safety
education program.
SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN
[WIC]
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $6,350,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 6,350,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 6,350,000,000
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 postpartum women and
infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk
because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income.
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 $6,350,000,000
for the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants,
and Children [WIC].
The Committee recommendation fully funds estimated WIC
participation in fiscal year 2017. The Committee recommendation
includes $60,000,000 for breastfeeding support initiatives and
$13,600,000 for infrastructure.
WIC Food Package.--The Committee understands the Department
continues to work with the Institute of Medicine to make
recommendations to update the WIC food packages to reflect
current science and cultural factors. The Committee maintains
its interest in the recommendations that will be made regarding
the fish species that scientific evidence shows to be low in
mercury and are in other respects nutritious, including wild
salmon, for inclusion in WIC Food Packages IV, V, VI, and VII
that serve children age 1 to 4 years and pregnant, postpartum,
and breastfeeding women. The Committee expects the Department
to conduct a thorough and efficient review of this question and
issue its final report as planned in 2017.
SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $80,849,383,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 81,689,168,000
Committee recommendation................................ 79,682,168,000
The Food Stamp Program was reauthorized through fiscal year
2012 and renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
[SNAP] in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. The
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program attempts to alleviate
hunger and malnutrition among low-income persons by increasing
their food purchasing power. Eligible households receive SNAP
benefits with which they can purchase food through regular
retail stores.
Other programs funded through SNAP include Nutrition
Assistance to Puerto Rico and American Samoa, the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, the Emergency Food
Assistance Program, and the Community Food Projects program.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 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 benefit allotments to reflect
changes in the cost of the thrifty food plan.
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.
State Antifraud Activities.--Under the provisions of the
Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, States are eligible to be
reimbursed for 50 percent of the costs of their fraud
investigations and prosecutions.
States are required to implement an employment and training
program for the purpose of assisting members of households
participating in SNAP 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
$79,682,168,000 for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program. Of the amount recommended, $3,000,000,000 is made
available as a contingency reserve.
Out-of-State Moves.--The Committee includes bill language
to require SNAP participants to report, in a manner prescribed
by the Secretary, if that participant no longer resides in the
State in which they are certified.
State SNAP Implementation.--The Committee is concerned
about implementation of the SNAP program in certain states
where states are failing to meet the required deadlines for
processing applications. USDA is encouraged to work closely
with States to remedy program deficiency and be aggressive in
combating any falsification of SNAP implementation data.
COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $296,217,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 313,139,000
Committee recommendation................................ 313,139,000
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 and in 2014 by Public Law 113-79, this program provides
supplemental food to low-income senior citizens and in some
cases low-income infants and children up to age six, low-income
pregnant and postpartum women. The Agricultural Act of 2014
discontinued the admission of new pregnant and postpartum women
and children into the program. Those already in the program can
continue to receive assistance until they are no longer
eligible.
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.
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.
Pacific Island and Disaster 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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $313,139,000
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 $236,120,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food
Program. This amount fully funds participation in fiscal year
2017.
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 $16,548,000 for the
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and directs the Secretary to
obligate these funds within 45 days.
The Emergency Food Assistance Program.--The Agricultural
Act of 2014 provides $299,000,000 for TEFAP commodities to be
purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds.
The Committee recommendation includes $59,401,000 for TEFAP
transportation, storage, and program integrity. In addition,
the Committee recommendation grants the Secretary authority to
transfer up to an additional 10 percent from TEFAP commodities
for this purpose and urges the Secretary to use this authority.
The Committee encourages the Secretary to identify
opportunities for increasing the supply of TEFAP commodities in
the coming fiscal year through bonus and specialty crop
purchases. The Department shall make available to the States
domestically produced catfish fillets for distribution to local
agencies.
NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $150,824,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 179,447,000
Committee recommendation................................ 173,274,000
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]; Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance 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 and Disaster 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 $173,274,000
for Nutrition Programs Administration. The Committee
recommendation includes $1,000,000 for Phase II of dietary
guidance from birth to 24 months; $17,700,000 for headquarters
renovation or office relocation; and $1,192,000 for GSA Rent/
DHS Security Payments.
TITLE V
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Foreign Agricultural Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers from
Appropriations loan accounts Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016......................................... 191,566 6,394 197,960
Budget estimate, 2017........................................ 196,571 6,074 202,645
Committee recommendation..................................... 196,571 6,074 202,645
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 98 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 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
facilities financing guarantees; (2) Food for Peace; (3)
section 416b Overseas Donations Program; (4) Market Access
Program; and (5) 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 $202,645,000 for the Foreign
Agricultural Service, including a direct appropriation of
$196,571,000. The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000,
as requested in the budget, to establish an overseas post in
Cuba.
Borlaug Fellows Program.--The Committee recommendation
includes $2,650,000 for the Borlaug International Agricultural
Science and Technology Fellows Program. This program provides
training for international scientists and policymakers from
selected developing countries. The fellows work closely with
U.S. specialists in their fields of expertise and apply that
knowledge in their home countries. The Committee recognizes the
importance of this program in helping developing countries
strengthen their agricultural practices and food security.
Cochran Fellowship Program.--The Committee recommendation
includes $5,300,000 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.
Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.--The
Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market
Development Cooperator Program.
Fortified Poultry-Based Spread.--The Committee notes that
the use of Fortified Poultry-Based Spread [FPBS] for
distribution in food aid programs was recently approved.
Developed as part of the Micronutrient-Fortified Food Aid
Products Pilot Program, FPBS has been found to reduce school
absences due to illness, while improving iron status and
vitamins D and B12 levels. Additionally, the study demonstrated
a larger than expected gain in cognition.
The Committee encourages USDA and USAID to utilize FPBS in
future invitations for bids.
Market Access Program.--The Committee continues the full
mandatory funding for the Market Access Program and expects the
Department to administer the program as authorized in 7 U.S.C.
5623, without changing the eligibility requirements for
participation of cooperative organizations, small businesses,
trade associations, and other entities.
FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE I DIRECT CREDIT AND FOOD FOR PROGRESS PROGRAM
ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $2,528,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 149,000
Committee recommendation................................ 149,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $149,000 for
administrative expenses to continue servicing existing Food for
Peace title I agreements.
FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $1,466,000,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 1,350,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,600,000,000
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 an appropriation of $1,600,000,000
for Food for Peace title II grants.
MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION
PROGRAM GRANTS
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $201,626,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 182,045,000
Committee recommendation................................ 201,626,000
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 $201,626,000
for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program.
Local and Regional Procurement.--The Committee provides an
appropriation of $10,000,000 for efforts to build long-term
agriculture sustainability and establish a local investment in
school feeding programs. With direct U.S. commodity
contributions, projects supported by the McGovern-Dole Food for
Education Program have significantly improved the attendance,
nourishment, and learning capacity of school-aged children in
low-income countries throughout the impoverished world. New
funding authorities would enable school feeding programs to
proactively transition from direct commodity assistance to
locally source agriculture products. The Committee directs the
Secretary to conduct the Local and Regional Food Aid
Procurement Project Program in accordance with the priorities
of the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child
Nutrition Program.
LOCAL AND REGIONAL FOOD AID PROCUREMENT PROJECT PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2016....................................................
Budget estimate, 2017................................... $15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the
Local and Regional Food Aid Procurement Project Program, as
requested in the budget. The Committee instead provides
$10,000,000 for this purpose through the McGovern-Dole
International Food for Education Program.
COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNTP(EXPORT CREDIT
PROGRAMS AND GSM-102)
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guaranteed loan Administrative
levels expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016.................. 5,500,000 6,748
Budget estimate, 2017................. 5,500,000 8,537
Committee recommendation.............. 5,500,000 8,537
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 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 AGENCY 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 blend of
science and law. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments
Act of 2007 [FDAAA] (Public Law 110-85) reaffirmed the
responsibilities of the FDA: to ensure safe and effective
products reach the market in a timely way, and to monitor
products for continued safety while 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, radiological, 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.
In January 2011, the Food Safety Modernization Act was
signed into law. This law enables FDA to better protect public
health by strengthening the food safety system. It enables FDA
to focus more on preventing food safety and feed problems
rather than relying primarily on reacting to problems after
they occur. The law also provides FDA with new enforcement
authorities designed to achieve higher rates of compliance with
prevention- and risk-based food and feed safety standards and
to better respond to and contain problems when they do occur.
The law also gives FDA important new tools to hold imported
food and feed to the same standards as domestic food and feed
and directs FDA to build an integrated national food safety
system in partnership with State and local authorities.
The FDA Drugs programs are comprised of four separate
areas, Human Drugs, Animal Drugs, Medical Devices and
Biologics. FDA is responsible for the lifecycle of products,
including premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human
and animal drugs, medical devices and biological products to
ensure their safety and effectiveness. 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 effective
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, blood products, and other
biologics.
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, and MRIs. Radiological products
include items such as 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
lead to developing methods to improve assessment of human
exposure, susceptibility and risk of those products regulated
by FDA.
In 2009, Congress granted FDA new authority to regulate the
manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products.
FDA exercises this responsibility by protecting the public
health from the health effects of tobacco, setting scientific
standards and standards for tobacco product review, conducting
compliance activities to enforce its authority over tobacco,
and conducting public education and outreach about the health
effects of tobacco products.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation User fees Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2016......... 2,720,808 1,960,584 4,681,392
Budget estimate, 2017........ 2,730,924 2,227,302 4,958,226
Committee recommendation..... 2,759,978 2,025,020 4,784,998
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,759,978,000
for FDA salaries and expenses. The Committee also recommends
$2,025,020,000 in definite user fees, including: $865,653,000
in Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee collections;
$144,859,000 in Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act
user fee collections; and $22,977,000 in Animal Drug User Fee
Act user fee collections; $10,367,000 in Animal Generic Drug
User Fee Act user fee collections; $635,000,000 in Tobacco
Product user fee collections; $324,085,000 in Generic Drug User
Fee Act user fee collections; and $22,079,000 in Biosimilar
User Fee Act user fee collections, as assumed in the
President's budget. The Committee also recommends $58,606,000
in permanent, indefinite user fees, including: $5,300,000 in
Voluntary Qualified Importer Program collections; $1,434,000 in
food and feed recall collections; $6,414,000 in food
reinspection collections; $20,522,000 in Mammography Quality
Standards Act fee collections; $10,062,000 in color
certification collections; $7,686,000 in Pediatric Disease
Priority Review Voucher collections; $1,400,000 in third-party
auditor collections; $1,092,000 in outsourcing facility
collections; and $4,696,000 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 recommendation does not include proposed user
fees for food facility registration and inspection, food
import, food contact substance notification, cosmetics, and
international courier imports. None of these user fee proposals
have been authorized by Congress. The Committee will continue
to monitor any action by the appropriate authorizing Committees
regarding these proposed user fees.
The Committee expects FDA to continue all projects,
activities, laboratories, and programs as included in fiscal
year 2016 unless otherwise specified. The Committee accepts
$13,016,000 in proposed administrative savings; however the
Committee does not support the proposed $3,054,000 reduction to
the National Center for Toxicological Research or the proposed
$5,000,000 reduction to improving foreign high risk
inspections.
The Committee recommendation includes an increase of
$40,275,000 for the implementation of FSMA, which is
$15,000,000 more than the budget request. This includes
increases of $18,762,000 for the National Integrated Food
Safety System and $21,513,000 for Import Safety. Additionally,
the Committee recommendation includes increases of $2,911,000
for animal drug and medical device reviews and $2,000,000 for
precision medicine, as requested in the budget. Increases of
$1,000,000 to evaluate biomarkers for drug development,
$3,000,000 for improved foreign high risk inspections,
$2,000,000 for pediatric device review, and $1,000,000 for
medical device postmarket safety activities are also provided.
The following table reflects the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2016 and budget
request levels:
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2017 budget Committee
2016 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers and related field activities:
Foods.................................................... 987,328 1,012,603 1,027,103
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN]. 303,994 303,994 310,794
Field Activities..................................... 683,334 708,609 716,309
Human Drugs.............................................. 491,503 491,503 492,503
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER]....... 355,296 354,856 356,296
Field Activities..................................... 136,207 136,647 136,207
Biologics................................................ 215,443 215,443 215,443
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER].. 174,052 174,052 174,052
Field Activities..................................... 41,391 41,391 41,391
Animal Drugs............................................. 158,652 161,852 161,352
Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM]................. 94,005 97,205 96,705
Field Activities..................................... 64,647 64,647 64,647
Medical and radiological devices......................... 323,253 325,764 328,764
Center for Devices and Radiological Health........... 240,808 243,319 246,319
Field Activities..................................... 82,445 82,445 82,445
National Center for Toxicological Research............... 63,331 60,277 63,331
Other Activities............................................. 183,087 178,287 186,287
Rent and related activities.................................. 121,528 114,987 114,987
Rental Payments to GSA....................................... 176,683 170,208 170,208
--------------------------------------------------
Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority. 2,720,808 2,730,924 2,759,978
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients.--The Committee is
concerned that the FDA has not yet approved a list of active
pharmaceutical ingredients [APIs] for use by compounding
pharmacists pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act [FDCA]. Within 90 days of the enactment of this act, the
FDA is directed to provide a timeline for when the remaining
substances will be considered, and in the meantime re-consider
its policy with regard to enforcement of the bulk drug
substances provisions under section 503A.
Artisanal Cheese.--While the Committee appreciates the
FDA's willingness to pause enforcement and reevaluate its
standard regarding permissible levels of nontoxigenic E. coli
in raw milk cheese, it remains concerned that this standard was
developed in the absence of any published data from controlled
studies describing either the process or rate of transfer of
bacteria from the environment in the plant to the product.
Therefore, the Committee directs the FDA to continue working
with stakeholders to benefit from their expertise about safe
cheese-making practices to achieve the mutual goal of food
safety, and to provide to the Committee on Appropriations the
results of the ``Surveillance Sampling Program for Raw Milk
Cheese.''
Atypical Actives.--The Committee requests that the FDA
provide an update on how it regulates ``atypical actives.''
Biosimilars.--The Committee directs the FDA to provide no
later than 30 days after enactment an estimated timeline by
which the agency will finalize pending draft biosimilars
guidance documents and an estimated timeline by which the
agency will issue draft guidance on biosimilars topics,
including, interchangeability, for which the agency has not
published draft guidance.
In addition, the Committee recognizes that biosimilars
offer an important opportunity for expanding the market and
reducing costs for patients. The Committee urges the FDA to
conduct outreach to external stakeholders including patient
organizations on educating patients and professionals about
biosimilars, with a focus on populations for which approved
biosimilars are indicated.
Center for Safety and Nutrition Centers of Excellence.--The
Committee is aware of the important contribution of the FDA
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Centers of
Excellence [COEs] program in supporting critical basic research
as well as facilitating the implementation of the FDA Food
Safety Modernization Act. The Committee encourages the Agency
to continue to fully utilize the COEs to accomplish these
goals, and instructs that it enhance its level of support for
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act activities.
Centers of Excellence in Regulatory Science and
Innovation.--The Committee is encouraged by the ongoing
research and collaboration underway at the Centers of
Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation program and
commends the FDA for launching this program in 2011 and
expanding it in 2014. As such, the Committee directs the Office
of the Commissioner to use at least $2,000,000 within existing
funds to provide additional funding opportunities for the
existing CERSI Centers to allow for the capitalization of
ongoing studies and research.
Cosmetics.--The Committee provides not less than
$11,700,000 for cosmetics activities, including not less than
$7,200,000 for the Office of Colors and Cosmetics [OCAC].
Funding for OCAC is for the direct support of the operation,
staffing, compliance, research and international activities
performed by this office.
Cotton Ginning.--The Committee is concerned about the
impact of the ``Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard
Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for
Animals'' final rule (80 FR 56170; September 17, 2015) on the
cotton industry. The Committee notes post-harvest activity of
ginning cotton does not transform the resulting cottonseed into
a ``processed food,'' and thus, cottonseed should fall within
the definition of a ``raw agricultural commodity'' for purposes
of rules promulgated pursuant to the FSMA. In addition, the
Committee is concerned about the rationale for the definitions
of ``primary production farm'' and ``secondary activities
farm'' and how these definitions factor into the determination
of operations either being exempt from or covered by certain
requirements of the final rule. Therefore, the Committee
directs the FDA to provide outreach and technical assistance to
cotton ginning operations to assist them in complying with the
final rule or subsequent guidance documents.
Diabetes.--The Committee applauds the FDA for working with
the diabetes community on clinical outcomes beyond hemoglobin
A1c [HbA1c]. While HbA1c remains a fundamental measurement to
assess the benefit of therapy for diabetes mellitus, regulatory
decisions should be reached using the full range of outcomes
that are important to people with diabetes. The Committee is
pleased that the FDA will be holding a workshop focused on this
topic in 2016 and encourages the Agency to incorporate the
scientific learnings from that workshop into their decision-
making so that important new, safe, and effective medical
therapies can be made available to people with diabetes.
In addition, the Committee recognizes that being able to
identify people at risk of developing type 1 diabetes could
provide an opportunity to delay and eventually prevent the
disease altogether. The appearance of certain islet
autoantibodies in the serum of individuals increases the chance
of developing type 1 diabetes at some point in the future.
Therefore the Committee encourages the FDA to work with the
Type 1 diabetes community on the assessment of potential
diabetes biomarkers related to islet autoimmunity, which might
help inform the design of clinical studies.
Donor Milk Supply.--The Committee is aware of the growing
commercial human milk industry, and its importance to, in
particular, preterm infants. The Committee is also aware that
the FDA has had discussions with the industry regarding the
need for adequate safeguards to ensure the safety and
nutritional quality of the donor human milk supply. The
Committee directs FDA to report on its efforts to implement
regulations to protect a safe and stable human milk supply.
Drug Shortages.--The Committee requests that the FDA report
on how it works with manufacturers to facilitate timely
communication to the field on the availability of drugs in
shortage, as well as its processes for the completion of drug
application reviews and facility inspections during times of or
risk of critical drug shortage.
Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.--The Committee is encouraged
that the FDA has the tools, authorities, and latitude necessary
to review and approve safe and effective treatments for rare
diseases, such as Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, as efficiently
as possible. In particular, the Committee is aware that the use
of intermediate clinical endpoints [ICE] may be an appropriate
approach as they have been in similar deadly diseases with dire
unmet need, such as HIV and cancer.
Drug Vial Sizes.--The Food and Drug Administration is
responsible for approving vial sizes and fill volumes for
injectable drug products before products come to market, in a
manner that balances multiple considerations related to safe
use and administration of the product. In 2015, the FDA issued
guidance documents for industry on this matter. Given that many
factors play a role in FDA's assessment of vial sizes for
injectable drug products, the Committee directs the FDA to
provide a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment with
recommendations on how the FDA may assist in addressing
concerns about appropriate vial sizes and fill volumes from a
safety perspective, to ensure that patients are receiving the
appropriate care.
Experimental Drugs for Terminally-Ill Patients.--The
Committee directs the FDA to report on efforts to increase
patient access to experimental drugs for terminally-ill
patients.
FDA Food Mission.--The Committee requests information on
FDA's current nutrition activities and resources.
Food Contact Notification User Fees.--The Committee
recommendation does not include proposed user fees.
Food Packaging.--The Committee encourages FDA to increase
the involvement of experts in endocrinology as FDA continues to
evaluate the chemical BPA and similar alternatives such as BPS
as it relates to health safety of human exposure through food
packaging. Evaluations shall include specific focus on the
long-term low-dose exposure that these chemicals have on the
endocrine system.
Food Traceability.--The FDA announced two pilot projects on
September 7, 2011 pursuant to section 204 of the Food Safety
Modernization Act, which required pilot projects for improving
product tracing along the food supply system and establishment
of recordkeeping requirements for high-risk foods to help in
tracing products. The pilots were conducted by the Institute of
Food Technologists, in consultation with industry sectors,
USDA, State agencies and consumer groups, and the resulting
report was released on March 4, 2013. The Committee notes that
industry and government continue to pursue their traceability
goals on separate tracks and with little collaboration. The
Committee further notes that no report has been issued pursuant
to section 204(a) of the act, which directs the Secretary to
report to Congress on the findings of the pilot projects, and
the Committee directs the Secretary to issue such report.
Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Secretary has failed
to propose a rulemaking to establish the recordkeeping
requirements as required by section 204(d) of the act. The
Committee directs the FDA to collaborate with science-based
international and industry-led food traceability initiatives of
the type recommended by the pilot projects. In addition, the
Committee directs the Commissioner to make publicly available
information on FDA's efforts to encourage the work of science-
based international and industry-led food traceability
initiatives.
Foreign High Risk Inspections.--The bill provides an
additional $3,000,000 and a total of $8,000,000 for the FDA's
Office of Global Regulatory Operations and Policy to enhance
the compliance of foreign manufacturers and exporters of food,
medical devices and pharmaceuticals through on-site
verification.
Human Tissue Models, Including 3D Models.--The Committee is
aware that bioengineered human tissue models hold the promise
of improving the drug discovery process by enhancing the
ability to predict potential safety risks during preclinical
testing and post market safety of pharmaceutical products,
thereby minimizing the potential risk of adverse toxicological
outcomes to patients during clinical trials and post-approval
use. The Committee directs the Secretary to prepare a report,
with input from the Office of Regulatory Science and Innovation
and the National Center of Toxicology Research, on how to
accelerate adoption of predictive bioengineered human tissue
models when used in combination or in lieu of animal testing
models pre and post market approval. The Committee directs the
Secretary to report recommendations to the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees within 180 days of enactment of this
Act.
In Silico Clinical Trials.--In Silico clinical trials use
computer models and simulations to develop and assess devices
and drugs, including their potential risk to the public, before
being tested in live clinical trials. Advanced computer
modeling can also be used to predict how a drug or device will
behave when deployed in the general population, thereby
protecting the public from the unintended consequences of side
effects and drug interactions. In Silico trials protect public
health, advance personalized treatment and can be executed
quickly and for a fraction of the cost of a full scale live
trial. The FDA has advocated the use of such systems and
utilized them with success in the past. Therefore, the
Committee strongly encourages the FDA to make greater use of In
Silico trials for devices and drug therapies before they are
released for live clinical trials.
In Vitro Clinical Trials.--In vitro clinical trials use
specimens collected from patients to test how a particular
cancer or disease will react to a specific therapy or
combination of therapies. This personalized approach to
treatment can improve a patient's quality of life by increasing
the likelihood that physicians and researchers will find the
proper combination of drugs uniquely suited to treat that
individual's illness. An emerging new scientific methodology,
In Vitro trials allow researchers to test therapeutics and
treatment strategies on living human tissues without the risks
posed by traditional whole patient clinical trials.
Personalized treatment through In Vitro trials dismantles the
``one size fits all'' approach to care and enables medical
professionals to diagnose and treat patients in a more
efficient and effective way. Accordingly, the Committee
strongly encourages the FDA to make greater use of In Vitro
clinical trials for Investigational New Drug applications and
general therapeutic indications, especially as it relates to
complicated cancers and other common disease States.
Listeriosis.--Listeriosis is a serious illness that is
usually caused by eating food contaminated with the bacterium
Listeria monocytogenes. The disease primarily affects older
adults, pregnant women, newborns, and adults with weakened
immune systems. To better understand the risk of listeriosis
associated with the consumption of certain foods, the FDA has
conducted or is conducting risk assessments on ready-to-eat
foods, soft ripened cheeses, smoked finfish, and retail
delicatessens. These risk assessments have been used to protect
and enhance the public health. The FDA uses risk analysis to
ensure that regulatory decisions about foods are science-based
and transparent. For the first time, the consumption of certain
frozen vegetables has been linked to a multi-state outbreak of
listeriosis. Because of this outbreak, the need to protect the
public health, and to ensure science-based and transparent
regulatory decisions, the Committee encourages the FDA to
conduct a quantitative risk assessment of the relative risk to
public health from foodborne Listeria monocytogenes among
frozen vegetables and other frozen foods currently considered
not ready-to-eat.
Mammography Quality Standards Act.--The Committee
recommendation includes full funding as requested for
implementation of the Mammography Quality Standards Act. This
program sets national quality standards for mammography
facilities, equipment, personnel and operating procedures, and
has improved the quality of mammography and made mammograms a
more reliable tool to detect breast cancers.
Medical Devices.--The Committee is concerned about the lack
of transparency and consistency with the medical device
facility inspection process. This often leads to inefficiencies
and inconsistencies in the inspection process. The Committee
urges the agency to work with stakeholders and Congress to
improve the facility inspection process. Potential process
improvements may include, but are not necessarily limited to,
more timely and frequent communications related to inspection
observations and remediation plans, as well as changes to the
way medical device Export Certificates (e.g., Certificate to
Foreign Government, etc.) are affected by FDA Observational
Findings following a facility inspection.
Medical Device Performance.--The Committee is aware that
each year the FDA is required to submit a report to Congress
regarding performance goals for user fees paid by medical
device manufacturers. However, the Committee is concerned that
FDA may not be providing information about how the FDA is
meeting timelines established in law by Congress. The Committee
directs the FDA to provide a report to the Committee within 90
days of the date of enactment including performance information
for statutory timelines for medical devices, specifically: the
number of de novo requests under 513(f)(2) for which FDA has
met the 120 day statutory requirement, and the total number of
de novo requests submitted; the number of requests for
classification under 513(g) and the number for which FDA has
met the 60 day statutory requirement; and, the number of orders
for postmarket device surveillance under 522 for which the FDA
has responded within 60 days of receipt of such plan.
Medical Foods.--The Committee urges the FDA to be more
active in engaging external stakeholders on best practice
standards for medical foods that are based upon the Generally
Recognized as Safe [GRAS] status. The Committee requests the
FDA work with external stakeholders in forming a framework for
a distinct regulatory pathway for medical foods that does not
encumber its progress towards approval for patient use.
Medical Gases.--The Committee is significantly concerned
that FDA has not initiated rulemaking, nor listed such
rulemaking as a priority in the Unified Agenda, to address
numerous longstanding regulatory issues for medical gases
despite the statutory requirement section 1112 in FDASIA
(Public Law 112-144) to issue a final rulemaking addressing all
necessary changes for medical gases by July 9, 2016. The
Committee disagrees with the FDA report to Congress sent on
June 29, 2015, and believes that FDA must address medical gas
regulatory issues with a new rulemaking amending the Federal
drug regulations. Therefore, FDA shall issue final medical gas
regulations as required by FDASIA not later than July 9, 2016.
If FDA determines that it is a more efficient use of resources,
it should incorporate by reference a voluntary consensus
standard by an ANSI-accredited standard development
organization as required by the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-113), and the
Office of Management and Budget [OMB] Circular A-119. If FDA
fails to issue final regulations with respect to medical gases
by the statutory deadline, the Agency shall incorporate by
reference voluntary consensus safety and labeling standards
developed by an ANSI-accredited standard development
organization until such time as the Agency issues final
regulations consistent with section 1112 of Public Law 112-144.
Nanotechnology.--The Committee recognizes the increased
capabilities that FDA has developed to study environment,
health, and safety of nanomaterials within FDA's Jefferson
Laboratory Campus, including the National Center for
Toxicological Research, and its consolidated headquarters at
White Oak, Maryland. The Committee expects FDA to continue to
support collaborative research with universities and industry
on the toxicology of nanotechnology products and processes in
accordance with the National Nanotechnology Initiative
Environment, Health, and Safety Research Strategy as updated in
October 2011.
National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System.--The
Committee recommendation includes $10,800,000 for the National
Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, equal to the level
provided in fiscal year 2016.
Olive Oil.--The Committee directs the FDA to take a
sampling of off-the-shelf olive oil bottles offered for sale to
consumers to determine if it is adulterated with seed oil,
pursuant to Section 342 of the FDCA, and report to Congress
within 270 days on its findings.
Opioid Overdose Prevention.--The Committee is very
concerned about the ongoing prescription opioid abuse epidemic,
and is additionally concerned by FDA's decision in August 2015
to approve OxyContin for pain management in children as young
as 11 years old. As the Agency that oversees the approval of
these drugs, the FDA has a responsibility to consider the
public health impact of opioid abuse and overdose death.
Therefore, the Committee directs FDA to continue implementing
its opioids action plan announced in February 2016 to take
concrete steps toward reducing the impact of opioid abuse on
American families and communities, and to strongly consider the
danger of addiction and overdose death associated with
prescription opioid medications when approving and regulating
the manufacturing, marketing and distribution of opioid
medications. This plan should include policies aimed at
reversing the epidemic while still providing patients access to
effective pain relief. Finally, the FDA is directed to refer
any new drug application for an opioid submitted under section
505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to an
advisory committee for their recommendations prior to approval,
unless the FDA finds that holding such advisory committee
meeting is not in the interest of protecting and promoting
public health.
Oversight Activities.--The Committee recommendation
includes $1,500,000 for the HHS Office of Inspector General
specifically for oversight of FDA activities.
Over-the-Counter Drugs.--The Committee directs the FDA
provide a report on the funding levels put to OTC Monograph
issues for the past 10 years (fiscal year 2006-2016).
Parallel Review Pilot.--The Committee directs the FDA to
report on plans to extend the pilot and steps the agency will
take to encourage more manufacturers to utilize the pilot,
including considerations for manufacturers choosing the 510(k)
clearance pathway and for novel products deemed covered by CMS
but that warrant evaluation to ensure the appropriate level of
coverage.
Patient Focused Drug Development Initiative.--The Committee
applauds FDA's efforts to engage external and patient
stakeholders through FDA's Patient Focused Drug Development
initiative which includes convening disease-specific public
meetings, publication of Voice of the Patient reports for each
meeting, and welcoming stakeholders to conduct externally-led
Patient Focused Drug Development Meetings. The Committee
encourages FDA to continue working with external stakeholders
to develop a strategic action plan in follow up to these
activities.
Pediatric Device Consortia Grants.--The Committee is
pleased that the nine FDA-funded Pediatric Device Consortia
have assisted in the development of more than 650 proposed
pediatric medical devices since its inception in 2009, as well
as promoting job-growth in the healthcare sector, and as such,
continues to support this critical effort. The program funds
consortia to assist innovators in developing medical and
surgical devices designed for the unique needs of children that
often go unmet by devices currently available on the market.
The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for Pediatric
Device Consortia Grants.
Proprietary Information.--The Committee is concerned with
requirements in the Nutrition Facts proposed rule that may
cause some manufacturers to disclose proprietary records.
Therefore, the Committee urges the FDA to ensure that steps are
imposed to protect the security of trade secrets and commercial
confidential information if it is provided to FDA.
Seafood Advisory.--The Committee directs the FDA ensure
that pregnant women receive final guidance on nutrition advice
for what seafood is safe and healthy to consume that is
consistent, understandable, and based on the FDA's latest
scientific review of the net effects of seafood consumption.
Shrimp Imports.--The Committee is concerned the FDA
continues to detect an alarming amount of imported shrimp
raised with hormones, antibiotics, or other drugs not approved
for use in the United States. Therefore, the Committee directs
the FDA to work with Customs and Border Protection [CBP] to
establish a 2-year pilot program to better track shrimp imports
and inspections by port of entry, in order to increase
enforcement and improve food safety. In addition, the Committee
directs the FDA to assist CBP to provide details on
opportunities for enhancing FDA and CBP coordination on
improving the safety of shrimp imports into the U.S., initial,
both for a briefing required of CBP within 180 days and for the
overall pilot program report.
Sodium Guidance.--The Committee is aware that the FDA is
considering issuing guidance to food manufacturers in order to
reduce sodium in various food categories. It is imperative that
any guidance be issued using the latest sound science. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the IOM are
working together to update the Dietary Reference Intake [DRI]
report on sodium. The FDA is encouraged to issue any voluntary
or mandatory guidance based upon an updated DRI report.
Sunscreen Ingredients.--The Committee is significantly
concerned that despite the increase in incidence of skin cancer
in the United States, and the January 2016 Presidential
Memorandum creating the White House Cancer Moonshot Task Force
to prevent and cure cancer, FDA has still not approved a new
over-the-counter sunscreen ingredient through the process
created by the Sunscreen Innovation Act [SIA]. The Committee
has, for multiple years, directed the FDA to clear the
sunscreen backlog, and the agency has failed to do so.
Therefore, the Committee directs the FDA to include it its
report to Congress required by section 4(c) of the SIA by May
26, 2016, an update on how the agency plans to work with
stakeholders to resolve the science-based concerns raised in
public comments and describe how the agency is appropriately
balancing the benefit of additional skin cancer prevention
tools versus the hypothetical risk of OTC sunscreens that have
been used around the world for decades. FDA is further directed
to work with stakeholders to come to an agreement on an
appropriate, science-based testing regimen by June 20, 2016.
The Committee recommendation maintains the funding increase
provided in fiscal year 2016 to address this public health
threat. In addition, the Committee directs the FDA to finalize
a rule limiting the maximum Sun Protection Factor [SPF] to
``50'' or ``50+'', which was first proposed in 2011, within 90
days of enactment of this Act, and to issue a proposed rule to
establish testing and labeling standards for sunscreen sprays
within 90 days of enactment of this act.
Vibrio.--The Committee is aware of the public health
challenge related to the naturally occurring bacteria called
Vibrio parahaemolyticus that can accumulate in shellfish and
believes that more scientific research is necessary to develop
proper controls that will reduce the risk to consumers and
sustain a healthy domestic shellfish industry. The Committee
encourages the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] to increase
funding for research into Vibrio illnesses associated with the
consumption of raw molluscan shellfish, improve risk assessment
models, and develop improved rapid detection methods for
virulent Vibrio strains.
White Oak Expansion.--The Committee is aware of the need
for FDA facilities to accommodate an anticipated expanded
workforce due to broader missions related to food safety and
other mandates in legislation over the last few years. Due to
the challenging fiscal environment, the Committee encourages
the FDA and GSA to consider innovative financing options to
allow for the space allocation required. In particular, the
Committee directs the FDA and GSA to consider partnership
opportunities with non-Federal Government entities that provide
reasonable cost options that will enable the FDA to maintain
very close proximity to its campus headquarters in White Oak,
including space contiguous to the White Oak campus.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $8,788,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 11,788,000
Committee recommendation................................ 11,788,000
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 $11,788,000
for FDA buildings and facilities. This funding shall be used to
upgrade FDA facilities and laboratories which are currently
below public safety standards and incapable of performing
agency requirements.
INDEPENDENT AGENCY
Farm Credit Administration
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2016.................................... $65,600,000
Budget estimate, 2017................................... 69,800,000
Committee recommendation................................ 65,600,000
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 promulgates regulations, 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 $65,600,000 on
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration.
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 gives the Secretary of
Agriculture authority to transfer unobligated balances to the
Working Capital Fund and clarifies longstanding practices
associated with the Fund.
Section 703. This section limits the funding provided in
the bill to 1 year, unless otherwise specified.
Section 704. This section limits negotiated indirect costs
on cooperative agreements between the Department of Agriculture
and nonprofit organizations to 10 percent.
Section 705. 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 706. This section prohibits the purchase of new
information technology equipment in excess of $25,000 without
the prior approval of the Chief Information Officer.
Section 707. This section makes funds for certain
conservation programs available until expended to disburse
certain obligations made in the current fiscal year.
Section 708. This section makes certain former Rural
Utilities Service borrowers eligible for the Rural Economic
Development loan and grant program.
Section 709. This section provides funds for Rural
Development and the Farm Service Agency information technology
expenses.
Section 710. This section includes language regarding
first-class travel.
Section 711. This section includes language regarding the
Commodity Credit Corporation.
Section 712. 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 713. This section includes language regarding the
limitation on direct costs for grants awarded by the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture.
Section 714. This section includes language regarding the
availability of funds for certain Department of Agriculture
programs.
Section 715. This section includes language regarding the
availability of funds for certain Department of Agriculture
programs.
Section 716. This section prohibits the use of funds for
user fee proposals that fail to provide sufficient budget
impact information.
Section 717. 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 718. This section includes language for the
establishment of a fee under the business and industry loan
program.
Section 719. 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 720. This section includes language regarding
prepackaged news.
Section 721. This section requires Department of
Agriculture agencies to provide reimbursement to other
Department of Agriculture agencies for employees detailed for
longer than 60 days.
Section 722. This section includes language regarding
industrial hemp.
Section 723. This section includes language regarding
spending plans.
Section 724. This section provides funding for the
Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers Program.
Section 725. This section includes language regarding
section 502 single family direct loans.
Section 726. This section includes language regarding loans
and loan guarantees.
Section 727. This section includes language regarding
credit card refunds.
Section 728. This section includes language regarding Rural
Economic Area Partnership Zones.
Section 729. This section includes language regarding the
Emergency Community Water Assistance Grant Program.
Section 730. This section includes language regarding the
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.
Section 731. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Utilities Service.
Section 732. This section provides funding to carry out a
program for hardwood trees.
Section 733. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Housing Service.
Section 734. This section includes language regarding
disclosure of information for pharmaceuticals.
Section 735. This section includes language regarding menu
labeling.
Section 736. This section includes language regarding
research exemptions.
Section 737. This section includes language regarding dried
spent grain products.
Section 738. This section includes language regarding the
Water Bank Program.
Section 739. This section includes language regarding
housing programs.
Section 740. This section includes language regarding
partially hydrogenated oils.
Section 741. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Housing Service.
Section 742. This section includes a rescission of funds.
Section 743. This section includes a rescission of funds.
Section 744. This section includes language regarding SNAP
household reporting requirements.
Section 745. This section includes a rescission of
unobligated balances.
Section 746. This section includes funding for the Healthy
Food Financing Initiative.
Section 747. This section includes language regarding
funding information technology activities.
Section 748. This section includes language regarding
funding information technology activities.
Section 749. This section includes language regarding
housing programs.
Section 750. This section includes language regarding
agriculture research.
Section 751. This section includes language regarding the
Agriculture Risk Coverage Program.
Section 752. This section includes language regarding the
SNAP program.
Section 753. This section includes language regarding crab
nomenclature.
Section 754. This section includes language regarding
genetically engineered salmon.
Section 755. This section includes language regarding the
use of funds for certain horse inspection activities.
PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
During fiscal year 2017, 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, Food and
Drug Administration, 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, 2017, and the accompanying Senate
Report.
If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2017 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 2017 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.
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 is filing an original bill, which is not
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the
spirit of full disclosure.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal
year 2017:
Child Nutrition Program State Administrative Expenses
Farmers Market Nutrition Program
Grain Inspection Service
Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants
and Children
Summer Food Service Program
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on May 19, 2016,
the Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill (S.
2956) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other
purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to amendment and
that the bill be consistent with its budget allocation, and
provided that the Chairman of the Committee or the Chairman of
the Subcommittee reporting the original bill be authorized to
offer the substance of the original bill as a Committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute to the House companion
measure, by a recorded vote of 30-0, a quorum being present.
The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Cochran
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Kirk
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Cassidy
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Reed
Mr. Tester
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin
Mr. Murphy
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, 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 italic; and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman.
TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
Chapter 1--School Lunch Programs
Sec. 1769g. Information clearninghouse
(a) In general
* * * * * * *
(d) Funding
Out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the
Secretary to provide to the organization selected under this
section, to establish and maintain the information
clearinghouse, $200,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996,
$150,000 for fiscal year 1997, $100,000 for fiscal year 1998,
$166,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2004, and
$250,000 for each of fiscal years [2010 through 2016] 2010
through 2017. The Secretary shall be entitled to receive the
funds and shall accept the funds, without further
appropriation.
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 in Committee Amount in
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee
allocation for 2017: Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies:
Mandatory........................................... 116,316 116,316 104,824 \1\104,824
Discretionary....................................... 21,250 21,250 22,103 \1\22,102
Security........................................ ............ ............ ............ NA
Nonsecurity..................................... 21,250 21,250 NA NA
Projections of outlays associated with the
recommendation:
2017................................................ ............ ............ ............ \2\112,042
2018................................................ ............ ............ ............ 5,146
2019................................................ ............ ............ ............ 1,104
2020................................................ ............ ............ ............ 425
2021 and future years............................... ............ ............ ............ 328
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 40,600 NA \2\33,574
2017...................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2017
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2016 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2016
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Production, Processing, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
Office of the Secretary............................................ 5,051 10,178 10,178 +5,127 ...............
Office of Tribal Relations......................................... 502 755 505 +3 -250
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination............. 1,496 1,592 1,592 +96 ...............
Office of Advocacy and Outreach.................................... 1,209 11,220 4,220 +3,011 -7,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration............... 804 807 807 +3 ...............
Departmental Administration........................................ 25,124 27,420 25,396 +272 -2,024
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Departmental Administration........................ 25,928 28,227 26,203 +275 -2,024
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations...... 3,869 3,919 3,919 +50 ...............
Office of Communications........................................... 7,500 8,512 7,533 +33 -979
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Secretary............................... 45,555 64,403 54,150 +8,595 -10,253
====================================================================================
Executive Operations:
Office of the Chief Economist.................................. 17,777 17,592 16,917 -860 -675
National Appeals Division...................................... 13,317 13,481 13,481 +164 ...............
Office of Budget and Program Analysis.......................... 9,392 9,525 9,525 +133 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Executive Operations............................... 40,486 40,598 39,923 -563 -675
Office of the Chief Information Officer............................ 44,538 65,716 49,917 +5,379 -15,799
Office of the Chief Financial Officer.............................. 6,028 9,119 8,119 +2,091 -1,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights................. 898 901 901 +3 ...............
Office of Civil Rights............................................. 24,070 24,750 24,342 +272 -408
Building and Facilities Agriculture buildings and facilities....... 64,189 84,365 74,365 +10,176 -10,000
Hazardous materials management..................................... 3,618 3,633 3,633 +15 ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................ 95,738 100,998 99,378 +3,640 -1,620
Office of the General Counsel...................................... 44,383 49,599 45,010 +627 -4,589
Office of Ethics................................................... 3,654 4,617 3,715 +61 -902
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental Administration........................... 373,157 448,699 403,453 +30,296 -45,246
====================================================================================
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and 893 901 901 +8 ...............
Economics.........................................................
Economic Research Service.......................................... 85,373 91,278 86,757 +1,384 -4,521
National Agricultural Statistics Service........................... 168,443 176,639 169,639 +1,196 -7,000
Census of Agriculture.......................................... (42,177) (42,177) (42,177) ............... ...............
Agricultural Research Service:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 1,143,825 1,161,340 1,177,938 +34,113 +16,598
Buildings and facilities....................................... 212,101 94,500 64,300 -147,801 -30,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Research Service......................... 1,355,926 1,255,840 1,242,238 -113,688 -13,602
====================================================================================
National Institute of Food and Agriculture:
National Institute of Food and Agriculture (Leg. proposal)..... ............... 1,373,974 ............... ............... -1,373,974
Research and education activities.............................. 819,685 ............... 851,496 +31,811 +851,496
Native American Institutions Endowment Fund.................... (11,880) (11,880) (11,880) ............... ...............
Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities ............... (10,000) (10,000) (+10,000) ...............
Endowment Fund................................................
Extension activities........................................... 475,891 ............... 476,230 +339 +476,230
Integrated activities.......................................... 30,900 ............... 36,000 +5,100 +36,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Institute of Food and Agriculture............ 1,326,476 1,373,974 1,363,726 +37,250 -10,248
====================================================================================
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs 893 901 901 +8 ...............
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 894,415 901,196 939,286 +44,871 +38,090
Buildings and facilities....................................... 3,175 3,175 3,175 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service............ 897,590 904,371 942,461 +44,871 +38,090
====================================================================================
Agricultural Marketing Service:
Marketing Services............................................. 81,223 81,933 82,933 +1,710 +1,000
Standardization activities (user fees)..................... (65,000) (65,000) (65,000) ............... ...............
(Limitation on administrative expenses, from fees collected)... (60,982) (61,227) (61,227) (+245) ...............
Funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (Section
32):
Permanent, Section 32...................................... 1,303,000 1,322,001 1,322,001 +19,001 ...............
Marketing agreements and orders (transfer from section (20,489) (20,705) (20,705) (+216) ...............
32)...................................................
Payments to States and Possessions............................. 1,235 1,235 1,235 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Marketing Service program................ 1,446,440 1,466,396 1,467,396 +20,956 +1,000
====================================================================================
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 43,057 43,482 43,482 +425 ...............
Limitation on inspection and weighing services................. (55,000) (57,500) (57,500) (+2,500) ...............
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety...................... 816 819 819 +3 ...............
Food Safety and Inspection Service................................. 1,014,871 1,030,405 1,033,806 +18,935 +3,401
Lab accreditation fees......................................... (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Production, Processing, and Marketing................. 6,652,953 6,732,478 6,694,352 +41,399 -38,126
====================================================================================
Farm Assistance Programs
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 898 901 901 +3 ...............
Services..........................................................
Farm Service Agency:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 1,200,180 1,209,751 1,210,412 +10,232 +661
(Transfer from Food for Peace (Public Law 480))................ (2,528) (149) (149) (-2,379) ...............
(Transfer from export loans)................................... (354) (2,463) (2,463) (+2,109) ...............
(Transfer from ACIF)........................................... (306,998) (306,998) (306,998) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, transfers from program accounts.................... (309,880) (309,610) (309,610) (-270) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses................................. (1,510,060) (1,519,361) (1,520,022) (+9,962) (+661)
====================================================================================
State mediation grants......................................... 3,404 3,404 3,904 +500 +500
Grassroots source water protection program..................... 6,500 ............... 6,500 ............... +6,500
Dairy indemnity program........................................ 500 500 500 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Farm Service Agency................................ 1,210,584 1,213,655 1,221,316 +10,732 +7,661
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund [ACIF] Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Farm ownership loans:
Direct............................................. (1,500,000) (1,500,000) (1,500,000) ............... ...............
Guaranteed......................................... (2,000,000) (2,000,000) (2,000,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... (3,500,000) (3,500,000) (3,500,000) ............... ...............
Farm operating loans:
Direct............................................. (1,252,004) (1,460,047) (1,460,047) (+208,043) ...............
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ (1,393,443) (1,432,430) (1,432,430) (+38,987) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... (2,645,447) (2,892,477) (2,892,477) (+247,030) ...............
Emergency loans........................................ (34,667) (22,576) (22,576) (-12,091) ...............
Indian tribe land acquisition loans.................... (2,000) (20,000) (20,000) (+18,000) ...............
Conservation loans:
Guaranteed......................................... (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) ............... ...............
Indian highly fractionated land loans.................. (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) ............... ...............
Boll weevil eradication loans.......................... (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (6,402,114) (6,655,053) (6,655,053) (+252,939) ...............
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies:
Farm ownership loans:
Direct............................................. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Farm operating loans:
Direct............................................. 53,961 62,198 62,198 +8,237 ...............
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ 14,352 15,327 15,327 +975 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... 68,313 77,525 77,525 +9,212 ...............
Emergency loans........................................ 1,262 1,262 1,262 ............... ...............
Individual development account grants.................. ............... 1,500 1,500 +1,500 ...............
Indian highly fractionated land loans.................. ............... 2,550 2,550 +2,550 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants..................... 69,575 82,837 82,837 +13,262 ...............
====================================================================================
ACIF administrative expenses:
Salaries and expenses (transfer to FSA)............ 306,998 306,998 306,998 ............... ...............
Administrative expenses............................ 7,920 10,070 10,070 +2,150 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, ACIF expenses............................. 314,918 317,068 317,068 +2,150 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund............ 384,493 399,905 399,905 +15,412 ...............
(Loan authorization)............................... (6,402,114) (6,655,053) (6,655,053) (+252,939) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Farm Service Agency........................... 1,595,077 1,613,560 1,621,221 +26,144 +7,661
====================================================================================
Risk Management Agency:
RMA Salaries and expenses...................................... 74,829 66,615 75,750 +921 +9,135
FCIC user fee (transfer) (Leg. proposal)....................... ............... (20,000) ............... ............... (-20,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Risk Management Agency............................. 74,829 86,615 75,750 +921 -10,865
====================================================================================
Total, Farm Assistance Programs.............................. 1,670,804 1,681,076 1,697,872 +27,068 +16,796
====================================================================================
Corporations
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation:
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation fund........................ 7,870,934 8,849,090 8,849,090 +978,156 ...............
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund:
Reimbursement for net realized losses.......................... 6,871,132 13,476,854 13,476,854 +6,605,722 ...............
Hazardous waste management (limitation on expenses)............ (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Corporations.......................................... 14,742,066 22,325,944 22,325,944 +7,583,878 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, Title I, Agricultural Programs........................ 23,065,823 30,739,498 30,718,168 +7,652,345 -21,330
(By transfer)............................................ (330,369) (330,315) (330,315) (-54) ...............
(Loan authorization)..................................... (6,402,114) (6,655,053) (6,655,053) (+252,939) ...............
(Limitation on administrative expenses).................. (120,982) (123,727) (123,727) (+2,745) ...............
====================================================================================
TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment 898 901 901 +3 ...............
Natural Resources Conservation Service:
Conservation Operations........................................ 850,856 860,374 864,474 +13,618 +4,100
Farm Security and Rural Investment program (Transfer ............... (1,033,983) ............... ............... (-1,033,983)
authority)................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Conservation operations........................... 850,856 1,894,357 864,474 +13,618 -1,029,883
====================================================================================
Watershed flood and prevention operations...................... ............... ............... 150,000 +150,000 +150,000
Watershed rehabilitation program............................... 12,000 ............... ............... -12,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Natural Resources Conservation Service................ 862,856 860,374 1,014,474 +151,618 +154,100
====================================================================================
Total, Title II, Conservation Programs....................... 863,754 861,275 1,015,375 +151,621 +154,100
====================================================================================
TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development................ 893 896 896 +3 ...............
Rural Development:
Rural development expenses:
Salaries and expenses...................................... 225,835 230,679 226,283 +448 -4,396
(Transfer from RHIF)....................................... (417,854) (426,821) (417,854) ............... (-8,967)
(Transfer from RDLFP)...................................... (4,468) (4,564) (4,468) ............... (-96)
(Transfer from RETLP)...................................... (34,707) (36,451) (34,707) ............... (-1,744)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Transfers from program accounts................ (457,029) (467,836) (457,029) ............... (-10,807)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural development expenses........................ (682,864) (698,515) (683,312) (+448) (-15,203)
====================================================================================
Rural Housing Service:
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Single family direct (Sec. 502)........................ (900,000) (900,000) (900,000) ............... ...............
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ (24,000,000) (24,000,000) (24,000,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Single family.......................... (24,900,000) (24,900,000) (24,900,000) ............... ...............
Housing repair (Sec. 504).............................. (26,278) (26,277) (26,278) ............... (+1)
Rental housing (Sec. 515).............................. (28,398) (33,074) (40,000) (+11,602) (+6,926)
Multi-family housing guarantees (Sec. 538)............. (150,000) (230,000) (230,000) (+80,000) ...............
Site development loans (Sec. 524)...................... (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ............... ...............
Single family housing credit sales..................... (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) ............... ...............
Self-help housing land develop. (Sec. 523)............. (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ............... ...............
Farm Labor Housing (Sec.514)........................... (23,855) (23,857) (23,857) (+2) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (25,148,531) (25,233,208) (25,240,135) (+91,604) (+6,927)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies:
Single family direct (Sec. 502)........................ 60,750 60,930 60,930 +180 ...............
Housing repair (Sec. 504).............................. 3,424 3,663 3,663 +239 ...............
Rental housing (Sec. 515).............................. 8,414 9,790 11,840 +3,426 +2,050
Site development loans (Sec. 524) (Leg. proposal)...... ............... 111 111 +111 ...............
Farm labor housing (Sec.514)........................... 6,789 7,052 7,052 +263 ...............
Self-help land dev. housing loans (Sec. 523) (Leg. ............... 417 417 +417 ...............
proposal).............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies................................ 79,377 81,963 84,013 +4,636 +2,050
====================================================================================
Farm labor housing grants.............................. 8,336 8,336 8,336 ............... ...............
RHIF administrative expenses (transfer to RD).......... 417,854 426,821 417,854 ............... -8,967
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Housing Insurance Fund program.......... 505,567 517,120 510,203 +4,636 -6,917
(Loan authorization)............................... (25,148,531) (25,233,208) (25,240,135) (+91,604) (+6,927)
====================================================================================
Rental assistance program:
Rental assistance (Sec. 521)............................... 1,389,695 1,405,033 1,405,033 +15,338 ...............
Multi-Family Housing Revitalization Program Account:
Rural housing voucher program.................................. 15,000 18,000 18,000 +3,000 ...............
Multi-family housing revitalization program.................... 22,000 19,362 22,000 ............... +2,638
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Multi-family housing revitalization................... 37,000 37,362 40,000 +3,000 +2,638
====================================================================================
Mutual and self-help housing grants............................ 27,500 18,493 27,500 ............... +9,007
Rural housing assistance grants................................ 32,239 28,701 32,239 ............... +3,538
Rural Community Facilities Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Community facility:
Direct............................................. (2,200,000) (2,200,000) (2,200,000) ............... ...............
Guaranteed......................................... (148,305) ............... (156,250) (+7,945) (+156,250)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations....................... (2,348,305) (2,200,000) (2,356,250) (+7,945) (+156,250)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Community facility:
Guaranteed......................................... 3,500 ............... 3,500 ............... +3,500
Grants............................................. 25,000 25,000 25,000 ............... ...............
Rural community development initiative................. 4,000 4,000 4,000 ............... ...............
Economic impact initiative grants...................... 5,778 ............... 5,778 ............... +5,778
Tribal college grants.................................. 4,000 8,000 4,000 ............... -4,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, RCFP Loan subsidies and grants................ 42,278 37,000 42,278 ............... +5,278
====================================================================================
Subtotal, grants and payments................................ 102,017 84,194 102,017 ............... +17,823
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Housing Service................................. 2,034,279 2,043,709 2,057,253 +22,974 +13,544
(Loan authorization)..................................... (27,496,836) (27,433,208) (27,596,385) (+99,549) (+163,177)
====================================================================================
Rural Business--Cooperative Service:
Rural Business Program Account:
(Guaranteed business and industry loans)................... (919,765) (892,244) (919,765) ............... (+27,521)
Loan subsidies and grants:
Guaranteed business and industry subsidy............... 35,687 35,779 36,883 +1,196 +1,104
Rural business development grants.................. 24,000 30,000 24,000 ............... -6,000
Demonstration Projects (rural child poverty) (Leg. ............... 20,000 ............... ............... -20,000
proposal).........................................
Data Alignment (rural child poverty) (Leg. ............... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000
proposal).........................................
Delta regional authority........................... 3,000 ............... 3,000 ............... +3,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, RBP loan subsidies and grants............. 62,687 90,779 63,883 +1,196 -26,896
====================================================================================
Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account:
(Loan authorization)....................................... (18,889) (18,889) (18,889) ............... ...............
Loan subsidy............................................... 5,217 5,476 5,476 +259 ...............
Administrative expenses (transfer to RD)................... 4,468 4,564 4,468 ............... -96
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, IRP Fund.......................................... 9,685 10,040 9,944 +259 -96
====================================================================================
Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account:
(Loan authorization)....................................... (33,077) (85,000) (33,077) ............... (-51,923)
Limit cushion of credit interest spending.................. (179,000) (151,487) (165,000) (-14,000) (+13,513)
(Rescission)........................................... -179,000 -151,487 -165,000 +14,000 -13,513
Rural Cooperative Development Grants:
Cooperative development.................................... 5,800 6,000 5,800 ............... -200
Appropriate technology transfer for rural areas............ 2,500 2,500 2,750 +250 +250
Grants to assist minority producers........................ 3,000 3,000 3,000 ............... ...............
Value-added agricultural product market development........ 10,750 10,750 10,750 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Cooperative development grants.............. 22,050 22,250 22,300 +250 +50
====================================================================================
Rural Microenterprise Investment Program Account (Leg.
proposal):
(Loan authorization)....................................... ............... (23,419) ............... ............... (-23,419)
Loan subsidies and grants.................................. ............... 4,904 ............... ............... -4,904
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Microenterprise Investment.................. ............... 4,904 ............... ............... -4,904
====================================================================================
Rural Energy for America Program (Loan authorization).......... (7,576) (75,754) (7,576) ............... (-68,178)
Loan subsidy and grants.................................... 500 3,515 352 -148 -3,163
Grants..................................................... ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Energy for America Program.................. 500 18,515 352 -148 -18,163
====================================================================================
Rural Business Investment Program Account (Leg. proposal):
(Loan authorization)....................................... ............... (20,600) ............... ............... (-20,600)
Loan subsidy............................................... ............... 2,577 ............... ............... -2,577
Grants..................................................... ............... 4,000 ............... ............... -4,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Business Investment Program................. ............... 6,577 ............... ............... -6,577
====================================================================================
Healthy Foods Financing Initiative (Leg. proposal):
Grants..................................................... ............... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Healthy Foods, Healthy Neighborhoods.............. ............... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Business--Cooperative Service................... -84,078 2,578 -68,521 +15,557 -71,099
(Loan authorization)..................................... (979,307) (1,115,906) (979,307) ............... (-136,599)
====================================================================================
Rural Utilities Service:
Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Direct................................................. (1,200,000) (803,802) (1,200,000) ............... (+396,198)
Guaranteed............................................. (50,000) ............... (50,000) ............... (+50,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorization............................ 1,250,000 803,802 1,250,000 ............... +446,198
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Direct subsidy......................................... 31,320 34,885 52,080 +20,760 +17,195
Guaranteed subsidy..................................... 275 ............... 240 -35 +240
Water and waste revolving fund......................... 1,000 500 1,000 ............... +500
Water well system grants............................... 993 500 993 ............... +493
Colonias and AK/HI grants.............................. 64,000 42,544 66,500 +2,500 +23,956
Water and waste technical assistance................... 20,000 13,930 20,000 ............... +6,070
Circuit rider program.................................. 16,397 13,000 16,897 +500 +3,897
Solid waste management grants.......................... 4,000 1,000 4,000 ............... +3,000
High energy cost grants................................ 10,000 ............... 10,000 ............... +10,000
Water and waste disposal grants........................ 364,380 350,234 364,380 ............... +14,146
306A(i)(2) grants...................................... 10,000 5,000 10,000 ............... +5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants..................... 522,365 461,593 546,090 +23,725 +84,497
====================================================================================
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program
Account:
Loan authorizations:
Electric:
Direct, FFB........................................ (5,500,000) (6,500,000) (5,500,000) ............... (-1,000,000)
Guaranteed underwriting............................ (750,000) ............... (750,000) ............... (+750,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Electric............................... (6,250,000) (6,500,000) (6,250,000) ............... (-250,000)
Telecommunications:
Direct, Treasury rate.............................. (346,667) (345,056) (345,000) (-1,667) (-56)
Direct, FFB........................................ (345,000) (345,000) (345,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Telecommunications..................... (691,667) (690,056) (690,000) (-1,667) (-56)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations....................... (6,941,667) (7,190,056) (6,940,000) (-1,667) (-250,056)
====================================================================================
Loan Subsidy:
Telecommunications Direct, Treasury Rate........... 104 3,071 3,071 +2,967 ...............
Loan modifcations (Leg. proposal).................. ............... 11,000 ............... ............... -11,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies............................ 104 14,071 3,071 +2,967 -11,000
RETLP administrative expenses (transfer to RD)............. 34,707 36,451 34,707 ............... -1,744
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans 34,811 50,522 37,778 +2,967 -12,744
Program Account.........................................
(Loan authorization)............................... (6,941,667) (7,190,056) (6,940,000) (-1,667) (-250,056)
====================================================================================
Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program:
Loan authorizations:
Broadband telecommunications........................... (20,576) ............... (27,043) (+6,467) (+27,043)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (20,576) ............... (27,043) (+6,467) (+27,043)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Distance learning and telemedicine:
Grants............................................. 22,000 34,950 22,000 ............... -12,950
Broadband telecommunications:
Direct............................................. 4,500 ............... 4,500 ............... +4,500
Grants............................................. 10,372 39,492 10,372 ............... -29,120
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants................. 36,872 74,442 36,872 ............... -37,570
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Utilities Service............................... 594,048 586,557 620,740 +26,692 +34,183
(Loan authorization)..................................... (8,212,243) (7,993,858) (8,217,043) (+4,800) (+223,185)
====================================================================================
Total, Title III, Rural Development Programs................. 2,770,977 2,864,419 2,836,651 +65,674 -27,768
(By transfer)............................................ (457,029) (467,836) (457,029) ............... (-10,807)
(Loan authorization)..................................... (36,688,386) (36,542,972) (36,792,735) (+104,349) (+249,763)
====================================================================================
TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer 811 814 814 +3 ...............
Services..........................................................
Food and Nutrition Service:
Child nutrition programs....................................... 22,108,746 23,148,733 23,148,733 +1,039,987 ...............
School breakfast program equipment grants.................. 25,000 35,000 30,000 +5,000 -5,000
Demonstration projects (Summer EBT)........................ 16,000 26,000 23,000 +7,000 -3,000
Summer Food Service Program (Leg. proposal)................ ............... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000
Direct Certification (Leg. proposal)....................... ............... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000
Child Nutrition State Exchange Activities (Leg. proposal).. ............... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Child nutrition programs.......................... 22,149,746 23,230,733 23,201,733 +1,051,987 -29,000
====================================================================================
Special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and 6,350,000 6,350,000 6,350,000 ............... ...............
children (WIC)................................................
Supplemental nutrition assistance program:
(Food stamp program)....................................... 77,848,385 76,681,170 76,681,170 -1,167,215 ...............
Reserve................................................ 3,000,000 5,000,000 3,000,000 ............... -2,000,000
FDPIR nutrition education services..................... 998 998 998 ............... ...............
National food consumption survey (Leg. proposal)....... ............... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000
Traditional and Local Foods Demonstration Project (Leg. ............... 2,000 ............... ............... -2,000
proposal).............................................
Fiscal Year 2018 (first quarter) (Leg. proposal)....... ............... 19,647,500 ............... ............... -19,647,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Food stamp program............................ 80,849,383 101,336,668 79,682,168 -1,167,215 -21,654,500
====================================================================================
Commodity Assistance Program:
Commodity supplemental food program........................ 222,198 236,120 236,120 +13,922 ...............
Farmers market nutrition program........................... 18,548 16,548 16,548 -2,000 ...............
Emergency food assistance program.......................... 54,401 59,401 59,401 +5,000 ...............
Pacific island and disaster assistance..................... 1,070 1,070 1,070 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Commodity assistance program...................... 296,217 313,139 313,139 +16,922 ...............
====================================================================================
Nutrition programs administration.............................. 150,824 179,447 173,274 +22,450 -6,173
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Food and Nutrition Service............................ 109,796,170 131,409,987 109,720,314 -75,856 -21,689,673
Fiscal Year 2017................................... (109,796,170) (111,762,487) (109,720,314) (-75,856) (-2,042,173)
====================================================================================
Total, Title IV, Domestic Food Programs...................... 109,796,981 131,410,801 109,721,128 -75,853 -21,689,673
Fiscal Year 2017................................... (109,796,170) (111,762,487) (109,720,314) (-75,856) (-2,042,173)
====================================================================================
TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Foreign Agricultural Service
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 191,566 196,571 196,571 +5,005 ...............
(Transfer from export loans)................................... (6,394) (6,074) (6,074) (-320) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses................................. 197,960 202,645 202,645 +4,685 ...............
====================================================================================
Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress Program
Account, Administrative Expenses:
Farm Service Agency, Salaries and expenses (transfer to FSA)... 2,528 149 149 -2,379 ...............
Food for Peace Title II Grants:
Expenses....................................................... 1,466,000 1,350,000 1,600,000 +134,000 +250,000
Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program Account
(administrative expenses):
Salaries and expenses (Export Loans):
Foreign Agriculture Service, S&E; (transfer to FAS)......... 6,394 6,074 6,074 -320 ...............
Farm Service Agency S&E; (transfer to FSA).................. 354 2,463 2,463 +2,109 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, CCC Export Loans Program Account.................. 6,748 8,537 8,537 +1,789 ...............
====================================================================================
McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition 201,626 182,045 201,626 ............... +19,581
program grants....................................................
Local and Regional Food Aid Procurement Program (Leg. proposal).... ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
====================================================================================
Total, Title V, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs...... 1,868,468 1,752,302 2,006,883 +138,415 +254,581
(By transfer)............................................ (6,394) (6,074) (6,074) (-320) ...............
====================================================================================
TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Salaries and expenses, direct appropriation........................ 2,720,808 2,730,924 2,759,978 +39,170 +29,054
Prescription drug user fees.................................... (851,481) (865,653) (865,653) (+14,172) ...............
Medical device user fees....................................... (137,677) (144,859) (144,859) (+7,182) ...............
Human generic drug user fees................................... (318,363) (324,085) (324,085) (+5,722) ...............
Biosimilar biological products user fees....................... (21,540) (22,079) (22,079) (+539) ...............
Animal drug user fees.......................................... (22,818) (22,977) (22,977) (+159) ...............
Animal generic drug user fees.................................. (9,705) (10,367) (10,367) (+662) ...............
Tobacco product user fees...................................... (599,000) (635,000) (635,000) (+36,000) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, user fees, enacted and definite.................... (1,960,584) (2,025,020) (2,025,020) (+64,436) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal (including user fees)............................... (4,681,392) (4,755,944) (4,784,998) (+103,606) (+29,054)
Mammography user fees.......................................... (20,109) (20,522) (20,522) (+413) ...............
Export and color certification user fees....................... (13,835) (14,758) (14,758) (+923) ...............
Food and Feed Recall user fees................................. (1,434) (1,434) (1,434) ............... ...............
Food Reinspection fees......................................... (6,414) (6,414) (6,414) ............... ...............
Voluntary qualified importer program fees...................... (5,300) (5,300) (5,300) ............... ...............
Pharmacy compounding fees (CBO estimate)....................... (1,000) ............... ............... (-1,000) ...............
Priority review vouchers (PRV) pediatirc disease............... (7,686) (7,686) (7,686) ............... ...............
Third pary auditor............................................. (1,400) (1,400) (1,400) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, FDA user fees...................................... (2,017,762) (2,082,534) (2,082,534) (+64,772) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, FDA (including user fees).......................... (4,738,570) (4,813,458) (4,842,512) (+103,942) (+29,054)
FDA New User Fees (Leg. proposals):
Export and color certification user fees cap increase (Leg. ............... (4,280) ............... ............... (-4,280)
proposal).................................................
Food Inspection and Facility Registration user fees........ ............... (61,252) ............... ............... (-61,252)
Food import user fees...................................... ............... (105,289) ............... ............... (-105,289)
International courier user fees............................ ............... (6,038) ............... ............... (-6,038)
Cosmetic user fees......................................... ............... (20,230) ............... ............... (-20,230)
Food contact substance notification user fees.............. ............... (5,193) ............... ............... (-5,193)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, FDA new user fees (Leg. Proposals)............. ............... (202,282) ............... ............... (-202,282)
Buildings and facilities........................................... 8,788 11,788 11,788 +3,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, FDA (w/user fees, including proposals)................ (4,747,358) (5,027,528) (4,854,300) (+106,942) (-173,228)
Total, FDA (w/enacted user fees only)........................ (4,747,358) (4,829,526) (4,854,300) (+106,942) (+24,774)
Total, FDA (excluding user fees)............................. 2,729,596 2,742,712 2,771,766 +42,170 +29,054
====================================================================================
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Farm Credit Administration (limitation on administrative expenses). (65,600) (69,800) (65,600) ............... (-4,200)
====================================================================================
Total, Title VI, Related Agencies and Food and Drug 2,729,596 2,742,712 2,771,766 +42,170 +29,054
Administration..............................................
====================================================================================
TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Limit Dam Rehab (Sec. 714(1))...................................... -68,000 ............... -63,000 +5,000 -63,000
(rescission)................................................... ............... -54,000 ............... ............... +54,000
Limit Environmental Quality Incentives Program (Sec. 714(2))....... -209,000 ............... -189,000 +20,000 -189,000
Limit Environmental Quality Incentives Program Fiscal Year 2016 ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
(Sec. 714 (2)) (rescission).......................................
Limit Biomass Crop Assistance Program (Sec. 714(3))................ -20,000 ............... -20,000 ............... -20,000
Limit Biorefinery Assistance (Sec. 714(4))......................... -19,000 ............... ............... +19,000 ...............
Limit Conservation Stewardship Program (Sec. 714 (5)).............. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Limit Ag Management Assistance (Sec. 714 (6))...................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Limit fruit and vegetable program (Sec. 715)....................... -125,000 -125,000 -125,000 ............... ...............
Section 32 (Sec. 715) (rescission)................................. -216,000 -311,000 -237,000 -21,000 +74,000
APHIS B&F--Fruit; Fly Rearing (Sec. 743)............................ ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
WIC (rescission) (Sec. 745)........................................ ............... ............... -200,000 -200,000 -200,000
TEFAP (Sec. 748)................................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Ebola/Zika Funding (Sec. 752)...................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Emergency Watershed Protection Program (Sec. 753).................. 120,000 ............... ............... -120,000 ...............
Citrus Greening (Sec. 757)......................................... 5,500 ............... ............... -5,500 ...............
RD balances (Sec. 758) (rescission)................................ ............... -4,221 -4,221 -4,221 ...............
Healthy Food Financing Initiative.................................. ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
FSA, CCE (rescission).............................................. -1,000 ............... ............... +1,000 ...............
RD unobligated balances (rescission)............................... -13,000 ............... ............... +13,000 ...............
Marketing Certificate CHIMP........................................ 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000 ...............
Watershed Flood and Prevention Program (rescission)................ -20,000 ............... ............... +20,000 ...............
Emergency Watershed................................................ 2,000 ............... ............... -2,000 ...............
Hardwood Trees (Reforestation Pilot Program)....................... 600 ............... 600 ............... +600
Water Bank program................................................. 4,000 ............... 4,000 ............... +4,000
Geographic Disadvantaged farmers................................... 1,996 ............... 1,996 ............... +1,996
Emergency Forest Restoration Program............................... 4,000 ............... ............... -4,000 ...............
Emergency Conservation Program..................................... 17,000 ............... ............... -17,000 ...............
Emergency Watershed Protection (disaster relief category).......... 37,000 ............... ............... -37,000 ...............
Emergency Forestry Restoration Program (disaster relief category).. 2,000 ............... ............... -2,000 ...............
Emergency Conservation Program (disaster relief category).......... 91,000 ............... ............... -91,000 ...............
NAM Study.......................................................... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000 ...............
Summer EBT......................................................... 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
School Equipment Grants............................................ 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000 ...............
Food for Peace..................................................... 250,000 ............... ............... -250,000 ...............
Rural Energy Savings Program....................................... 8,000 ............... 8,000 ............... +8,000
Maturing mortgage pilot............................................ ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
FSA ARC pilot...................................................... ............... ............... 5,000 +5,000 +5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Title VII, General Provisions......................... -129,904 -494,221 -816,625 -686,721 -322,404
====================================================================================
Grand total.................................................. 140,965,695 169,876,786 148,253,346 +7,287,651 -21,623,440
Appropriations fiscal year 2017.......................... (141,264,695) (150,749,994) (148,859,567) (+7,594,872) (-1,890,427)
Emergency appropriations................................. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Disaster relief.......................................... (130,000) ............... ............... (-130,000) ...............
Rescissions.............................................. (-429,000) (-520,708) (-606,221) (-177,221) (-85,513)
Advance appropriations, Fiscal Year 2017................. ............... (19,647,500) ............... ............... (-19,647,500)
(By transfer).............................................. (793,792) (804,225) (793,418) (-374) (-10,807)
(Loan authorization)....................................... (43,090,500) (43,198,025) (43,447,788) (+357,288) (+249,763)
(Limitation on administrative expenses).................... (186,582) (193,527) (189,327) (+2,745) (-4,200)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[all]
