Calendar No. 155 112TH CONGRESS " 1st Session SENATE ! REPORT 112–73 AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 SEPTEMBER 7, 2011.—Ordered to be printed Mr. KOHL, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H.R. 2112] The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the bill (H.R. 2112) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, reports the same with an amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass. New obligational authority Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $136,955,373,000 Amount of 2011 appropriations ............................... 130,559,669,000 Amount of 2012 budget estimate ............................ 132,278,780,000 Amount of House allowance .................................... 125,359,837,000 Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 2011 appropriations .......................................... ∂6,395,704,000 2012 budget estimate ........................................ ∂4,676,593,000 House allowance ................................................ ∂11,595,536,000 68–117 PDF CONTENTS Page Breakdown by Title ................................................................................................. Summary of the Bill: Overview and Summary of the Bill ................................................................. Reports to Congress .......................................................................................... Title I: Agricultural Programs: Production, Processing, and Marketing: Office of the Secretary ....................................................................... Office of Tribal Relations ................................................................... Healthy Food Financing Initiative ................................................... Executive Operations ......................................................................... Office of the Chief Information Officer ............................................. Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights ........................... Office of Civil Rights .......................................................................... Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration ...................... Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments ........... Hazardous Materials Management .................................................. Departmental Administration ........................................................... Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations ....... Office of Communications .................................................................. Office of Inspector General ................................................................ Office of the General Counsel ........................................................... Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics .............................................................................................. Economic Research Service ............................................................... National Agricultural Statistics Service .......................................... Agricultural Research Service ........................................................... National Institute of Food and Agriculture ..................................... Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs ............................................................................................... Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service .................................. Agricultural Marketing Service ........................................................ Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration ............ Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety ................................. Food Safety and Inspection Service .................................................. Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services ............................................................................................ Farm Service Agency ......................................................................... Risk Management Agency ................................................................. Corporations: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund ...................................... Commodity Credit Corporation Fund ............................................... Title II: Conservation Programs: Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment ........................................................................................................ Natural Resources Conservation Service ................................................ Title III: Rural Development Programs: Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development ........................... Rural Housing Service .............................................................................. Rural Business—Cooperative Service ...................................................... Rural Energy for America Program ......................................................... (2) 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 21 28 28 33 36 37 37 38 39 43 43 44 46 46 48 49 55 59 3 Page Title III—Continued Rural Development Programs—Continued Rural Utilities Service .............................................................................. Title IV: Domestic Food Programs: Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services ................................................................................................... Food and Nutrition Service ...................................................................... Title V: Foreign Assistance and Related Programs: Foreign Agricultural Service .......................................................................................................................... Title VI: Related Agency and Food and Drug Administration: Food and Drug Administration ................................................................ Independent Agency: Farm Credit Administration ................................ Title VII: General Provisions .................................................................................. Program, Project, and Activity ............................................................................... Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate .......................................................................................................................... Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate ................................................................................................................... Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate ................................................................................................................... Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... Comparative Statement of Budget Authority ........................................................ 60 64 64 72 76 83 85 87 87 88 89 92 93 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] 2011 2012 Committee recommendation Title I: Agricultural programs ..................................................................................... Title II: Conservation programs .................................................................................. Title III: Rural economic and community development programs ............................. Title IV: Domestic food programs ............................................................................... Title V: Foreign assistance and related programs ..................................................... Title VI: Related agencies and Food and Drug Administration ................................. Title VII: General provisions ........................................................................................ Other appropriations (discretionary) ........................................................................... 29,490,110 889,360 2,430,774 95,065,478 1,891,341 2,457,001 ¥1,664,395 .............................. 24,959,852 829,007 2,265,837 105,519,631 1,935,478 2,506,003 ¥1,060,435 .............................. Total, new budget (obligational) authority ................................................... 130,559,669 136,955,373 (4) 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]. Public Law 112–10, the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act for 2011, included an across-theboard rescission in discretionary spending of 0.2 percent. This rescission is reflected in the fiscal year 2011 numbers included in this report. Additionally, H.R. 2112, the House Fiscal Year 2012 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, included an across the board rescission in discretionary spending of 0.78 percent applied to titles I through VI. This rescission is reflected in the fiscal year 2012 numbers included in this report. 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. As our economy witnesses increasing shifts of manufacturing capacity (and associated jobs) to foreign shores, we must never lose (5) 6 sight that the one area of production which must be protected as inherently domestic is that of our food supply. That does not mean that certain foods need not appropriately rely on import and export markets, but it does mean that we must never surrender our ability to adequately and safely feed our own people. Without adequate levels of research, development, and regulatory resources, that threat of surrender will be ever present and our natural resource base will remain always at risk. Accordingly and 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 2012. 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 on Appropriations as one electronic document per Department in an agreed upon format within 120 days after the date of enactment, unless an alternative submission schedule is specifically stated in the report request. TITLE I AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS PRODUCTION, PROCESSING, OFFICE OF THE AND MARKETING SECRETARY Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $5,051,000 5,883,000 4,260,000 4,798,000 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 $4,798,000 for the Office of the Secretary. Animal Fighting.—The Committee is very concerned about reports of illegal animal fighting activities and directs the Secretary to work with relevant agencies on the most effective and proper means for investigating and enforcing laws and regulations regarding these activities. Food Safety Information Sharing.—The Committee urges the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services to enter into a memorandum of understanding between the relevant agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, including the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the relevant agencies within the Department of Agriculture, including the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Agricultural Research Service, and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, to ensure the timely and efficient sharing of all information collected by such agencies related to foodborne pathogens, contaminants and illnesses. Zero Base Budgeting.—Anticipated constraints on Federal spending in the coming years will likely reduce the ability of this Committee to support increases for USDA activities beyond current lev(7) 8 els, and may result in future reductions. The Committee believes it is necessary to carefully examine each agency’s budget requirements from a zero base, rather than by reviewing only incremental changes as they occur year to year. Such a change in method would both assist the Committee’s appropriating and oversight responsibilities and it will also require agencies to systematically examine all of their budgetary requirements on an annual basis to ensure they relate properly to their mission within the Department. Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary to develop and present USDA’s fiscal year 2013 budget requirements from a zero base and such presentation should include an examination and justification of each program, project, and activity and allocation of FTEs and related items. The Secretary is further instructed to provide a report to the Committee on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress by November 1, 2011, on the status of this directive. OFFICE OF TRIBAL RELATIONS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $498,000 1,015,000 420,000 473,000 The Office of Tribal Relations will interact with USDA program agencies to understand pending actions that may affect Indian tribes. This interaction and programmatic knowledge will improve USDA’s ability to conduct consultation activities, thereby better addressing the needs of USDA tribal constituents and improving relationships. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $473,000 for the Office of Tribal Relations. HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $35,000,000 House allowance .................................................................................... ........................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... The Healthy Food Financing Initiative is intended as a new program to help create opportunities to place grocery stores and other retail outlets in urban and rural areas where better access to items of high nutritional quality are needed. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. While the Committee is unable to provide additional budget authority specifically for this new activity, loans and grants are made available under the Rural Development title of this bill which may, in part, be used toward the objectives of this initiative in rural areas where individuals may reside many miles from the nearest food outlet. Additionally, elsewhere in this bill resources are available for economic and policy analysis that can be used to determine and help develop policy objectives that can ultimately achieve a more efficient and effective distribution of nutritional resources to the American people. As the 9 Department moves forward in this effort, the Secretary is directed to establish a system of metrics to measure the outcomes of such activities and to report to the Committee in this regard. EXECUTIVE OPERATIONS Executive operations were established as a result of the reorganization of the Department to provide a support team for USDA policy officials and selected departmentwide services. Activities under the executive operations include the Office of the Chief Economist, the National Appeals Division, the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination and the Office of Advocacy and Outreach. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $12,008,000 15,196,000 10,623,000 11,408,000 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 costbenefit 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 $11,408,000 for the Office of the Chief Economist. NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $14,225,000 15,254,000 11,997,000 13,514,000 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 $13,514,000 for the National Appeals Division. OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $9,417,000 9,436,000 7,942,000 8,946,000 10 The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides direction and administration of the Department’s budgetary functions including development, presentation, and execution of the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program and resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries of pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental policy officials and agency program managers in the decisionmaking process; and provides departmentwide coordination for and participation in the presentation of budget-related matters to the committees of the Congress, the media, and interested public. The Office also provides departmentwide coordination of the preparation and processing of regulations and legislative programs and reports. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,946,000 for the Office of Budget and Program Analysis. OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY COORDINATION Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,496,000 4,272,000 1,262,000 1,421,000 The Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination formulates emergency preparedness policies and objectives for USDA. The Office directs and coordinates all of the Department’s program activities that support USDA emergency programs and liaison functions with the Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, and other Federal departments and agencies involving homeland security, natural disasters, other emergencies, and agriculture-related international civil emergency planning and related activities. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,421,000 for the Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination. OFFICE OF ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,422,000 7,000,000 1,120,000 1,351,000 The purpose of the Office of Advocacy and Outreach is to increase the accessibility of USDA programs to underserved constituents. The Office coordinates the activities of various USDA programs and agencies that have as a mission purpose the provision of assistance to underserved constituents and generally encourages and advocates for full participation by all Americans in USDA programs. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,351,000 for the Office of Advocacy and Outreach. 11 OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $39,920,000 63,579,000 33,735,000 36,031,000 The Office of the Chief Information Officer was established in August 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), pursuant to the ClingerCohen 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 longrange 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. On November 28, 2004, the information technology staffs of the Service Center Agencies [SCA] were converged into one IT organization within the office of the Chief Information Officer; this converged organization is named Information Technology Services and replaces a network of cross-agency teams used to coordinate IT infrastructure investment within the SCA and allows for unified management of the IT infrastructure. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,031,000 for the Office of the Chief Information Officer. This amount includes $20,000,000 to support cybersecurity requirements of the Department. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $6,247,000 6,566,000 5,269,000 5,935,000 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 12 National Finance Center and the Departmental Working Capital Fund. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,935,000 for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. The Committee notes its concern regarding the period of time with which the Department has operated with a vacancy in the post of Chief Financial Officer. The Department is encouraged to seek qualified candidates to assume this position and the Committee reminds the Secretary of the statutory requirements of 31 U.S.C 902. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $893,000 895,000 754,000 848,000 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights. OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $22,692,000 24,922,000 19,138,000 21,558,000 The Office of Civil Rights provides overall leadership responsibility for all departmentwide civil rights activities. These activities include employment opportunity as well as program non-discrimination policy development, analysis, coordination, and compliance. The Office is responsible for providing leadership in facilitating the fair and equitable treatment of USDA employees, and for monitoring program activities to ensure that all USDA programs are delivered in a non-discriminatory manner. The Office’s outreach functions provide leadership, coordination, facilitation, and expertise to internal and external partners to ensure equal and timely access to USDA programs for all constituents, with emphasis on the underserved, through information sharing, technical assistance, and training. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,558,000 for the Office of Civil Rights. 13 OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $804,000 820,000 678,000 764,000 The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration directs and coordinates the work of the departmental management offices in carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress relating to real and personal property management, personnel management, ethics, and other general administrative functions. In addition, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible for certain activities financed under the Department’s Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235). COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $764,000 for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration. AGRICULTURE BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES AND RENTAL PAYMENTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $246,476,000 255,191,000 199,825,000 230,416,000 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. Annual appropriations finance payments to the General Services Administration [GSA] for leased space and related payments are made to the Department of Homeland Security for perimeter security services at USDA occupied space. Under this arrangement USDA operates, maintains, and repairs the D.C. complex buildings, in lieu of rental payments for the two-building D.C. complex and the George Washington Carver Center. GSA charges commercial rent rates pursuant to the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972, and agencies may review rate procedures and exercise rights to appeal. For the last several years the Department has implemented a strategic space plan to locate staff more efficiently, renovate its buildings, and eliminate safety hazards, particularly in the Agriculture South Building. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $230,416,000 for Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments. The following table reflects the Committee’s specific recommendations for this account as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: 14 [In thousands of dollars] 2011 enacted 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Rental Payments ........................................................................................ Building Operations ................................................................................... DHS Building Security ................................................................................ 178,113 54,890 13,473 164,470 76,921 13,800 164,470 52,146 13,800 Total .............................................................................................. 246,476 255,191 230,416 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $3,992,000 5,125,000 3,367,000 3,792,000 Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to meet the same standards regarding the storage and disposition of hazardous materials as private businesses. The Department is required to contain, clean up, monitor, and inspect for hazardous materials in areas under the Department’s jurisdiction. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,792,000 for Hazardous Materials Management. DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $29,647,000 35,787,000 16,381,000 28,165,000 Departmental Administration is comprised of activities that provide staff support to top policy officials and overall direction and coordination of administrative functions of the Department. These activities include departmentwide programs for human resource management, ethics, occupational safety and health management, real and personal property management, procurement, contracting, motor vehicle and aircraft management, supply management, emergency preparedness, small and disadvantaged business utilization, and the regulatory hearing and administrative proceedings conducted by the Administrative Law Judges and Judicial Officer. Departmental Administration is also responsible for representing USDA in the development of governmentwide policies and initiatives; and analyzing the impact of governmentwide trends and developing appropriate USDA principles, policies, and standards. In addition, Departmental Administration engages in strategic planning and evaluates programs to ensure USDA-wide compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to administrative matters for the Secretary and general officers of the Department. 15 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,165,000 for Departmental Administration. Efficiency of Operations.—The Committee recognizes the special management challenges facing the Department in view of serious constraints in fiscal resources, the requirements of a vastly dispersed workforce, and expectations of the public for continuity of vital services. It is clear that recent reductions in discretionary spending and the likely continuation of austere measures in the near term present significant difficulties to those charged with program execution. The Committee fully recognizes the need, and expects the Department to achieve the most efficient methods possible to maintain the responsibilities of governance for the benefit of both the customers of USDA and the personnel charged with carrying out the missions of the Department. The Committee expects that any substantive changes to the functions and organization of USDA follow a thoughtful analysis of implications for budgetary resources, services to customers and employees, and inherent dynamics within the Department that might result. Toward that objective, before moving forward with the implementation of any substantive reorganization, the Department is instructed to conduct a detailed analysis of the savings, efficiencies, and implications of these changes. In addition, an understanding of the methodology used for determining these factors and some form of demonstration of the results anticipated is required. Any timetable for implementation of the changes suggested obviously will be driven by the fiscal resources available and it may be prudent to give consideration to a tiered implementation as conditions dictate rather than a full scale Departmental shift that would be far more complex and potentially expensive. The Secretary is instructed to provide a report, consistent with the guidance outlined above, to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not less than 60 days prior to the implementation of any Departmental reorganization. The Secretary is further reminded of the reprogramming instructions set forth elsewhere in this bill for the purpose of any implementation stage of a proposed reorganization. The Committee does not provide a separate appropriation for an acquisition workforce and expects the functions of that proposed activity to be included as part of the efficiencies to be undertaken in the guidance set forth under this heading. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY RELATIONS FOR CONGRESSIONAL Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $3,869,000 4,041,000 3,262,000 3,676,000 The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations maintains a liaison with the Congress and White House on legislative matters. It also provides for overall direction and coordination in the development and implementation of policies and procedures applicable to the Department’s intra- and inter-governmental relations. 16 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,676,000 for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. The Committee allows these funds to be transferred to support congressional relations’ activities at the agency level. Within 30 days from the enactment of this act, the Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the allocation of these funds by USDA agency, along with an explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution of the funds as well as the staff years funded by these transfers. OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $9,480,000 9,722,000 7,995,000 8,105,000 The Office of Communications provides direction, leadership, and coordination in the development and delivery of useful information through all media to the public on USDA programs. The Office serves as the liaison between the Department and the many associations and organizations with an interest in USDA’s mission areas. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,105,000 for the Office of Communications. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $88,548,000 90,755,000 79,376,000 84,121,000 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 programrelated 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 investiga- 17 tive agencies of the executive and legislative branches of the Government. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $84,121,000 for the Office of Inspector General. In addition, the recommendation 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $41,416,000 46,058,000 34,929,000 39,345,000 The Office of the General Counsel provides all legal advice, counsel, and services to the Secretary and to all agencies, offices, and corporations of the Department. The Office represents the Department in administrative proceedings; non-litigation debt collection proceedings; State water rights adjudications; proceedings before the Environmental Protection Agency, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Maritime Administration, and International Trade Commission; and, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, in judicial proceedings and litigation. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,345,000 for the Office of the General Counsel. OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RESEARCH, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. AND $893,000 911,000 754,000 848,000 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics. 18 ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $81,814,000 85,971,000 69,454,000 77,723,000 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 $77,723,000 for the Economic Research Service, which includes continued funding for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $156,447,000 165,421,000 148,340,000 152,616,000 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 $152,616,000 for the National Agricultural Statistics Service. Included in this amount is $41,639,000 for the Census of Agriculture. Chemical Use Data Series.—The Committee believes that the Chemical Use Data Series provides timely, valuable information on fertilizer and chemical user data on major field crops and selected specialty crops, and is pleased that NASS is continuing the collection and analysis of chemical use data, as well as practices such as integrated pest management. Organic Production Survey.—In 2008, NASS conducted the firstever comprehensive Organic Production Survey as a follow-on sur- 19 vey to the 2007 Census of Agriculture. Published in February 2010, the survey has provided information vital to the organic sector’s growth. The Committee believes the Organic Production Survey should be conducted on a regular basis to properly assess the characteristics, trends, and changes in the sector. AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,133,230,000 1,137,690,000 987,581,000 1,094,647,000 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 U.S. Department of Agriculture’s in-house agricultural research unit, ARS has major responsibilities for conducting and leading the national agricultural research effort. It provides initiative and leadership in five areas: research on broad regional and national problems, research to support Federal action and regulatory agencies, expertise to meet national emergencies, research support for international programs, and scientific resources to the executive branch and Congress. The mission of ARS research is to develop 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 $1,094,647,000 for salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research Service. The Committee does not concur with the President’s budget request regarding the termination of extramural research. Aerial Application Research.—The Committee recognizes the importance of ARS’s 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 20 strives to meet the food, fiber and bio-energy demands of a growing population. 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. Commodity Processing.—The Committee encourages ARS to consider research to improve the processing of commodities that produce high quality, nutritious products for the American people, including sweet potatoes. These commodities have created an unprecedented need for basic and applied research in the development of new innovative processing technologies and have the potential to create new market opportunities, increase employment in rural America and provide consumers with healthy and readily available foods. Domestic and Bighorn Sheep.—The Committee recognizes the challenges caused by infectious disease problems arising from wildlife-domestic animal agriculture interactions, particularly between domestic sheep and wild bighorn sheep. Research has recently produced an experimental vaccine to protect bighorn populations from disease, but much work still needs to be done in this area. The Committee encourages ARS to work to determine the role of domestic sheep in causing die-offs of bighorn sheep from respiratory disease and develop methods to reduce transmission and enhance immunity in domestic and bighorn sheep. 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. 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. Therefore, the Committee encourages ARS to continue research relating to both childhood and adult obesity. Humanitarian Efforts.—The Committee encourages USDA to work with the Department of Defense to coordinate on agricultural research and technology transfer to further the country’s humanitarian mission throughout the world. National Agricultural Library.—The Committee encourages the Agricultural Research Service to maintain a focus on agriculturerelated legal issues within the National Agricultural Library. The Committee notes that as the agriculture sector of the national economy evolves, there is a necessity that these 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. 21 Pear Genetics and Genomics.—The Committee directs ARS to provide a report detailing specifically its year-by-year plans to locate and allocate resources including staff, facilities and equipment for pear genetics and genomics throughout ARS. This report will also provide an estimate of how long it will take to meet the goals of the Pyrus plant improvement roadmap and funding that will be required to meet the terms of that roadmap. Pollinator Research.—The Committee is aware that pollinators are responsible for the production of one-third of the Nation’s food supply, but the number of managed honeybee colonies in the United States has dropped in half since 1940. Because of the importance of pollinators in the production of the Nation’s food supply and their impact on the stability of our agricultural economy, the Committee encourages ARS to continue to dedicate resources to protecting the health of both honeybees and other native bees, including continued research into colony collapse disorder. Pulse Health Initiative.—The Committee continues to recognize the need to investigate the ability of pulse crops—dry beans, dry peas, lentils, and chickpeas—to provide solutions to critical health issues including but not limited to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer; and to increase the consumption of pulse crops by improving their functionality in baked goods and end use as a food and food ingredient through the study of milling, extrusion, extraction, and cooking properties. The Committee also recognizes the potential to improve the sustainability of agricultural rotations and reduce green house gas emissions by improving the nitrogen fixing abilities of pulse crops. The Committee recommends ARS provide adequate funding to establish the Pulse Health Initiative. Research Facilities.—The Committee concurs with the budget proposal to close 12 research laboratories at 10 locations. The Committee further directs, in concurrence with the budget proposal, that no other research facilities be closed during fiscal year 2012. Additionally, while the Committee understands the need to continually look for ways to increase efficiency and improve research outcomes, laboratory closures often cost money in the short-term and do not necessarily provide real savings. Therefore, the Committee directs ARS to evaluate its capital asset requirements for necessary coordination with ongoing and emerging research opportunities. As part of this evaluation, ARS should provide opportunity for public comment in order to incorporate the priorities of all interested stakeholders, including ARS and other scientists, and users of ARS data. Finally, in future budget requests, the Committee directs ARS to identify any costs associated with any proposed laboratory closures, including decommissioning, relocation or other effects on employees, and any other additional costs. Shellfish Research.—The Committee is aware of ARS’ work on shellfish research to address shellfish diseases and other factors, and encourages ARS to continue this work to help improve the economics of shellfish farming and encourage expanded production and job opportunities. 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 22 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $698,740,000 708,107,000 591,748,000 709,825,000 Research and Education programs administered by NIFA are USDA’s principal entre´e 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 $709,825,000 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: 23 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE [NIFA]—RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES Committee recommendation Hatch Act ........................................................................................................................................................... McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Research Program ................................................................................. Evans-Allen program (1890 Colleges, Tuskegee University and West Virginia State University) .................... Animal Health and Disease Research ............................................................................................................... Special Research Grants: Global Change/UV-Monitoring ................................................................................................................... Potato Research ........................................................................................................................................ Forest Products Research ......................................................................................................................... $236,334,000 32,934,000 50,898,000 2,944,000 Total, Special Research Grants ............................................................................................................ 4,181,000 Improved Pest Control: Expert IPM Decision Support System ........................................................................................................ Integrated Pest Management .................................................................................................................... Minor Crop Pest Management, IR–4 ........................................................................................................ Pest Management Alternatives ................................................................................................................. 153,000 2,362,000 11,913,000 1,402,000 Total, Improved Pest Control ................................................................................................................ 15,830,000 Critical Ag Materials Act of 1984 ..................................................................................................................... Aquaculture Centers, Section 1475 ................................................................................................................... Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education ............................................................................................. 1994 Institutions Research Program ................................................................................................................. Supplemental and Alternative Crops, Section 1473 D ...................................................................................... AFRI .................................................................................................................................................................... Joe Skeen Institute for Rangeland Restoration ................................................................................................. New Era Rural Technology Program .................................................................................................................. Competitive Grants for Policy Research ............................................................................................................ Capacity Building for Non-Land-Grant Colleges of Agriculture ........................................................................ Farm Business Management and Benchmarking Program ............................................................................... Sun Grant Program ............................................................................................................................................ Federal Administration: Data Information System (REEIS) ............................................................................................................. Electronic Grants Administration System ................................................................................................. Office of Extramural Programs ................................................................................................................. Pay Costs .................................................................................................................................................. Peer Panels ............................................................................................................................................... 1,081,000 3,920,000 14,471,000 1,801,000 833,000 265,987,000 961,000 856,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 1,497,000 2,246,000 Total, Federal Administration ............................................................................................................... 11,006,000 Higher Education: Graduate Fellowships Grants .................................................................................................................... Institution Challenge Grants ..................................................................................................................... 1890s Institution Capacity Building Grants ............................................................................................. Multicultural Scholars ............................................................................................................................... Hispanic-Serving Institutions Education Grants Program ........................................................................ Tribal Colleges Education Equity Grants Program ................................................................................... Secondary/2-Year Post Secondary ............................................................................................................. Veterinary Medical Services Act ................................................................................................................ Alaska Native-Serving and Native-Hawaiian-Serving Institutions ........................................................... Resident Instruction Grants for Insular Areas ......................................................................................... Distance Education Grants for Insular Areas ........................................................................................... 3,774,000 5,530,000 19,336,000 1,239,000 9,219,000 3,335,000 981,000 4,790,000 3,194,000 898,000 749,000 Total, Higher Education Grants ............................................................................................................ 53,045,000 Total, Research and Education ............................................................................................................ 709,825,000 1,377,000 1,404,000 1,400,000 2,645,000 2,089,000 430,000 5,454,000 388,000 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.—The Committee recommendation includes $265,987,000 for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative [AFRI]. The Committee notes that programs previously funded through the Integrated Activities account are eligible for funding under the AFRI. 24 Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 specifies priority areas within 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 requests a report from the agency as to its plans for implementing this important conventional/classical plant and animal breeding 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 10 percent of the competitive research grant funds be used for USDA’s agricultural research enhancement awards program (including USDA–EPSCoR), in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 450i. 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. Berry and Grape Research.—The Committee recognizes that the production of grapes is vital to many local economies, and encourages NIFA to work with partners to support the development of new cultivars to enhance economic stability and develop environmentally sound insect and disease management strategies and technologies. The Committee also encourages NIFA to support berry and grape research that focuses on integrated pest management to improve food safety, human health, and varietal development, while reducing chemical inputs and emerging pest and disease pressures related to climate change. Broccoli Production.—The Committee has been informed that the Department has dedicated funding toward spurring broccoli production in the eastern United States. The Committee is aware that that farmers have invested considerable amounts of time and private funding into research on soils, crop management practices, and new broccoli varieties to develop and maintain a successful broccoli production industry on the East Coast. The Committee directs the USDA to work to ensure that Departmental efforts do not compete with or detrimentally affect privately owned, family-farm business operations. 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. Cranberry and Blueberry Research.—The Committee encourages the NIFA to continue working with research institutions to develop resilient cranberry and blueberry breeds and establish effective and environmentally sound pest management technologies. 25 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 directs NIFA to support research, education and outreach for the forest products sector. National Clean Plant Network.—The National Clean Plant Network is instrumental in ensuring that nurseries can provide safe, virus-free materials to orchards, vineyards and other growers. The Committee recognizes the value of continued research to improve detection and eradication of viruses, and encourages the Department to continue its work on this important program. Policy Research Centers.—The Committee directs the Director of NIFA to consult with the Office of the Chief Economist in developing requests for proposals for competitive grants, reviewing applications, and awarding grants for the activities authorized by 7 U.S.C. 3155. The Committee further directs the Director of NIFA to obligate funds made available for 7 U.S.C 3155 within 120 days of the enactment of this act. 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. 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. NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $11,880,000 11,880,000 11,880,000 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 ad- 26 justed 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. HISPANIC-SERVING AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ENDOWMENT FUND Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $10,000,000 House allowance .................................................................................... ........................... 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 HispanicServing 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. EXTENSION ACTIVITIES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $479,132,000 466,788,000 407,993,000 478,179,000 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. 27 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 $478,179,000 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 [NIFA]—EXTENSION ACTIVITIES Committee recommendation Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c) .............................................................................................................. $295,800,000 Smith-Lever, Section 3d Programs: Food and Nutrition Education (EFNEP) ..................................................................................................... Farm Safety ............................................................................................................................................... New Technologies for Ag Extension .......................................................................................................... Pest Management ..................................................................................................................................... Children, Youth, and Families at Risk ..................................................................................................... Youth Farm Safety Education and Certification ....................................................................................... Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program ....................................................................................... Sustainable Agriculture ............................................................................................................................. 67,934,000 4,610,000 1,660,000 9,918,000 7,975,000 461,000 3,039,000 4,696,000 Total, Section 3d Programs .................................................................................................................. 100,293,000 1890 Colleges, Tuskegee University and West Virginia State University ......................................................... Rural Health and Safety Education ................................................................................................................... 1890 Facilities (Sec. 1447) ............................................................................................................................... Renewable Resources Extension Act (RREA) ..................................................................................................... Extension Services at the 1994 Institutions ..................................................................................................... Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database (FARAD) ......................................................................................... Women and Minorities in STEM Fields .............................................................................................................. 42,592,000 1,735,000 19,730,000 3,929,000 4,312,000 1,000,000 400,000 Federal Administration: Ag in the Classroom ................................................................................................................................. General Administration, Including Pay Costs ........................................................................................... 552,000 7,836,000 Total, Federal Administration ............................................................................................................... 8,388,000 Total, Extension Activities .................................................................................................................... 478,179,000 INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $36,926,000 29,874,000 12,303,000 25,948,000 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. 28 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,948,000 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 [NIFA]—INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES Committee recommendation Section 406 Legislative Authority: Water Quality ............................................................................................................................................... Regional Pest Management Centers ........................................................................................................... Methyl Bromide Transition Program ........................................................................................................... Organic Transition Program ........................................................................................................................ $8,982,000 2,994,000 1,996,000 3,992,000 Total, Section 406 .................................................................................................................................. 17,964,000 International Science and Education Grants Program ........................................................................................ Regional Rural Development Centers Program ................................................................................................... Homeland Security, Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative .............................................................................. 998,000 998,000 5,988,000 Total, Integrated Activities ..................................................................................................................... 25,948,000 OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MARKETING REGULATORY PROGRAMS AND Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $893,000 911,000 754,000 848,000 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs. ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $863,270,000 832,706,000 783,838,000 820,110,000 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. 29 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 $820,110,000 for salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. The following table reflects the Committee’s specific recommendations for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Safeguarding and International Technical Assistance: Animal Health Technical Services .............................................. Aquatic Animal Health ................................................................ Avian Health ............................................................................... Cattle Health ............................................................................... Equinine, Cervid & Small Ruminant Health .............................. National Veterinary Stockpile ...................................................... Swine Health ............................................................................... Veterinary Biologics .................................................................... Veterinary Diagnostics ................................................................ Zoonotic Disease Management ................................................... 29,550 5,422 50,090 112,094 38,326 3,561 25,547 16,424 29,309 10,447 38,459 2,261 55,733 98,884 22,018 3,568 23,088 16,457 33,211 10,468 31,309 2,261 48,733 97,884 22,018 3,568 23,088 16,457 31,611 10,468 Subtotal, Animal Health ......................................................... 320,770 304,147 287,397 Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated) .................... Cotton Pests ................................................................................ Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystems Pests ............................... 25,948 20,958 11,296 26,000 8,977 9,068 27,500 17,848 9,068 30 ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE—Continued [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Pest Detection ............................................................................. Plant Protection Methods Development ...................................... Specialty Crop Pests ................................................................... Tree & Wood Pests ...................................................................... 26,703 21,230 150,079 75,994 26,756 21,273 154,700 60,462 28,756 21,273 153,950 58,962 Subtotal, Plant Health ............................................................ 332,208 307,236 317,357 Wildlife Damage Management .................................................... Wildlife Services Methods Development ..................................... 72,058 17,078 68,487 16,065 72,500 18,065 Subtotal, Wildlife Services ..................................................... 89,136 84,552 90,565 Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement ........................ Biotechnology Regulatory Services ............................................. 13,955 13,037 17,275 25,135 16,275 18,135 Subtotal, Regulatory Services ................................................ 26,992 42,410 34,410 Contingency Fund ....................................................................... Emergency Preparedness & Response ........................................ 2,054 19,706 2,058 17,746 1,000 17,746 Subtotal, Emergency Management ......................................... 21,760 19,804 18,746 Subtotal, Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness/Response ................................................................................ 790,866 758,149 748,475 Safe Trade and International Technical Assistance: Agriculture Import/Export ............................................................ Overseas Technical & Trade Operations .................................... 12,579 20,135 14,104 20,776 13,354 20,104 Subtotal, Safe Trade .............................................................. 32,714 34,880 33,458 Animal Welfare: Animal Welfare ............................................................................ Horse Protection .......................................................................... 21,935 499 28,587 891 27,087 891 Subtotal, Animal Welfare ....................................................... 22,434 29,478 27,978 Agency Management: APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure ............................. Physical/Operational Security ..................................................... 4,465 5,714 4,474 5,725 4,474 5,725 Subtotal, Agency Management ............................................... 10,179 10,199 10,199 Undesignated ....................................................................................... 7,077 .......................... .......................... Total, Direct Appropriation ..................................................... 863,270 832,706 820,110 The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue use of contingency funding from the Commodity Credit Corporation, as in past fiscal years, to cover additional emergencies as the Secretary determines necessary. Furthermore, the Committee encourages the Secretary to employ cooperative agreements where appropriate to support activities related to animal health. 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 31 $27,500,000 for the agriculture quarantine inspections function, including pre-departure inspections. Animal Disease Traceability.—The Committee provides $7,000,000 to continue support for implementation of the new animal disease traceability system. Equine Transport.—In November, 2007, the Department published a proposed rule to clarify requirements set forth under the Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter provision of the 1996 Farm Bill. In June, 2011, the General Accountability Office released a report requested by this Committee on the subject of horse welfare in the context of slaughter operations which highlighted the need to improve the enforcement of this provision. The Committee is very concerned that nearly 4 years have transpired since publication of the proposed rule. The Committee directs the Secretary to finalize this rule no later than October 1, 2011. Invasive Honey 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. Livestock Warranty Programs.—The Committee directs USDA to engage the private sector in evaluating proposals presented to USDA for use in the poultry and livestock industry that: encourage early disease detection and appropriate management actions by producers; provide producer-protections to address business interruption events caused by catastrophic disease, including alternative delivery methods of indemnity payments; focus market education efforts on improved production practices; and provide liability protection for producers in the event of a trace back of a listed disease. Specialty Crop Pests.—The Committee supports APHIS activities to control plant pests and strongly supports efforts to eradicate such pests as the opportunities arise. Toward that purpose, the Committee expects that funding for Specialty Crop Pests be supplemented with contingency or CCC funds for the emergency purpose of eradicating the European Grape Vine Moth. Sudden Oak Death (Phytopthora Ramorum).—The Committee expects APHIS to use an appropriate portion of the funding provided for sudden oak death adequate to promote the development and testing of new systems of nursery pest and disease management, and for programs of inspection and regulation in partnership with the nursery industry. APHIS should also conduct a timely review of the current pre-notification program, cooperate with the Forest Service regarding phytopthora ramorum suppression efforts, and pursue the availability of a rapid, in-field DNA-based test for surveying positive nursery samples. Wildlife Damage Management.—APHIS is responsible for providing Federal leadership in managing problems caused by wildlife. The Committee provides $72,500,000 for wildlife damage control to maintain priority initiatives, including preventing the transport of invasive snakes and other harmful species. The Committee is concerned with the ever increasing loses of livestock to predation. Predation continues to be the single largest 32 cause of death loss of sheep, and losses of other livestock are rising. The Committee urges the Secretary to exercise all of his authority to address this economically devastating situation facing America’s farmers and ranchers. 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. A recent comprehensive study noted the critical need to provide standardized safety training to ensure the safest working environment possible. As such, the Committee directs APHIS to focus training programs on those areas of greatest concern such as pyrotechnics, firearms, hazardous materials, immobilization and euthanasia drugs, pesticides, and animal care and handling. 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 $18,065,000 to ensure continued development of technical and scientific information on wildlife damage management. COMMITTEE DIRECTIVES In complying with the Committee’s directives, the Committee expects APHIS not to redirect support for programs and activities without prior notification to and approval by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance with the reprogramming procedures specified in the act. Unless otherwise directed, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service shall implement appropriations by programs, projects, and activities as specified by the Appropriations Committees of both Houses of Congress. Unspecified reductions necessary to carry out the provisions of this act are to be implemented in accordance with the definitions contained in the program, project, and activity section of this report. BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $3,529,000 4,712,000 3,175,000 3,176,000 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 $3,176,000 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. 33 AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE MARKETING SERVICES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $86,538,000 94,755,000 77,193,000 82,211,000 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 $82,211,000 for marketing services of the Agricultural Marketing Service. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... Budget limitation, 2012 ......................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $60,947,000 62,101,000 61,000,000 62,101,000 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 $62,101,000 on administrative expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service. FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY (SECTION 32) Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $20,056,000 20,056,000 20,056,000 20,056,000 34 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 2010–2012: ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD—FISCAL YEARS 2010– 2012 Appropriation (30 percent of Customs Receipts) ...................................................... Balances Available for Transfers ................. Less Transfers: Food and Nutrition Service .................. Commerce Department ........................ Total, Transfers ............................... Prior Year Appropriation Available, Start of Year .......................................................... Rescission of Prior Year Funds .................... Prior Year Collections and Recoveries ......... Unavailable for Obligations (recoveries and offsetting collections). ............................. Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS (F&V) .. Fiscal year 2010 actual Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 budget Fiscal year 2012 estimate $8,061,101,371 ............................ $6,605,945,807 ............................ $7,947,045,940 ............................ $7,947,045,940 69,259,590 ¥6,747,877,000 ¥113,371,243 ¥5,277,574,000 ¥90,239,555 ¥6,644,834,000 ¥71,211,940 ¥6,745,466,733 ¥109,098,387 ¥6,861,248,243 ¥5,367,813,555 ¥6,716,045,940 ¥6,854,565,120 375,373,561 ¥133,351,561 12,844,939 122,127,338 ............................ ............................ 183,268,133 ............................ ............................ 186,259,590 ............................ ............................ ¥13,698,067 ¥242,022,000 ¥69,259,590 ¥76,000,000 ¥12,850,015 ¥170,418,118 ............................ ¥117,000,000 Budget Authority .................................. Proposed Rescission of Current Year Funds ............................................... Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to FNS) ....................... 1,199,000,000 1,215,000,000 1,231,000,000 1,231,000,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥150,000,000 ¥76,000,000 ¥117,000,000 ¥114,478,000 ¥133,000,000 Available for Obligation .............. 1,123,000,000 1,098,000,000 1,116,522,000 948,000,000 465,000,000 309,400,000 465,000,000 465,000,000 149,131,392 100,000,000 120,000,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 300,887,802 83,375,000 282,289 268,000,000 5,000,000 2,500,000 57,400,000 ............................ 5,000,000 ............................ 5,000,000 2,500,000 ............................ ............................ 5,000,000 ............................ 5,000,000 2,500,000 ............................ ............................ 5,000,000 24,639,114 25,000,000 177,394 ............................ 158,300,000 33,000,000 800,000 106,834,000 206,000,000 38,159,000 ............................ 227,076,000 206,000,000 20,000,000 ............................ 196,713,000 Total, Commodity Procurement ....... 1,048,492,991 1,046,234,000 1,068,735,000 900,213,000 Administrative Funds: Commodity Purchase Support ............. 22,275,551 31,710,000 27,731,000 27,731,000 Less Obligations: Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities) .................................. 12 Percent Commodity Floor Requirement ............................... Cotton, Soybean, Rice and Sweet Potato Disaster Program ..................... State Option Contract .......................... Removal of Defective Commodities ..... Emergency Surplus Removal ............... Direct Payments ................................... Disaster Relief ..................................... Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases ............................... Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program .... Accounting Adjustment ........................ Estimated Future Needs ...................... 35 ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD—FISCAL YEARS 2010– 2012—Continued Fiscal year 2010 actual Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 budget Fiscal year 2012 estimate Marketing Agreements and Orders ...... 19,802,187 20,056,000 20,056,000 20,056,000 Total, Administrative Funds ............ 42,077,738 51,766,000 47,787,000 47,787,000 Total Obligations ............................. 1,090,570,729 1,098,000,000 1,116,522,000 948,000,000 Unobligated Balance, End of Year ............... Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to FNS) ....................................... Balances, Collections and Recoveries Not Available ................................................... 32,429,271 ............................ ............................ ............................ 76,000,000 117,000,000 114,478,000 133,000,000 13,698,067 69,259,590 12,850,015 ............................ Total End of Year Balances ............ 122,127,338 186,259,590 127,328,015 133,000,000 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds of $20,056,000 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,331,000 2,634,000 1,321,000 1,198,000 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 36 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 $1,198,000 for Payments to States and Possessions for Federal-State marketing projects and activities. GRAIN INSPECTION, PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $40,261,000 44,192,000 36,711,000 38,248,000 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 $38,248,000 for salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration. LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... Budget limitation, 2012 ......................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $47,500,000 50,000,000 47,500,000 50,000,000 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 $50,000,000 on inspection and weighing services expenses. 37 OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $811,000 828,000 684,000 770,000 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 $770,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety. FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,006,503,000 1,011,393,000 964,446,000 1,006,503,000 The major objectives of the Food Safety and Inspection Service are to assure that meat and poultry products are wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged, as required by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.); and to provide continuous in-plant inspection to egg processing plants under the Egg Products Inspection Act. The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on June 17, 1981, by Secretary’s Memorandum No. 1000–1, issued pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953. The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection Service provides continuous in-plant inspection of all domestic plants preparing meat, poultry or egg products for sale or distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for export to the United States; and provides technical and financial assistance to States which maintain meat and poultry inspection programs. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,006,503,000 for the Food Safety and Inspection Service. This includes the full funding requested in the budget for Federal, State, and international inspection activities. Codex Alimentarius.—Codex Alimentarius is critical for the protection of consumer health globally and facilitating international trade. Therefore, the Committee recommends $3,866,000 exclusively for the activities of the U.S. Codex office including international outreach and education. Humane Slaughter.—The Committee directs FSIS to provide a report to the Committee within 120 days of enactment of this act on the implementation of objective scoring methods being undertaken by FSIS to enforce the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act [HMSA], including what techniques have been adopted and to what 38 degree, metrics used to determine whether or not these techniques have been successful in identifying and preventing HMSA violations, and any plans for expansion of these efforts. The Committee has long been supportive of objective standards for enforcement of HMSA, and was pleased that FSIS recently announced a final compliance guide for voluntary in-plant video monitoring. The Committee has been informed that funding provided in fiscal year 2010 specifically for enforcement of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act may have been used to fund personnel whose responsibilities are not focused on humane handling. The Committee directs FSIS to ensure that personnel hired with funding 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. Inspections.—The Committee supports implementation of section 11016 of Public Law 110–246, and directs USDA to meet its statutory obligation and promulgate final regulations to implement this section. Public Health Information System.—The Committee has continually been supportive of the development and implementation of the Public Health Information System. However, there have been, and continue to be, problems in this system, which has resulted in a delay of full implementation. While the Committee believes the goals of PHIS are laudable, it is imperative that implementation of this system is done in a manner that will not hinder the effectiveness of inspectors in the field. The Committee directs FSIS to continue to work closely with inspection personnel to ensure that final implementation of PHIS is as streamlined as possible and does not negatively impact the ability of FSIS inspectors to complete their work. The following table represents the Committee’s specific recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Food safety inspection: Federal .............................................................................................. State .................................................................................................. International ...................................................................................... Codex Alimentarius ........................................................................... PHDCIS .............................................................................................. 894,765 62,734 19,094 3,752 26,158 887,520 64,696 15,841 3,866 39,470 887,520 64,696 15,841 3,866 34,580 Total .............................................................................................. 1,006,503 1,011,393 1,006,503 OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FARM AGRICULTURAL SERVICES AND Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. FOREIGN $893,000 911,000 754,000 848,000 39 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services. FARM SERVICE AGENCY The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established October 3, 1994, pursuant to the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, Public Law 103–354. The FSA administers a variety of activities, such as the commodity price support and production adjustment programs financed by the Commodity Credit Corporation; the Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]; the Emergency Conservation Program; the Commodity Operation Programs including the warehouse examination function; farm ownership, farm operating, emergency disaster, and other loan programs; and the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program [NAP], which provides crop loss protection for growers of many crops for which crop insurance is not available. In addition, FSA currently provides certain administrative support services to the Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] and to the Risk Management Agency [RMA]. SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Appropriations Appropriations, 2011 ........................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................ House allowance .................................................................................. Committee recommendation ................................................................ 1,208,290 1,397,065 1,167,323 1,181,781 Transfers from program accounts Total, FSA, salaries and expenses 308,137 316,340 261,414 292,730 1,516,427 1,713,405 1,428,737 1,474,511 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. 40 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,474,511,000 for salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency, including a direct appropriation of $1,181,781,000. This amount includes not more than $13,000,000 for the Common Computing Environment. Information Technology.—The Committee remains aware of the unstable status of the Farm Service Agency computer system which is responsible for the calculation and tracking of the agency’s payments to agricultural producers, and which has resulted in disruption of services to U.S. farmers and ranchers. The Committee encourages the Department to use existing resources to continue the progress made regarding information technology modernization. National Agriculture Imagery Program.—The Committee recommends that funding shall be allocated to purchase imagery products to meet programmatic requirements. STATE MEDIATION GRANTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $4,177,000 4,369,000 3,522,000 3,759,000 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 $3,759,000 for State Mediation Grants. GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,241,000 Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... House allowance .................................................................................... 3,577,000 Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,817,000 This program is intended to assist in the protection of groundwater through State rural water associations. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,817,000 for Grassroots Source Water Protection. 41 DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM 2011 1 Appropriations, ........................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 1 ......................................................................... 1 House allowance .................................................................................. Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... 1 Current $876,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided. 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 2012 to be $100,000, 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 42 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 $4,756,982,000 for programs within the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account. 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 2011 and the budget request levels: AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS—LOAN LEVELS [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 enacted Farm ownership: Direct ........................................................... Guaranteed .................................................. Farm Operating: Direct ........................................................... Guaranteed unsubsidized ............................ Guaranteed subsidized ................................ Indian Tribe Land Acquisition .............................. Conservation Loans: Guaranteed .................................................. Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans ............... Boll Weevil Eradication ......................................... Total, Farm loans .................................... Fiscal year 2012 budget House recommendation Committee recommendation 474,050 1,497,000 475,000 1,500,000 471,292 1,500,000 475,000 1,500,000 947,607 1,496,996 122,097 3,940 1,050,090 1,500,000 .......................... 2,000 1,041,901 1,488,276 .......................... 2,000 1,019,982 1,500,000 .......................... 2,000 .......................... .......................... 100,000 150,000 10,000 60,000 150,000 9,896 100,000 150,000 10,000 100,000 4,641,690 4,747,090 4,763,365 4,756,982 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] 2012 budget House recommendation Committee recommendation 32,804 5,689 22,800 .......................... 22,622 .......................... 22,800 .......................... 57,425 59,120 58,659 57,425 2011 enacted Loan subsidies: Farm ownership: Direct .................................................. Guaranteed ......................................... Farm operating: Direct .................................................. 43 [In thousands of dollars] 2011 enacted 2012 budget House recommendation Committee recommendation Guaranteed unsubsidized ................... Guaranteed subsidized ....................... Conservation loans: Guaranteed ......................................... Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans ...... Individual Development Accounts ............... 34,880 16,886 26,100 .......................... 25,896 .......................... 26,100 .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... 193 2,500 .......................... 191 .......................... .......................... 193 .......................... Total, loan subsidies ............................... 147,684 110,713 107,368 106,518 ACIF expenses ....................................................... 312,881 321,093 266,538 297,237 RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $78,842,000 82,325,000 67,485,000 74,900,000 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 Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–246). 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 $74,900,000 for the Risk Management Agency. CORPORATIONS FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION FUND Appropriations, 2011 1 ........................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 1 ......................................................................... House allowance 1 .................................................................................. Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... $7,613,232,000 3,142,375,000 3,142,375,000 3,142,375,000 1 Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended, are provided. The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss adjustment, delivery expenses, program-related research and development, startup costs for implementing this legislation such as studies, pilot projects, data processing improvements, public outreach, and related tasks and functions. 44 All program costs, except for Federal salaries and expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to appropriation. Producers of insurable crops are eligible to receive a basic level of protection against catastrophic losses, which cover 50 percent of the normal yield at 55 percent of the expected price. The only cost to the producer is an administrative fee of $300 per crop per county. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary, estimated to be $3,142,375,000 in fiscal year 2012 for the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION FUND The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support, and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the orderly distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714). The Commodity Credit Corporation engages in buying, selling, lending, and other activities with respect to agricultural commodities, their products, food, feed, and fibers. Its purposes include stabilizing, supporting, and protecting farm income and prices; maintaining the balance and adequate supplies of selected commodities; and facilitating the orderly distribution of such commodities. In addition, the Corporation makes available materials and facilities required in connection with the storage and distribution of such commodities. The Corporation also disburses funds for sharing of costs with producers for the establishment of approved conservation practices on environmentally sensitive land and subsequent rental payments for such land for the duration of Conservation Reserve Program contracts. Corporation activities are primarily governed by the following statutes: the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act (Public Law 80–806), as amended; the Agricultural Act of 1949 (Public Law 81–439), as amended (1949 Act); the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (Public Law 75–430), as amended (the 1938 Act); the Food Security Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–198), as amended (1985 Act); and the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–246). 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. 45 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, 2011 1 ........................................................................... $13,925,575,000 Budget estimate, 2012 1 ......................................................................... 14,071,000,000 House allowance 1 .................................................................................. 14,071,000,000 Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... 14,071,000,000 1 Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2012 to be $14,071,000,000, for the payment to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for net realized losses. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 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 ENVIRONMENT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. AND $893,000 911,000 754,000 848,000 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment. 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $870,503,000 898,647,000 764,943,000 828,159,000 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. (46) 47 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 $828,159,000 for Conservation Operations, which includes not more than $12,500,000 for the Common Computing Environment. WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $17,964,000 Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... House allowance .................................................................................... 14,883,000 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, district, and county offices. OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $893,000 911,000 754,000 848,000 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 $848,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development. RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— 2011 appropriation 2012 budget request House allowance Committee recommendation Appropriation ........................................................ Transfer from: Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account .......................................... Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Program Account ........................ Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account ....................................................... 191,603 234,301 159,755 182,023 453,474 411,779 396,880 430,800 38,297 39,959 29,766 36,382 4,931 4,941 3,473 4,684 Total RD salaries and expenses ............. 688,305 690,980 589,874 653,889 (48) 49 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 $653,889,000 for salaries and expenses of Rural Development, which includes not more than $4,500,000 for the Common Computing Environment. 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, 2011 (budget authority) ............................................. Budget estimate, 2012 (budget authority) ........................................... House allowance (budget authority) ..................................................... Committee recommendation (budget authority) ................................. $555,476,000 473,466,000 468,814,000 512,791,000 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. Loan programs are limited to rural areas, which include towns, villages, and other places of not more than 10,000 population, which are not part of an urban area. Loans may also be made in areas with a population in excess of 10,000, but less than 20,000, if the area is not included in a standard metropolitan statistical area and has a serious lack of mortgage credit for low- and moderate-income borrowers. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $512,791,000 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 2012, as well as for administrative expenses. The following table 50 presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to the 2011 levels and the 2012 budget request: RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 appropriation 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Loan Levels: Single-Family Housing (sec. 502): Direct .................................................................................. Guaranteed ......................................................................... Housing Repair (sec. 504) .......................................................... Direct rental housing (sec. 515) ................................................ Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538) ....................................... Site loans (sec. 524) .................................................................. Credit sales of acquired property ............................................... Self help land development loans (sec. 523) ............................ Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)1 ....................................... 1,119,163 24,000,000 23,313 69,372 30,898 5,041 11,446 4,956 .......................... 211,416 24,000,000 .......................... 95,236 .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... 27,288 900,000 24,000,000 10,000 64,478 130,000 .......................... 10,000 5,000 23,426 Total, loan levels .................................................................... 25,264,189 24,333,940 25,142,904 Loan Subsidies and Grants: Single-Family Housing (sec. 502): Direct .................................................................................. Housing Repair (sec. 504) .......................................................... Direct rental housing (sec. 515) ................................................ Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538) ....................................... Site loans (sec. 524) .................................................................. Credit sales of acquired property ............................................... Self help land development loans (sec. 523) ............................ Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)1 ....................................... Farm labor housing grants (sec. 516)1 ..................................... 70,060 4,413 23,399 2,994 293 555 287 .......................... .......................... 10,000 .......................... 32,495 .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... 9,319 9,873 42,570 1,421 22,000 .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... 8,000 8,000 Total, loan subsidies and grants ........................................... 102,001 61,687 81,991 Administrative expenses ...................................................................... 453,474 411,779 430,800 Total, loan subsidies, grants and administrative expenses ...................................................................................... 555,475 473,466 512,791 1 Included in the Farm Labor Program Account in fiscal year 2011. In fiscal year 2011, $9,853,000 was provided for grants and $9,853,000 was provided for loan subsidies to support $25,673,000 in loans. Centralized Servicing Center.—The Secretary is encouraged to explore opportunities to provide services to other Federal agencies, through Economy Act Agreements, and thereby leverage existing capacity and expertise at Rural Development’s Centralized Servicing Center. Section 502 Guaranteed Single Family Housing Loan Program.— The Committee is concerned that neither USDA nor lenders will complete automated systems changes necessary to support USDA’s announced October 1, 2011, implementation of an annual fee. To ensure uninterrupted continuation of the program, the Secretary may increase the existing guarantee fee sufficient to cover subsidy costs. The Committee expects that the Department will fully implement the annual fee requirements prior to September 30, 2012. The Committee recognizes that the Secretary may implement such annual fee for any duration up to the life of the loan. Section 538 Guaranteed Multi-Family Housing Loan Program.— The Committee no longer prohibits utilization of authorized fees, and expects the Secretary to implement fees sufficient to cover program subsidy costs. 51 RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $953,724,000 906,653,000 883,058,000 904,653,000 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 Rural Housing Service section 515 rural rental and cooperative housing programs and the farm labor loan and grant programs. Priority is given to existing projects for units occupied by rent over-burdened low-income families and projects experiencing financial difficulties beyond the control of the owner; any remaining authority will be used for projects receiving new construction commitments under sections 514, 515, or 516 for very low-income families with certain limitations. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,653,000 for the Rental Assistance Program. Rental Assistance.—The Committee provides funding to meet the needs of expiring and new rental assistance contracts for section 515 and 514/516 multi-family housing projects. The Committee includes statutory language requiring rental assistance to be held in 514/516 projects for a minimum period of time. Rental assistance contracts are funded for 1-year durations. MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $29,940,000 16,000,000 10,914,000 13,000,000 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, a multi-family revolving loan program, and a program for the preservation and revitalization of affordable 52 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 $13,000,000 for the Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program, including $11,000,000 for vouchers and $2,000,000 for a housing preservation demonstration program. MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $36,926,000 Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... House allowance .................................................................................... 21,828,000 Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,000,000 The Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants Program is authorized by title V of the Housing Act of 1949. Grants are made to local organizations to promote the development of mutual or self-help programs under which groups of usually 6 to 10 families build their own homes by mutually exchanging labor. Funds may be used to pay the cost of construction supervisors who 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 $30,000,000 for Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants. RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $40,319,000 11,520,000 31,750,000 34,271,000 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. 53 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 lowincome people. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,271,000 for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program. The following table compares the grant program levels recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2011 levels and the budget request: RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— 2011 level Very low-income housing repair grants .............................................. 30,938 2012 request 11,520 Committee recommendation 27,000 54 RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS—Continued [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— 2011 level Committee recommendation 2012 request Housing preservation grants ............................................................... 9,381 .......................... 7,271 Total ........................................................................................ 40,319 11,520 34,271 FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $19,707,000 Budget estimate, 2012 1 ......................................................................... ........................... 1 House allowance .................................................................................. ........................... Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... ........................... 1 Included in the Rural Housing Insurance Fund in fiscal year 2012. The direct farm labor housing loan program is authorized under section 514 and the rural housing for domestic farm labor housing grant program is authorized under section 516 of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The loans, grants, and contracts are made to public and private nonprofit organizations for low-rent housing and related facilities for domestic farm labor. Grant assistance may not exceed 90 percent of the cost of a project. Loans and grants may be used for construction of new structures, site acquisition and development, rehabilitation of existing structures, and purchase of furnishings and equipment for dwellings, dining halls, community rooms, and infirmaries. Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for costs associated with grant programs. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommendation provides funding for the cost of direct farm labor loans and grants in the Rural Housing Insurance Fund. RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $41,379,000 38,400,000 17,860,000 26,274,000 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. 55 Healthcare and fire and rescue facilities are the priorities of the program and receive the majority of available funds. The Community Facility Grant Program authorized in the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–127), is used in conjunction with the existing direct and guaranteed loan programs for the development of community facilities, such as hospitals, fire stations, and community centers. Grants are targeted to the lowest income communities. Communities that have lower population and income levels receive a higher cost-share contribution through these grants, to a maximum contribution of 75 percent of the cost of developing the facility. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,274,000 for the Rural Community Facilities Program Account. The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 appropriation 2012 budget request Committee recommendations 289,945 167,411 1,000,000 ........................ 1,300,000 ........................ Total loan levels ........................................................................... Budget authority: Community facility direct loans ....................................................... Community facility guaranteed loans .............................................. Community facility grants ................................................................ Economic impact initiative grants ................................................... Rural community development initiative .......................................... Tribal college grants ......................................................................... 457,356 1,000,000 1,300,000 3,856 6,613 14,970 6,986 4,990 3,964 ........................ ........................ 30,000 ........................ 8,400 ........................ ........................ ........................ 12,725 5,938 4,242 3,369 Total budget authority .................................................................. 41,379 38,400 26,274 Loan levels: Community facilities direct loans .................................................... Community facilities guaranteed loans ........................................... School Food Service Equipment Support.—The Committee notes that USDA Community Facilities loans and grants can assist eligible school districts for upgrades in their school lunch and breakfast programs as may be appropriate in conjunction with new nutrition standards. The Committee directs the Department to conduct outreach to rural school districts and consider giving priority to applications for school food service upgrades through the Rural Community Facilities Program. 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. 56 RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $85,280,000 89,857,000 63,996,000 79,665,000 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 enterprise grants were authorized by the Rural Development Act of 1972. Grants are made to public bodies and nonprofit organizations to facilitate development of small and emerging business enterprises in rural areas, including the acquisition and development of land; the construction of buildings, plants, equipment, access streets and roads, parking areas, and utility extensions; refinancing fees; technical assistance; and startup operating costs and working capital. Rural business opportunity grants are authorized under section 306(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended. Grants may be made to public bodies and private nonprofit community development corporations or entities. Grants are made to identify and analyze business opportunities that will use local rural economic and human resources: to identify, train, and provide technical assistance to rural entrepreneurs and managers; to establish business support centers; to conduct economic development planning and coordination, and leadership development; and to establish centers for training, technology, and trade that will provide training to rural businesses in the utilization of interactive communications technologies. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $79,665,000 for the Rural Business Program Account. The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 appropriation Loan levels: Business and Industry guaranteed loans loan levels ...................... 887,332 2012 budget request 822,884 Committee recommendations 822,886 57 RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT—Continued [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 appropriation 2012 budget request Committee recommendations Budget authority: Business and industry guaranteed loans ........................................ Business enterprise grants ............................................................... Business opportunity grants ............................................................. Delta Regional Authority grants ....................................................... 44,899 34,930 2,478 2,973 52,500 29,874 7,483 ........................ 45,341 29,318 2,106 2,900 Total budget authority .................................................................. 85,280 89,857 79,665 Rural Business Program Account.—The Committee recommends $475,000 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. The Committee encourages the Department to consider applications for grants to rural public television broadcasting systems. RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— House allowance 2011 level 2012 request Committee recommendation Estimated loan level ............................................. Direct loan subsidy ............................................... Administrative expenses ....................................... 19,143 7,385 4,931 36,376 12,324 4,941 14,643 4,961 3,473 20,661 7,000 4,684 Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses ............................................. 12,316 17,265 8,434 11,684 The rural development (intermediary relending) loan program was originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Public Law 88–452). The making of rural development loans by the Department of Agriculture was reauthorized by Public Law 99– 425, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1986. Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (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 2011, as well as for administrative expenses. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,684,000 for the Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account. 58 RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT [In thousands of dollars] Estimated loan level Fiscal year 2011 level ........................................................................................................................................ Fiscal year 2012 request ................................................................................................................................... House allowance ................................................................................................................................................ Committee recommendation .............................................................................................................................. 33,077 33,077 33,077 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 credits payment program and created the rural economic development subaccount. The Administrator of RUS is authorized under the act to utilize funds in this program to provide zero interest loans to electric and telecommunications borrowers for the purpose of promoting rural economic development and job creation projects, including funding for feasibility studies, startup costs, and other reasonable expenses for the purpose of fostering rural economic development. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $30,193,000 35,854,000 22,325,000 27,915,000 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 nonFederal 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 en- 59 hance 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 $27,915,000 for Rural Cooperative Development Grants. Of the funds recommended, $2,250,000 is for the Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program. The Committee has included language in the bill that not more than $2,938,000 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 $16,005,000 for value-added agricultural product market development grants. RURAL MICROENTERPRISE INVESTMENT PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $5,700,000 House allowance .................................................................................... ........................... 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 does not recommend an appropriation for the Rural Microenterprise Investment Program. The following table provides the Committee’s recommendation as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: RURAL MICROENTERPRISE INVESTMENT PROGRAM [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 level Estimated loan level .................................................................................. Loan subsidy .............................................................................................. Grants ........................................................................................................ RURAL ENERGY FOR 2012 request ........................ ........................ ........................ 22,450 3,500 2,200 Committee recommendation ........................ ........................ ........................ AMERICA PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $4,990,000 36,788,000 2,282,000 4,500,000 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 60 rural businesses for the purchase of renewable energy systems and for energy efficiency improvements. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,500,000 for the Rural Energy for America Program. The following table provides the Committee’s recommendation as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 level Estimated loan level .................................................................................. Guaranteed loan subsidy ........................................................................... Grants ........................................................................................................ Committee recommendation 2012 request 5,382 2,495 2,495 10,645 2,788 34,000 8,591 2,250 2,250 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $527,944,000 488,978,000 496,099,000 509,295,000 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. 61 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $509,295,000 for the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account. The Committee recommends $67,200,000 for water and waste disposal systems grants for Native Americans, including Native Alaskans, the Colonias, and residents of Hawaiian Home Lands. The Committee recognizes the special needs and problems for delivery of basic services to these populations. In addition, the Committee makes up to $15,000,000 available for the circuit rider program. The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars] Fiscal year 2011 appropriation 2012 budget request Committee recommendation Loan levels: Water and waste disposal direct loans ............................... Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans ...................... 896,469 75,000 770,230 11,950 730,689 ............................ Total loan levels ............................................................... 971,469 782,180 730,689 Budget authority: Water and waste disposal direct loans ............................... Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans ...................... Water and waste disposal grants ........................................ Solid waste management grants ......................................... Water well system grants ..................................................... Water and waste water revolving funds .............................. High energy cost grants ....................................................... 76,917 ............................ 434,130 3,434 991 496 11,976 73,788 190 409,510 4,000 993 497 ............................ 70,000 ............................ 425,110 2,919 844 422 10,000 Total budget authority ...................................................... 527,944 488,978 509,295 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 2012, 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 2011 and budget request levels: 62 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— House allowance 2011 level 2012 request Committee recommendation Loan authorizations: Electric: Direct, 5 percent ................................. Direct FFB ........................................... Guaranteed underwriting .................... 100,000 6,500,000 499,000 100,000 6,000,000 .......................... 100,000 6,500,000 .......................... 100,000 6,500,000 424,286 Subtotal .......................................... 7,099,000 6,100,000 6,600,000 7,024,286 Telecommunications: Direct, 5 percent ................................. Direct, Treasury rate ........................... Direct, FFB .......................................... 145,000 250,000 295,000 145,000 250,000 295,000 145,000 250,000 295,000 145,000 250,000 295,000 Subtotal .......................................... 690,000 690,000 690,000 690,000 Total, loan authorizations ....................... 7,789,000 6,790,000 7,290,000 7,714,286 Guaranteed underwriting budget authority .......... Administrative expenses ....................................... 699 38,297 .......................... 39,959 .......................... 29,766 594 36,382 DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM LOANS AND GRANTS [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— House allowance 2011 level 2012 request Committee recommendation Loan and grant levels: Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program: Grants ................................................. Broadband program: Treasury rate loans ...................................... Treasury rate loans budget authority .......... Grants .......................................................... 32,435 30,000 14,883 28,570 399,200 22,275 13,379 .......................... .......................... 17,976 210,360 5,953 .......................... 282,686 8,000 10,372 Total DLT and Broadband program level ......................................................... 445,014 47,976 225,243 321,628 Total DLT and Broadband budget authority .................................................. 68,089 47,976 20,836 46,942 The Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program is authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), as amended by the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104– 127). This program provides incentives to improve the quality of phone services, to provide access to advanced telecommunications services and computer networks, and to improve rural opportunities. This program provides the facilities and equipment to link rural education and medical facilities with more urban centers and other facilities providing rural residents access to better health care through technology and increasing educational opportunities for rural students. These funds are available for loans and grants. 63 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $46,942,000 for the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program. The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 for public broadcasting systems grants to allow noncommercial educational television broadcast stations that serve rural areas to convert from analog to digital operations. 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 health care 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 and local dial-up Internet services for rural areas. TITLE IV DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION CONSUMER SERVICES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. AND $811,000 828,000 684,000 770,000 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 $770,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services. FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE The Food and Nutrition Service represents an organizational effort to eliminate hunger and malnutrition in this country. Nutrition assistance programs provide access to a nutritionally adequate diet for families and persons with low incomes and encourage better eating patterns among the Nation’s children. These programs include: Child Nutrition Programs.—The National School Lunch and School Breakfast, Summer Food Service, and Child and Adult Care Food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam for use in serving nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending schools of high school grades and under, to children of preschool age in child care centers, and to children in other institutions in order to improve the health and well-being of the Nation’s children, and broaden the markets for agricultural food commodities. Through the Special Milk Program, assistance is provided to the States for making reimbursement payments to eligible schools and child care institutions which institute or expand milk service in order to increase the consumption of fluid milk by children. Funds for this program are provided by direct appropriation and transfer from section 32. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC].—This program safeguards the health of pregnant, 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 (64) 65 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. The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110–246, provides that $248,750,000 in fiscal year 2012 from funds appropriated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program account be used to purchase commodities for The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP]. Commodity Assistance Program [CAP].—This program provides funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP], the Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program, Disaster Assistance, Pacific Island Assistance, and administrative expenses for TEFAP. CSFP provides supplemental foods to infants and children up to age 6, and to pregnant, postpartum, and breast-feeding women with low incomes, and who reside in approved project areas. In addition, this program operates commodity distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons. TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of donated commodities. 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. 66 CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS [In thousands of dollars] Appropriation Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ............................................................ House allowance ...................................................................... Committee recommendation .................................................... 12,046,169 18,810,571 18,770,442 18,151,176 Section 32 transfers Total 5,277,574 .............................. .............................. .............................. 17,323,743 18,810,571 18,770,442 18,151,176 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 $18,151,176,000 for the Child Nutrition Programs. The Committee’s recommendation provides for the following annual rates for the child nutrition programs. TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY [In thousands of dollars] Child nutrition programs 2011 level 1 School Lunch Program ......................................................................... School Breakfast Program ................................................................... Child and Adult Care Food Program ................................................... Summer Food Service Program ............................................................ Special Milk Program ........................................................................... State administrative expenses ............................................................ Commodity procurement ...................................................................... Team Nutrition ..................................................................................... Food safety education .......................................................................... Coordinated review .............................................................................. Computer support ................................................................................ CACFP training and technical assistance ........................................... Child Nutrition Program Studies and Evaluations .............................. Hunger-Free Community Grants .......................................................... Healthier U.S. School Challenge .......................................................... Farm to school tactical team .............................................................. Payment Accuracy ................................................................................ School breakfast expansion grants ..................................................... 9,981,095 3,093,970 2,686,344 392,680 12,512 206,943 907,919 15,004 2,506 5,745 9,518 3,530 2,994 .......................... 698 .......................... 2,333 .......................... 2012 budget 10,884,019 3,337,699 2,818,405 400,505 13,069 279,034 972,651 15,016 2,510 9,763 9,525 3,537 19,000 5,000 1,500 2,000 2,338 10,000 Committee recommendation 10,169,615 3,313,848 2,831,543 401,998 13,240 279,016 1,075,727 15,016 2,510 9,763 9,525 3,537 19,000 .......................... 1,500 2,000 2,338 1,000 67 TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY—Continued [In thousands of dollars] Child nutrition programs 2011 level 1 State childhood hunger grants ............................................................ .......................... 1 Does 2012 budget 25,000 Committee recommendation .......................... not include a rescission of $48,000. 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $6,734,027,000 7,390,100,000 6,001,074,000 6,582,497,000 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 $6,582,497,000 for the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]. The Committee recommendation fully funds estimated WIC participation in fiscal year 2012. The Committee recommendation includes $60,000,000 for breastfeeding support initiatives. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM [In thousands of dollars] Expenses Appropriations, 2011 ................................. Budget estimate, 2012 .............................. House allowance ........................................ Committee recommendation ...................... 65,614,155 66,176,441 66,165,941 75,299,637 Amount in reserve 3,000,000 5,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 Puerto Rico and American Samoa 1,751,611 1,758,617 1,758,617 1,842,835 TEFAP commodity purchases 247,500 248,750 248,750 260,250 Total 70,613,266 73,183,808 71,173,308 80,402,722 68 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 $80,402,722,000 for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The Committee recommendation includes $3,500,000 for financial management systems modernization and $2,000,000 for information technology modernization and support. Of the amount recommended, $3,000,000,000 is made available as a contingency reserve. The Committee notes that $3,000,000,000 was made available in fiscal year 2011 as a contingency reserve. The Committee recommendation includes language that permits the Food and Nutrition Service to conduct studies and evaluations consistent with the budget request. Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.—The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue the purchase of bison from producer-owned and Native American owned cooperatives for the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations. Although funding is not provided specifically for bison purchase, historically these purchases have been important for the Native American population both economically and nutritionally. 69 Northern Mariana Islands.—The Committee is aware Public Law 96–597 permits the Secretary to extend programs administered by USDA to the territories. The Committee encourages the Secretary to work with the government of the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands [CNMI] on a plan to integrate the CNMI into the national Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $246,126,000 249,619,000 195,960,000 242,336,000 The Commodity Assistance Program includes funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program and funding to pay expenses associated with the storage and distribution of commodities through The Emergency Food Assistance Program. The Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP].—Authorized by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note), as amended in 1981 by Public Law 97–98, this program provides supplemental food to infants and children up to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breastfeeding women who have low incomes, and reside in approved project areas. In addition, the program operates commodity distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons 60 years of age or older. The foods for CSFP are provided by the Department of Agriculture for distribution through State agencies. The authorized commodities include: iron-fortified infant formula, rice cereal, cheese, canned juice, evaporated milk and/or nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned meat or poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and peanut butter and dry beans. Elderly participants may receive all commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice cereal. The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP].—Authorized by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 7501 et seq.), as amended, the program provides nutrition assistance to low-income people through prepared meals served on site and through the distribution of commodities to low-income households for home consumption. The commodities are provided by USDA to State agencies for distribution through State-established networks. State agencies make the commodities available to local organizations, such as soup kitchens, food pantries, food banks, and community action agencies, for their use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need. Funds are administered by FNS through grants to State agencies which operate commodity distribution programs. Allocation of the funds to States is based on a formula which considers the States’ unemployment rate and the number of persons with income below the poverty level. The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 makes $248,750,000 available for the purchase of TEFAP commodities in fiscal year 2012. In addition to the commodities purchased specifically for TEFAP, commodities obtained under agriculture support 70 and surplus removal programs are donated to States for distribution through TEFAP. 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. Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program.—The Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program [FMNP] provides WIC or WIC-eligible participants with coupons to purchase fresh, nutritious, unprepared foods, such as fruits and vegetables, from farmers’ markets. This benefits both participants and local farmers by increasing the awareness and use of farmers’ markets by low-income households. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $242,336,000 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 $176,788,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program. This amount fully funds participation in fiscal year 2012. 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 Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 provides $248,750,000 for TEFAP commodities to be purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds. The Committee recommendation includes $48,000,000 for TEFAP administrative funding. In addition, the Committee recommendation grants the Secretary authority to transfer up to an additional 10 percent from TEFAP commodities for this purpose. NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $147,505,000 170,471,000 124,025,000 140,130,000 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 Pro- 71 gram; 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 $140,130,000 for Nutrition Programs Administration. TITLE V FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Appropriations Appropriations, 2011 ........................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................ House allowance .................................................................................. Committee recommendation ................................................................ 185,628 229,730 171,155 176,347 Transfers from loan accounts 6,452 6,465 6,415 6,129 Total 192,080 236,195 177,570 182,476 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 attache´s 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 Export Enhancement Program uses CCCowned commodities as export bonuses to provide export enhancements to U.S. producers. The Market Access Program [MAP] conducts both generic and brand-identified promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit agricultural associations and private firms financed through reimbursable CCC payments. The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit Corporation and 15 U.S.C. 714–714p. The funds allocated to the General Sales Manager are used for conducting the following programs: (1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM–102), including 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. (72) 73 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends $182,476,000 for the Foreign Agricultural Service, including a direct appropriation of $176,347,000. Borlaug Fellows Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 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 $5,000,000 for the Cochran Fellowship Program. The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to provide additional support for the program through the Commodity Credit Corporation Emerging Markets Program. Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.—The Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program. 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, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $2,806,000 2,812,000 2,366,000 2,666,000 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,666,000 for administrative expenses to continue servicing existing Food for Peace title I agreements. FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,497,000,000 1,690,000,000 1,032,084,000 1,562,000,000 The Committee recognizes the important mission of the Food for Peace Program to combat hunger and malnutrition; promote broadbased equitable and sustainable development; expand international trade; develop and expand export markets for U.S. agricultural commodities; and to foster and encourage the development of private enterprise and democratic participation in developing countries. The Committee strongly supports the continued efficient operation of this important program. Commodities Supplied in Connection With Dispositions Abroad (Title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721–1726).—Commodities are supplied without 74 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 $1,562,000,000 for Food for Peace title II grants. The Committee strongly supports international food assistance for both non-emergency, long-term solutions to chronic hunger and for emergency operations which can literally mean the difference between life and death. Currently, the Horn of Africa is suffering from severe malnutrition which has reached the state of declared famine and is proving to be the humanitarian crisis of a generation. A severe drought in that region, made worse by insecurity and civil unrest, has put more than 12 million people in danger of starvation, and acute malnutrition rates for children under the age of 5 exceeds 40 percent. Problems such as those in the Horn of Africa are compounded by escalating food and transportation costs which further reduce the amount of actual food that reaches victims in the field. Food costs have been reported by the World Bank to have risen 33 percent from similar costs just 1 year ago while demand for assistance world-wide escalates at a fast pace, as evidenced by the rise in appeals of the World Food Program from less than $1,000,000,000 in 2000 to $6,800,000,000 in 2010. For these reasons, within a period of declining Federal spending, the Committee has provided an increase of funding for Public Law 480 title II grants, and notes with concern the reality that rising program demand and consequential human tragedy in the absence of assistance are likely to occur. MC GOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAM GRANTS Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $199,101,000 200,500,000 178,596,000 188,000,000 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 75 sale to generate proceeds to support school feeding and nutrition projects. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $188,000,000 for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT (EXPORT CREDIT PROGRAMS AND GSM–102) [In thousands of dollars] Guaranteed loan levels 1 Appropriations, 2011 ........................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................ House allowance .................................................................................. Committee recommendation ................................................................ 1 No 5,500,000 5,500,000 5,500,000 5,500,000 Guaranteed loan subsidy 1 18,480 .......................... .......................... .......................... Administrative expenses 6,806 6,820 6,767 6,465 appropriation required since export credit authorizations are permanent authority. In 1980, the Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] instituted the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM–102) under its charter authority. With this program, CCC guarantees, for a fee, payments due U.S. exporters under deferred payment sales contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults due to commercial as well as noncommercial risks. The risk to CCC extends from the date of export to the end of the deferred payment period covered in the export sales contract and covers only that portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance agreement. Operation of this program is based on criteria which will assure that it is used only where it is determined that it will develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide financing to those areas where the institutions would be unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC guarantees. CCC also provides facilities financing guarantees. The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export guarantee programs are exempt from the requirement of advance appropriations of budget authority according to section 504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public Law 101–508. Appropriations to this account will be used for administrative expenses. TITLE VI RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is a scientific regulatory agency whose mission is to promote and protect the public health and safety of Americans. FDA’s work is a 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 to a timely way, and to monitor products for continued safety after they are in use. In addition, FDA is entrusted with two critical functions in the Nation’s war on terrorism: preventing willful contamination of all regulated products, including food, and improving the availability of medications to prevent or treat injuries caused by biological, chemical, 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 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 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 foods to the same standards as domestic foods 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 life cycle of products, including premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human and animal drugs, medical devices and biological products to ensure their safety and effectiveness. FDA is responsible for the life cycle of the product, (76) 77 including premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human, animal and biological products to ensure their safety and efficacy. For Human Drugs this includes assuring that all drug products used for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease are safe and effective. Additional procedures include the review of investigational new drug applications; evaluation of market applications for new and generic drugs, labeling and composition of prescription and over-the-counter drugs; monitoring the quality and safety of products manufactured in, or imported into, the United States; and, regulating the advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. The Animal Drugs and Feeds Program ensures only safe and beneficial veterinary drugs, intended for the treatment and/or prevention of diseases in animals and the improved production of food-producing animals, are approved for marketing. The FDA Biologics program assures that blood and blood products, blood test kits, vaccines, and therapeutics are pure, potent, safe, effective, and properly labeled. The program inspects blood banks and blood processors, licenses and inspects firms collecting human source plasma, evaluates and licenses biologics manufacturing firms and products; lot releases licensed products; and monitors adverse events associated with vaccine immunization, 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. 78 SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Appropriation Appropriations, 2011 ....................................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 .................................................................................... House allowance .............................................................................................. Committee recommendation ............................................................................ User fees 2,447,021 2,730,910 2,147,958 2,497,021 1,233,480 1,556,748 1,520,415 1,393,366 Total 3,680,501 4,287,658 3,668,373 3,890,387 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,497,021,000 for FDA salaries and expenses. The Committee also recommends $702,172,000 in Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; $57,605,000 in Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act user fee collections; $21,768,000 in Animal Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; $5,706,000 in Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; $477,000,000 in Tobacco Product user fee collections; $71,066,000 for Voluntary Qualified Importer Program user fee collections; $14,700,000 for food reinspection user fee collections; $12,364,000 for recall user fee collections; $19,318,000 in Mammography Quality Standards Act fee collections; and $11,667,000 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 language regarding generic drug review user fees, medical products reinspection user fees, or international courier user fees. None of these user fee proposals have been authorized by Congress. The Committee will continue to monitor any action by the Congress regarding these proposed user fees. The following table reflects the Committee’s recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2011 and budget request levels: FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— 2011 enacted 2012 request Committee recommendation Centers and related field activities: Foods ........................................................................................... 835,682 955,287 867,061 Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN] ..... Field Activities ................................................................... 252,322 583,360 300,869 654,418 265,150 601,911 Human Drugs .............................................................................. 477,018 497,534 477,310 Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER] ........... Field Activities ................................................................... 345,929 131,089 366,439 131,095 347,317 129,993 Biologics ...................................................................................... 212,014 224,933 211,974 Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER] ..... Field Activities ................................................................... 171,157 40,857 183,775 41,158 171,461 40,513 Animal Drugs .............................................................................. 139,178 147,898 138,021 79 FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES—Continued [In thousands of dollars] Fiscal year— 2011 enacted 2012 request Committee recommendation Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM] ............................... Field Activities ................................................................... 85,403 53,775 92,247 55,651 84,699 53,322 Medical and radiological devices ............................................... 322,370 329,102 322,422 Center for Devices and Radiological Health [CDRH] ........ Field Activities ................................................................... 240,486 81,884 247,726 81,376 241,225 81,197 National Center for Toxicological Research [NCTR] ................... 60,543 60,294 60,039 Other Activities .................................................................................... 149,900 197,686 153,704 Rent and related activities .................................................................. 99,554 150,350 105,984 Rental payments to GSA ...................................................................... 150,762 167,826 160,506 Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority ..... 2,447,021 2,730,910 2,497,021 The Committee recommendation includes the following increases: $40,000,000 to begin implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act, $12,962,000 for mandatory rental payments, and $19,038,000 for advancing medical countermeasures. The Committee also accepts FDA’s proposed reduction of $22,000,000 due to administrative and contract savings. The Committee recommendation includes an increase of $40,000,000 for FDA to begin implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act [FSMA]. This legislation will establish a prevention-focused food safety system and leverage the work of FDA’s State and local food safety partners. Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee was unable to provide the full funding request for implementation of FSMA, and directs FDA to apply these increased funds to the highest priority food safety activities. These activities could include publication of new preventative controls for food processing facilities, additional import oversight and inspections of both foreign and domestic facilities, and improved scientific capabilities. The Committee directs FDA to provide a report within 30 days of enactment of this act on how it intends to allocate these funds. The Committee also provides an increase of $19,038,000 for activities relating to advancing medical countermeasures. This initiative was begun in August 2010 in order to increase the U.S. readiness against public health threats, and will allow FDA to work with other Government agencies to facilitate the development of safe and effective medical countermeasures to protect the Nation from chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and emerging infectious disease threats. Again, due to budgetary constraints, the Committee was unable to provide the full funding request for these activities, and directs FDA to provide funding to the highest priority activities relating to these initiatives. The Committee directs FDA to provide a report within 30 days of enactment of this act on how it intends to allocate these funds. 80 The Committee expects FDA to continue all projects, activities, laboratories, and programs as included in the fiscal year 2012 budget request, unless otherwise specified. Adjuvanted Influenza Vaccines.—The Committee recognizes the importance of FDA exercising its authority under the Accelerated Approval of Biological Products regulation to approve licenses for adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines, which are currently being used in seasonal influenza campaigns in Europe. The Committee believes that FDA has sufficient authority under existing regulations to approve adjuvanted vaccines. The Committee is also aware that adjuvanted seasonal influenza clinical studies are needed to further encourage the development of new treatments for emerging public health requirements and for pandemic preparedness. The Committee urges the FDA to work collaboratively with industry and other Federal agencies to facilitate the design and conduct the necessary studies. Agency Collaboration.—The Committee is aware of the MOU between FDA and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services [CMS] to promote collaboration, and strongly supports this effort. The Committee encourages FDA to share information with CMS describing the clinical trials used to support a new drug indication, and to specifically note whether the new drug was compared to a placebo or to an active control. The Committee recommends that FDA make CMS aware of whether a newly approved drug was approved based on an application supported by clinical trials using a non-inferiority or a superiority design. Antimicrobial Resistance.—The Committee commends the FDA for publishing Draft Guidance for Industry No. 209 and for conducting a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence related to antimicrobial use in food animal production and antibiotic-resistant infections in humans. However, over a year has passed since this draft guidance was released and the FDA has not yet identified a timeframe for finalizing and implementing this guidance or for taking other proposed steps to address antimicrobial resistance. Therefore, the Committee directs the FDA to set a timeline for when Guidance No. 209 and any implementing guidance will be finalized, when the FDA intends to release any changes to the Veterinary Feed Directive, and when it plans to issue an order regarding extra label uses of Cephalosporin drugs in food-producing animals. The Committee also recommends that FDA examine medically important antimicrobial drugs currently approved for use in food-producing animals and take steps to assure that such products are aligned with current safety standards. Artificial Pancreas.—To foster the development of artificial pancreas technology, the Committee expects FDA to provide researchers and industry stakeholders with clear, prompt, and reasonable guidance for approval of safe and effective artificial pancreas systems for patients with type I diabetes. The FDA has taken an important first step with the issuance of guidance for an early version of an artificial pancreas system, known as a Low Glucose Suspend system. The Committee strongly encourages FDA to continue to make the advancement of more autonomous artificial pancreas technologies a priority by collaboration with stakeholders and investment of time and resources. Artificial pancreas technologies 81 could be an important tool for patients with type 1 diabetes to achieve better glycemic control, increasing their quality of life and overall health. Breast Imaging Quality Standards.—The Committee is aware that FDA is currently considering the implementation of several recommendations included in the Institute of Medicine Report entitled ‘‘Breast Imaging Quality Standards’’, which was released on May 23, 2005. The Committee directs FDA to provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 120 days of enactment of this act specifying which specific recommendations will be implemented, the timeline for doing so, and specific details on how the recommendations will be implemented. Budget Justification.—The Committee directs FDA to submit the fiscal year 2013 budget request in a format that follows the same account structure as the fiscal year 2012 budget request unless otherwise approved by the Committee. Dietary Supplements.—The Committee is aware that U.S. consumers widely use plant-derived dietary supplements, and that FDA inspects manufacturers and distributors that are responsible for ensuring that such products are not adulterated or contaminated, and do not cause harm to the consumer. The Committee believes that methods and standards are needed to verify source plants and ingredients and to detect toxic contaminants. The Committee encourages FDA to develop guidance for industry on such methods and standards, which would enhance FDA’s ability to inspect and assess industry practices for manufacturing botanical dietary supplements. Food Safety Information Sharing.—The Committee urges the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services to enter into a memorandum of understanding between the relevant agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, including the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the relevant agencies within the Department of Agriculture, including the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Agricultural Research Service, and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, to ensure the timely and efficient sharing of all information collected by such agencies related to foodborne pathogens, contaminants and illnesses. Generic Drugs.—The Committee recommendation includes no less than $97,218,000 for the generic drugs program at FDA, of which no less than $52,947,000 is for the Office of Generic Drugs. Medical Device Safety.—The Committee strongly encourages the Center for Devices and Radiological Health [CDRH] to complete its implementation of the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990. The Government Accountability Office [GAO] identified the unfinished implementation of this act as one of the main causes of including CDRH on GAO’s ‘‘high-risk’’ list of Government agencies. The Committee directs CDRH to report on its progress of the implementation of the Safe Medical Devices Act within 120 days of the enactment of this act. The Committee also encourages CDRH to implement the GAO recommendation for CDRH to strengthen its post-market surveillance of medical devices. The Committee supports CDRH’s use of section 522 authority to study high-risk medical devices that were 82 cleared through the 510(k) process, such as metal-on-metal hip implants. The Committee commends CDRH on meeting with medical experts and leaders of medical device registries that currently exist and recommends that CDRH continue to work with stakeholders to develop a more robust post-market surveillance program for medical devices. Nanotechnology.—The Committee recognizes that FDA is developing the facilities and expertise to study nanotechnology within FDA’s Jefferson Laboratory Campus, including the National Center for Toxicological Research, and its consolidated headquarters at White Oak, Maryland. The Committee supports FDA in its mission to expand upon current research in nanotechnology and supports the development of a Nanotechnology Core Center to meet this mission. The Committee believes a Nanotechnology Core Center should be designed to support nanotechnology toxicity studies, develop analytical tools to quantify nanomaterials in complex matrices, and develop procedures for characterizing nanomaterials in FDA-regulated products. Obesity Therapeutics.—The Committee is concerned with the absence of novel medicines to treat obesity, the second leading cause of preventable deaths in the United States and a disease linked to cancer, high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, and stroke. With only diet, exercise, and gastric surgery as options, the lack of obesity medications is a significant unmet medical need. The Committee directs FDA to report by March 30, 2012 on the steps it will take to support the development of new treatments for obesity, including the use of its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy and other post-marketing authorities, to mitigate risk and ensure rigorous post-market scrutiny while increasing access to novel medications. Office of Cosmetics and Colors [OCAC].—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. Funding provided for OCAC is for direct support of the operation, staffing, compliance, research and international activities performed by this office. Packaged Ice.—The Committee believes it is important that FDA provide guidance to manufacturers of packaged ice to ensure a safe product is sold to consumers. The Committee understands that a Citizens Petition was recently submitted to FDA regarding packaged ice, and encourages FDA to respond to this petition promptly. Seafood Advisory.—The Committee is concerned about differing messages from Federal agencies to pregnant women regarding the nutritional value of seafood consumption during pregnancy. The Committee directs FDA to initiate formal reconsideration of the 2004 advisory in consideration of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines. FDA shall report to the Committee within 120 days of enactment of this act on progress made and a timeline for final action on a new FDA advisory. Seafood Economic Integrity.—The Committee recognizes the importance of seafood to a healthy diet, but is concerned that FDA does not focus sufficient attention on economic integrity issues, particularly with respect to mislabeling of species, weights, country of origin, and treatment. The Committee encourages FDA to work 83 with States and the Department of Commerce to more aggressively combat fraud in parts of the seafood industry. Seafood Safety.—The Committee is aware that FDA currently inspects less than 2 percent of imported seafood. Further, many of these imports may contain substances that are banned in the United States. Therefore, the Committee directs FDA to develop a comprehensive program for imported seafood, in accordance with the Food Safety Modernization Act, to ensure the safety of seafood. Trade Facilitation and Interagency Cooperation.—The current fiscal environment requires that efforts to enhance safety must be directed toward the most serious compliance infractions. The Committee strongly encourages FDA to establish a pilot project to expedite imports for highly compliant importers. The goal would be new trade facilitation methods for low-risk, shippers and cargo that could be incorporated into the import inspection process, thereby enabling FDA to better target Federal resources. FDA is strongly encouraged to provide clear guidelines for those shippers who are low-risk and to collaborate with industry, Customs and Border Protection and other relevant agencies on how such a program could be implemented. FDA is directed to provide a report to the Committee on its efforts in this regard within 120 days of enactment of this act. BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $9,980,000 13,055,000 8,719,000 8,982,000 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 $8,982,000 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 Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... House allowance .................................................................................... Committee recommendation ................................................................. $59,400,000 62,000,000 62,000,000 62,000,000 The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible for the 84 examination and regulation of the banks, associations, and other institutions of the Farm Credit System. Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA also establishes standards, enforces rules and regulations, and approves certain actions of the institutions. The administration and the institutions under its jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92–181, effective December 10, 1971. Public Law 99–205, effective December 23, 1985, restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory authorities and enforcement powers. The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural residences, and associations and other entities upon which farming operations are dependent, and to modernize existing farm credit law to meet current and future rural credit needs. The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation [FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and rural housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, under section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, is assigned the responsibility of regulating this entity and assuring its safe and sound operation. Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by assessments collected from the Farm Credit System institutions and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee recommends a limitation of $62,000,000 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. 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 use of funds to establish an inspection panel at the Department of Agriculture. Section 707. This section prohibits the purchase of new information technology equipment and equipment in excess of $25,000 without the prior approval of the Chief Information Officer. Section 708. This section makes funds for certain conservation programs available until expended to disburse certain obligations made in the current fiscal year. Section 709. This section makes certain former Rural Utilities Service borrowers eligible for the Rural Economic Development loan and grant program. Section 710. This section modifies matching requirements for certain research grants. Section 711. This section provides funds for Rural Development and the Farm Service Agency information technology expenses. Section 712. This section includes language regarding reconstituted infant formula. Section 713. This section requires Department of Agriculture agencies to provide reimbursement to other Department of Agriculture agencies for employees detailed for longer than 30 days. Section 714. This section includes language regarding the Commodity Credit Corporation. Section 715. This section includes language regarding humanitarian food assistance. Section 716. This section places conditions on the closing or relocation of Rural Development State Offices. Section 717. This section includes language regarding the disbursement of obligations under the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. (85) 86 Section 718. This section limits the amount of funding available to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for the release of commodities under the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust. Section 719. 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 720. This section includes language regarding school equipment. Section 721. This section provides funding for the Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers Program as authorized in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. Section 722. This section provides funding to carry out a pilot program for hardwood trees. Section 723. 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 724. This section prohibits the use of funds for user fee proposals that fail to provide sufficient budget impact information. Section 725. This section includes language regarding the Rural Innovation Initiative. Section 726. This section prohibits funds to carry out certain sections of Public Law 110–246. Section 727. This section includes language for the establishment of a fee under the business and industry loan program. Section 728. 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 729. This section includes language regarding farm bill programs. Section 730. This section includes language regarding rescission of funds. Section 731. This section includes language regarding rescission of funds. Section 732. This section provides for disaster recovery. Section 733. This section provides for disaster recovery. PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY During fiscal year 2012, 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, 2012, 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 2012 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 2012 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 recommends funding for the following programs or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal year 2012: Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program Broadband Telecommunication Grants Rural Energy for America Program Horse Protection Act WIC Management Information Systems (87) 88 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on September 7, 2011, the Committee ordered favorably reported en bloc the fiscal year 2012 budget allocation a proposed by the Chairman, and a bill (H.R. 2112) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute; a bill (H.R. 2354) making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute; and a bill (H.R 2017) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute; provided, that each bill be subject to further amendment and that each bill be consistent with its spending allocations, by a recorded vote of 29–1, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows: Yeas Chairman Inouye Mr. Leahy Mr. Harkin Ms. Mikulski Mr. Kohl Mrs. Murray Mrs. Feinstein Mr. Durbin Mr. Johnson (SD) Ms. Landrieu Mr. Reed Mr. Lautenberg Mr. Nelson Mr. Pryor Mr. Tester Mr. Brown Mr. Cochran Mr. McConnell Mr. Shelby Mrs. Hutchison Mr. Alexander Ms. Collins Ms. Murkowski Mr. Graham Mr. Kirk Mr. Coats Mr. Blunt Mr. Moran Mr. Hoeven Nays Mr. Johnson (WI) 89 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by the committee.’’ In compliance with this rule, the following changes in existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italics; and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman. TITLE 7—AGRICULTURE CHAPTER 36—CROP INSURANCE SUBCHAPTER I—FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE § 1524. Education and risk management assistance (a) Education assistance * * * * * (b) Agricultural management assistance (1) Authority * * * * * (4) Commodity Credit Corporation (A) In general * * * (B) Funding (i) In general * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (ii) Exception for øfiscal years 2008 through 2012¿ certain fiscal years For each of fiscal years 2008 through ø2012¿ 2014, the Commodity Credit Corporation shall make available to carry out this subsection $15,000,000. 90 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION CHAPTER 58—ERODIBLE LAND AND WETLAND CONSERVATION AND RESERVE PROGRAM SUBCHAPTER IV—AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION PROGRAM PART II—CONSERVATION SECURITY AND FARMLAND PROTECTION SUBPART B—CONSERVATION STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM § 3838e. Conservation stewardship program (a) Establishment and purpose During each of fiscal years 2009 through ø2012¿ 2014, the Secretary shall carry out a conservation stewardship program to encourage producers to address resource concerns in a comprehensive manner— * * * * * * * PART IV—ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INCENTIVES PROGRAM § 3839aa–2. Establishment and administration (a) Establishment During each of the 2002 through ø2012¿ 2014 fiscal years, the Secretary shall provide payments to producers that enter into contracts with the Secretary under the program. * * * * SUBCHAPTER V—FUNDING * AND * * ADMINISTRATION § 3841. Commodity Credit Corporation (a) In general For each of fiscal years 2002 through ø2012¿ 2012 (and fiscal year 2014 in the case of the programs specified in paragraphs (3)(B), (4), (6), and (7)), the Secretary shall use the funds, facilities, and authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out the following programs under subchapter IV (including the provision of technical assistance): (1) The conservation reserve program under subpart B of part I, including to the maximum extent practicable— * * * * * * * (4) The farmland protection program under subpart C of part II, using, to the maximum extent practicable— (A) * * * * * * * * * * * (E) $200,000,000 in øfiscal year 2012¿ each of fiscal years 2012 through 2014. * * * * * * 91 (6) The environmental quality incentives program under part IV, using, to the maximum extent practicable— (A) * * * * * * * * * * (E) $1,750,000,000 in øfiscal year 2012¿ each of fiscal years 2012 through 2014. (7) The wildlife habitat incentives program under section 3839bb–1 of this title, using, to the maximum extent practicable— (A) * * * * * * * * * * (D) $85,000,000 in each of fiscal years 2005 through ø2012¿ 2014. FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT, 2008, PUBLIC LAW 110–234 TITLE XIV—MISCELLANEOUS CHAPTER 2—OTHER PROVISIONS Subtitle C—Other Miscellaneous Provisions SEC. 14222. DOMESTIC FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. (a) DEFINITION OF SECTION 32.— * * * (b) TRANSFER TO FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Amounts made available for a fiscal year to carry out section 32 in excess of the maximum amount calculated under paragraph (2) shall be transferred to the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service, to be used to carry out the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) except section 21, and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), except sections 17 and 21. 92 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 Committee allocation Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to its subcommittees of amounts in the budget resolution for 2012: Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies: Mandatory ............................................................................ Discretionary ........................................................................ Security ....................................................................... Nonsecurity ................................................................. Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 2012 ..................................................................................... 2013 ..................................................................................... 2014 ..................................................................................... 2015 ..................................................................................... 2016 and future years ........................................................ Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2012 ......................................................................................... 1 Includes 2 Excludes Outlays Amount in bill Committee allocation Amount in bill 116,916 19,780 1,750 18,030 116,916 20,046 1,750 18,296 104,815 22,931 NA NA 1 104,805 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 2 115,138 NA 7,893 NA 6,035 1 23,038 NA NA 2,890 982 280 90 outlays from prior-year budget authority. outlays from prior-year budget authority. NA: Not applicable. Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster funding and in accordance with section 251(b)(2)(D) of the BBEDCA and section 106 of the Deficit Control Act of 2011, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $266,000,000 in budget authority plus associated outlays. 121,303 84,735 893 22,692 804 (246,476) 178,113 13,473 54,890 3,992 29,647 3,869 9,480 88,548 41,416 538,101 Subtotal, Executive Operations ................................................... Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights ................................... Office of Civil Rights ............................................................................... Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration .............................. Agriculture buildings and facilities and rental payments ...................... Payments to GSA ............................................................................. Department of Homeland Security .................................................. Building operations and maintenance ........................................... Hazardous materials management .......................................................... Departmental Administration ................................................................... Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations ............... Office of Communications ....................................................................... Office of Inspector General ...................................................................... Office of the General Counsel ................................................................. Total, Departmental Administration ........................................... 636,517 895 24,922 820 (255,191) 164,470 13,800 76,921 5,125 35,787 4,041 9,722 90,755 46,058 15,196 15,254 9,436 4,272 7,000 63,579 6,566 12,008 14,225 9,417 1,496 1,422 39,920 6,247 Executive Operations: Office of Chief Economist ............................................................... National Appeals Division ............................................................... Office of Budget and Program Analysis ......................................... Office of Homeland Security ........................................................... Office of Advocacy and Outreach ................................................... Office of the Chief Information Officer .......................................... Office of the Chief Financial Officer .............................................. 5,883 1,015 35,000 Budget estimate 5,051 498 ............................ 2011 appropriation Office of the Secretary ............................................................................. Office of Tribal Relations ......................................................................... Healthy Food Financing Initiative ............................................................ Production, Processing, and Marketing TITLE I—AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS Item 442,333 754 19,138 678 (199,825) 145,396 11,452 42,977 3,367 16,381 3,262 7,995 79,376 34,929 71,948 10,623 11,997 7,942 1,262 1,120 33,735 5,269 4,260 420 ............................ House allowance [In thousands of dollars] 504,667 848 21,558 764 (230,416) 164,470 13,800 52,146 3,792 28,165 3,676 8,105 84,121 39,345 78,606 11,408 13,514 8,946 1,421 1,351 36,031 5,935 4,798 473 ............................ Committee recommendation ¥3,788 ¥1,740 ¥490 ¥2,851 ¥5,649 ¥27,548 ¥631 ¥42,697 ¥47 ¥3,364 ¥56 (¥24,775) ............................ ............................ ¥24,775 ¥1,333 ¥7,622 ¥365 ¥1,617 ¥6,634 ¥6,713 ¥131,850 ¥6,129 ¥45 ¥1,134 ¥40 (¥16,060) ¥13,643 ∂327 ¥2,744 ¥200 ¥1,482 ¥193 ¥1,375 ¥4,427 ¥2,071 ¥33,434 ¥1,085 ¥542 ¥35,000 Budget estimate ¥600 ¥711 ¥471 ¥75 ¥71 ¥3,889 ¥312 ¥253 ¥25 ............................ 2010 appropriation ∂62,334 ∂94 ∂2,420 ∂86 (∂30,591) ∂19,074 ∂2,348 ∂9,169 ∂425 ∂11,784 ∂414 ∂110 ∂4,745 ∂4,416 ∂6,658 ∂785 ∂1,517 ∂1,004 ∂159 ∂231 ∂2,296 ∂666 ∂538 ∂53 ............................ House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 93 (10,000) 832,706 (141,000) 4,712 837,418 ............................ 1,214,798 893 863,270 ............................ 3,529 866,799 86,538 (65,000) (60,947) Total, National Institute of Food and Agriculture ................. Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs ................................................................................................... Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: Salaries and expenses .................................................................... Assistance, goods, or services (user fees) NA ...................... Buildings and facilities .................................................................. Total, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service ................... Agricultural Marketing Service: Marketing Services .......................................................................... Standardization activities (user fees) NA .............................. (Limitation on administrative expenses, from fees collected) ....... 94,755 (66,000) (62,101) 911 1,204,769 708,107 (11,880) 466,788 29,874 1,137,690 698,740 (11,880) 479,132 36,926 1,133,230 Agricultural Research Service: Salaries and expenses .................................................................... 85,971 165,421 (41,639) 911 Budget estimate National Institute of Food and Agriculture: Research and education activities ................................................. Native American Institutions Endowment Fund ............................. Extension activities ......................................................................... Integrated activities ........................................................................ Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities Endowment Fund .................................................................................. 893 81,814 156,447 (33,139) Economic Research Service ..................................................................... National Agricultural Statistics Service ................................................... Census of Agriculture ..................................................................... 2011 appropriation Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics ........................................................................................................ Item 77,193 (66,000) (61,000) 787,013 783,838 ............................ 3,175 754 1,012,044 ............................ 591,748 (11,880) 407,993 12,303 987,581 69,454 148,340 (40,000) 754 House allowance [In thousands of dollars] 82,211 (65,000) (62,101) 823,286 820,110 ............................ 3,176 848 1,213,952 (10,000) 709,825 (11,880) 478,179 25,948 1,094,647 77,723 152,616 (41,639) 848 Committee recommendation ¥12,544 (¥1,000) ............................ ¥14,132 ¥43,513 ¥4,327 ............................ (∂1,154) ¥12,596 (¥141,000) ¥1,536 ¥43,160 ............................ ¥353 ¥63 ∂9,183 ¥45 ............................ ¥846 ∂1,718 ............................ ∂11,391 ¥3,926 ¥43,043 (∂10,000) ∂11,085 ............................ ¥953 ¥10,978 ¥38,583 ¥63 ¥8,248 ¥12,805 ............................ ¥45 Budget estimate ¥4,091 ¥3,831 (∂8,500) 2010 appropriation ∂5,018 (¥1,000) (∂1,101) ∂36,273 ∂36,272 ............................ ∂1 ∂94 ∂201,908 (∂10,000) ∂118,077 ............................ ∂70,186 ∂13,645 ∂107,066 ∂8,269 ∂4,276 (∂1,639) ∂94 House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 94 1,239,490 (316,340) (1,713,405) 1,213,816 40,261 (47,500) 811 1,006,503 (1,000) 6,193,419 893 1,208,290 ............................ (2,806) (354) (304,977) (308,137) (1,516,427) 4,177 4,241 876 1,217,584 Total, Agricultural Marketing Service program .......................... Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration: Salaries and expenses .................................................................... Limitation on inspection and weighing services ............................ Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety ........................................ Food Safety and Inspection Service ......................................................... Lab accreditation fees .................................................................... Total, Production, Processing, and Marketing ........................... Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services ...................................................................................................... Farm Service Agency: Salaries and expenses .................................................................... Equal Credit Opportunity claims (leg. proposal) ............................ (Transfer from Food for Peace (Public Law 480)) .......................... (Transfer from export loans) ........................................................... (Transfer from ACIF) ....................................................................... Subtotal, transfers from program accounts .............................. Total, Salaries and expenses ..................................................... State mediation grants ................................................................... Grassroot source water protection program ................................... Dairy indemnity program ................................................................ Subtotal, Farm Service Agency ................................................... Farm Assistance Programs (20,056) 2,634 (20,056) 1,331 1,401,534 4,369 ............................ 100 1,357,065 40,000 (2,812) (355) (313,173) 911 6,303,410 828 1,011,393 (1,000) 44,192 (50,000) 1,080,000 1,065,000 Funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (Section 32): Permanent, Section 32 ........................................................... Marketing agreements and orders (transfer from section 32) ..................................................................... Payments to States and Possessions ............................................. 1,174,522 3,522 3,577 100 (1,428,737) (261,414) 1,167,323 ............................ (2,366) (352) (258,696) 754 5,608,628 684 964,446 (1,000) 36,711 (47,500) 1,219,514 (20,056) 1,321 1,080,000 1,189,457 3,759 3,817 100 (1,474,511) (292,730) 1,181,781 ............................ (2,666) (336) (289,728) 848 6,077,517 770 1,006,503 (1,000) 38,248 (50,000) 1,225,510 (20,056) 1,198 1,080,000 ¥225,893 ¥115,902 (¥238,894) ¥610 ∂3,817 ............................ ¥212,077 ¥418 ¥424 ¥776 ¥28,127 (¥23,610) ¥175,284 ¥40,000 (¥146) (¥19) (¥23,445) (¥41,916) (¥15,407) ¥26,509 ............................ (¥140) (¥18) (¥15,249) ¥63 ¥58 ¥4,890 ............................ ¥41 ............................ ............................ ¥45 ¥5,944 ............................ ¥13,980 ∂11,694 ¥2,013 (∂2,500) ............................ ¥1,436 ............................ ............................ ¥133 ∂15,000 ∂14,935 ∂237 ∂240 ............................ (∂45,774) (∂31,316) ∂14,458 ............................ (∂300) (¥16) (∂31,032) ∂94 ∂468,889 ∂86 ∂42,057 ............................ ∂1,537 (∂2,500) ∂5,996 ............................ ¥123 ............................ 95 (1,050,090) (1,500,000) ............................ (2,550,090) (2,000) (150,000) (10,000) (60,000) (4,747,090) (947,607) (1,496,996) (122,097) (2,566,700) (3,940) ............................ ............................ (100,000) (4,641,690) 32,804 5,689 38,493 57,425 34,880 Subtotal ........................................................... Indian tribe land acquisition loans .............................. Conservation loans: Guaranteed ........................................................... Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans ........................ Boll weevil eradication loans ........................................ Total, Loan authorizations ........................................ Loan subsidies: Farm ownership loans: Direct .................................................................... Guaranteed ........................................................... Subtotal ........................................................... Farm operating loans: Direct .................................................................... Unsubsidized guaranteed ..................................... 59,120 26,100 22,800 22,800 ............................ (1,975,000) (1,971,050) Subtotal ........................................................... Farm operating loans: Direct .................................................................... Unsubsidized guaranteed ..................................... Subsidized guaranteed ......................................... Budget estimate (475,000) (1,500,000) 2011 appropriation (474,050) (1,497,000) Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund (ACIF) Program Account: Loan authorizations: Farm ownership loans: Direct .................................................................... Guaranteed ........................................................... Item 58,659 25,896 22,622 22,622 ............................ (4,763,365) (150,000) (9,896) (100,000) (2,000) (2,530,177) (1,041,901) (1,488,276) ............................ (1,971,292) (471,292) (1,500,000) House allowance [In thousands of dollars] 57,425 26,100 22,800 22,800 ............................ (4,756,982) (150,000) (10,000) (100,000) (2,000) (2,519,982) (1,019,982) (1,500,000) ............................ (1,975,000) (475,000) (1,500,000) Committee recommendation ¥1,695 ............................ ............................ ¥15,693 ............................ ¥8,780 ............................ ............................ (∂9,892) ............................ ............................ (∂40,000) ............................ (¥30,108) (¥30,108) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ Budget estimate ¥10,004 ¥5,689 (∂115,292) (∂150,000) (∂10,000) ............................ (¥1,940) (¥46,718) (∂72,375) (∂3,004) (¥122,097) (∂3,950) (∂950) (∂3,000) 2010 appropriation ¥1,234 ∂204 ∂178 ∂178 ............................ (¥6,383) ............................ (∂104) ............................ ............................ (¥10,195) (¥21,919) (∂11,724) ............................ (∂3,708) (∂3,708) ............................ House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 96 193 2,500 110,713 431,806 (4,747,090) 1,833,340 147,684 304,977 7,904 312,881 460,565 (4,641,690) 1,678,149 78,842 1,757,884 Total, Loan subsidies ............................................... ACIF administrative expenses: Salaries and expense (transfer to FSA) ........................ Administrative expenses ............................................... Total, ACIF expenses ................................................. Total, Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund ................ (Loan authorization) ........................................ Total, Farm Service Agency ...................................... Risk Management Agency, Administrative and operating expenses ....... Total, Farm Assistance Programs .............................................. 14,071,000 (5,000) 13,925,575 (5,000) 21,538,807 29,490,110 (328,193) (4,641,690) (113,447) Total, Corporations ..................................................................... Total, Title I, Agricultural Programs ........................................... (By transfer) ...................................................................... (Loan authorization) .......................................................... (Limitation on administrative expenses) ........................... 25,433,361 (336,396) (4,747,090) (117,101) 17,213,375 3,142,375 7,613,232 1,916,576 82,325 321,093 Federal Crop Insurance Corporation: Federal crop insurance corporation fund ....................................... Commodity Credit Corporation Fund: Reimbursement for net realized losses .......................................... Hazardous waste management (limitation on expenses) .............. Corporations 85,220 109,191 ............................ ............................ Subtotal ........................................................... Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans ........................ Individual Development Accounts ................................. 313,173 7,920 ............................ 16,886 Subsidized guaranteed ......................................... 24,438,670 (281,470) (4,763,365) (113,500) 17,213,375 14,071,000 (5,000) 3,142,375 1,616,667 67,485 1,548,428 373,906 (4,763,365) 266,538 258,696 7,842 107,368 191 ............................ 84,555 ............................ 24,959,852 (312,786) (4,756,982) (117,101) 17,213,375 14,071,000 (5,000) 3,142,375 1,668,960 74,900 1,593,212 403,755 (4,756,982) 297,237 289,728 7,509 106,518 193 ............................ 83,525 ............................ ............................ ¥473,509 (¥23,610) (∂9,892) ............................ ¥4,325,432 ¥4,530,258 (¥15,407) (∂115,292) (∂3,654) ¥247,616 ¥88,924 ............................ ............................ ¥7,425 ¥3,942 ∂145,425 ............................ ¥240,128 ¥84,937 ............................ ¥28,051 (∂9,892) ¥56,810 (∂115,292) ¥4,470,857 ¥23,856 ¥15,644 ¥41,166 ¥23,445 ¥411 ¥4,195 ∂193 ............................ ¥15,249 ¥395 ¥1,695 ............................ ¥2,500 ¥25,666 ............................ ¥16,886 ∂521,182 (∂31,316) (¥6,383) (∂3,601) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂52,293 ∂7,415 ∂44,784 ∂29,849 (¥6,383) ∂30,699 ∂31,032 ¥333 ¥850 ∂2 ............................ ¥1,030 ............................ 97 (456,679) (690,980) 888,467 889,360 893 191,603 (453,474) (4,931) (38,297) (496,702) (688,305) (1,119,163) (24,000,000) Total, Natural Resources Conservation Service ......................... Total, Title II, Conservation Programs ........................................ Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development ............................. Rural Development: Rural development expenses: Salaries and expenses ........................................................... (Transfer from RHIF) .............................................................. (Transfer from RDLFP) ........................................................... (Transfer from RETLP) ............................................................ Subtotal, Transfers from program accounts ..................... Total, Rural development expenses ................................... Rural Housing Service: Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account: Loan authorizations: Single family direct (Sec. 502) ..................................... Unsubsidized guaranteed ..................................... TITLE III—RURAL DEVELOPMENT 870,503 17,964 (211,416) (24,000,000) 234,301 (411,779) (4,941) (39,959) 911 899,558 898,647 898,647 ............................ 893 911 Budget estimate Natural Resources Conservation Service: Conservation operations .................................................................. Watershed rehabilitation program .................................................. 2011 appropriation Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment ..................................................................................................... TITLE II—CONSERVATION PROGRAMS Item (839,070) (24,000,000) (589,874) (430,119) 159,755 (396,880) (3,473) (29,766) 754 780,580 779,826 764,943 14,883 754 House allowance [In thousands of dollars] (900,000) (24,000,000) (653,889) (471,866) 182,023 (430,800) (4,684) (36,382) 848 829,007 828,159 828,159 ............................ 848 Committee recommendation ¥70,551 ¥63 ¥60,353 ¥45 (¥219,163) ............................ (¥34,416) (¥24,836) (∂688,584) ............................ (¥37,091) (∂15,187) ¥52,278 (∂19,021) (¥257) (¥3,577) ¥70,488 ¥60,308 ¥9,580 (¥22,674) (¥247) (¥1,915) ¥70,488 ............................ ¥63 Budget estimate ¥42,344 ¥17,964 ¥45 2010 appropriation (∂60,930) ............................ (∂64,015) (∂41,747) ∂22,268 (∂33,920) (∂1,211) (∂6,616) ∂94 ∂48,427 ∂48,333 ∂63,216 ¥14,883 ∂94 House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 98 10,000 ............................ 32,495 ............................ ............................ ............................ 9,319 ............................ 51,814 (25,289,862) 70,060 4,413 23,399 2,994 293 555 9,853 287 111,854 9,854 453,474 575,182 (25,289,862) 948,704 2,026 2,994 953,724 13,972 14,970 998 Total, Loan authorizations ........................................ Loan subsidies: Single family direct (Sec. 502) ..................................... Housing repair (Sec. 504) ............................................. Rental housing (Sec. 515) ............................................ Multi-family housing guarantees (Sec. 538) ................ Site development loans (Sec. 524) ............................... Multi-family housing credit sales ................................. Farm labor housing (Sec. 514) ..................................... Self-help land dev. housing loans (Sec. 523) ............. Total, Loan subsidies ............................................... Farm labor housing grants .................................................... RHIF administrative expenses (transfer to RD) ..................... Total, Rural Housing Insurance Fund program ................. (Loan authorization) ................................................. Rental assistance program: Rental assistance (Sec. 521) ................................................ New construction (Sec. 515) .................................................. New construction (Farm Labor Housing) ............................... Total, Rental assistance program ..................................... Rural housing voucher program ..................................................... Multi-family housing revitalization program .................................. Multifamily housing preservation revolving loans .......................... 16,000 ............................ ............................ 906,653 900,653 3,000 3,000 473,466 (24,333,940) 9,873 411,779 (24,333,940) (23,313) (69,372) (5,041) (30,898) (1,446) (10,000) (4,956) (25,673) (24,211,416) ............................ (95,236) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (27,288) (25,119,163) Subtotal, Single family .................................... Housing repair (Sec. 504) ............................................. Rental housing (Sec. 515) ............................................ Site loans (Sec. 524) .................................................... Multi-family housing guarantees (Sec. 538) ................ Multi-family housing credit sales ................................. Single family housing credit sales ............................... Self-help housing land develop. (Sec. 523) ................. Farm Labor Housing (Sec. 514) .................................... (24,839,070) 10,914 ............................ ............................ 883,058 879,089 1,488 2,481 468,814 (24,915,388) 6,201 396,880 65,733 39,688 ............................ 19,844 ............................ ............................ ............................ 6,201 ............................ (24,915,388) ............................ (58,159) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (18,159) 11,000 2,000 ............................ 904,653 900,653 2,000 2,000 512,791 (25,142,904) 8,000 430,800 73,991 42,570 1,421 22,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ 8,000 ............................ (25,142,904) (10,000) (64,478) ............................ (130,000) ............................ (10,000) (5,000) (23,426) (24,900,000) ¥2,000 ¥5,000 ∂2,000 ............................ ¥2,972 ¥12,970 ¥998 ∂39,325 (∂808,964) ¥62,391 (¥146,958) ¥49,071 ¥1,873 ∂19,021 ¥1,854 ¥22,674 ............................ ¥1,000 ¥1,000 ∂22,177 ¥37,863 ¥48,051 ¥26 ¥994 ∂32,570 ∂1,421 ¥10,495 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥1,319 ............................ (∂808,964) (∂10,000) (¥30,758) ............................ (∂130,000) ............................ (∂10,000) (∂5,000) (¥3,862) (∂688,584) ¥27,490 ¥2,992 ¥1,399 ¥2,994 ¥293 ¥555 ¥1,853 ¥287 (¥146,958) (¥13,313) (¥4,894) (¥5,041) (∂99,102) (¥1,446) ............................ (∂44) (¥2,247) (¥219,163) (∂60,930) ∂86 ∂2,000 ............................ ∂21,595 ∂21,564 ∂512 ¥481 ∂43,977 (∂227,516) ∂1,799 ∂33,920 ∂8,258 ∂2,882 ∂1,421 ∂2,156 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂1,799 ............................ (∂227,516) (∂10,000) (∂6,319) ............................ (∂130,000) ............................ (∂10,000) (∂5,000) (∂5,267) 99 (1,000,000) ............................ (1,000,000) (289,945) (167,411) (457,356) 3,856 6,613 14,970 4,990 6,986 3,964 41,379 118,624 1,677,470 (25,747,218) (887,332) Rural community facilities program account: Loan authorizations: Community facility: Direct .................................................................... Guaranteed ........................................................... Total, Loan authorizations ............................... Loan subsidies and grants: Community facility: Direct .................................................................... Guaranteed ........................................................... Grants ................................................................... Rural community development initiative ...................... Economic impact initiative grants ............................... Tribal college grants ..................................................... Total, RCFP Loan subsidies and grants .................. Subtotal, grants and payments ............................... Total, Rural Housing Service .................................... (Loan authorization) ........................................ Rural Business-Cooperative Service: Rural Business Program Account: (Guaranteed business and industry loans) ........................... 16,000 36,926 40,319 (822,884) 1,446,039 (25,333,940) 49,920 38,400 ............................ ............................ 30,000 8,400 ............................ ............................ ............................ 11,520 29,940 Budget estimate Total, Multi-family housing revitalization .................................. 2011 appropriation Mutual and self-help housing grants ............................................ Rural housing assistance grants ................................................... Item (622,069) 1,434,224 (26,020,272) 71,438 17,860 ............................ 4,961 9,922 2,977 ............................ ............................ (1,104,884) (1,000,000) (104,884) 21,828 31,750 10,914 House allowance [In thousands of dollars] (822,886) 1,520,989 (26,442,904) 90,545 26,274 ............................ ............................ 12,725 4,242 5,938 3,369 (1,300,000) (1,300,000) ............................ 30,000 34,271 13,000 Committee recommendation ¥6,926 ¥6,048 ∂40,625 ∂74,950 (∂1,108,964) ¥28,079 ¥156,481 (∂695,686) (∂2) ¥12,126 ¥15,105 (¥64,446) ............................ ............................ ¥17,275 ¥4,158 ∂5,938 ∂3,369 (∂300,000) ¥3,856 ¥6,613 ¥2,245 ¥748 ¥1,048 ¥595 (∂842,644) (∂300,000) ............................ ¥3,000 ∂30,000 ∂22,751 ¥16,940 (∂1,010,055) (¥167,411) Budget estimate 2010 appropriation (∂200,817) ∂86,765 (∂422,632) ∂19,107 ∂8,414 ............................ ¥4,961 ∂2,803 ∂1,265 ∂5,938 ∂3,369 (∂195,116) (∂300,000) (¥104,884) ∂8,172 ∂2,521 ∂2,086 House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 100 29,874 7,483 ............................ 89,857 (36,376) 12,324 4,941 17,265 34,930 2,478 2,973 85,280 (19,143) 7,385 4,931 12,316 (33,077) (207,000) ¥207,000 7,908 ............................ ............................ 18,829 3,456 30,193 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (5,382) 2,495 2,495 Total, RBP loan subsidies and grants ............ Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account: (Loan authorization) ............................................................... Loan subsidy .......................................................................... Administrative expenses (transfer to RD) ............................. Total, Rural Development Loan Fund ................................ Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account: (Loan authorization) ............................................................... Limit cushion of credit interest spending ............................. (Rescission) ................................................................... Rural cooperative development grants: Cooperative development ....................................................... Appropriate technology transfer for rural areas .................... Cooperative research agreement ........................................... Value-added agricultural product market development ........ Grants to assist minority producers ...................................... Total, Rural Cooperative development grants. .................. Rural Microenterprise Investment Program Account: (Loan authorization) ............................................................... Loan subsidy .......................................................................... Grants ..................................................................................... Total, Rural Microenterprise Investment ........................... Rural Energy for America Program (Loan authorization) ............................................................... Loan subsidy .......................................................................... Grants ..................................................................................... (10,645) 2,788 34,000 5,700 (22,450) 3,500 2,200 35,854 8,924 2,800 300 20,367 3,463 (33,077) (241,794) ¥241,794 52,500 44,899 Loan subsidies and grants: Guaranteed business and industry subsidy ................. Grants: Rural business enterprise .................................... Rural business opportunity .................................. Delta regional authority ....................................... (4,357) 1,141 1,141 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 22,325 4,961 1,984 ............................ 12,403 2,977 (33,077) (155,000) ¥155,000 8,434 (14,643) 4,961 3,473 63,996 19,844 2,232 2,232 39,688 (8,591) 2,250 2,250 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 27,915 6,722 2,250 ............................ 16,005 2,938 (33,077) (155,000) ¥155,000 11,684 (20,661) 7,000 4,684 79,665 29,318 2,106 2,900 45,341 (∂3,209) ¥245 ¥245 ............................ (∂4,234) ∂1,109 ∂1,109 ............................ ¥5,700 (¥2,054) ¥538 ¥31,750 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂5,590 ∂1,761 ∂266 ............................ ∂3,602 ¥39 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂3,250 (∂6,018) ∂2,039 ∂1,211 ∂15,669 ∂9,474 ¥126 ∂668 ∂5,653 (¥22,450) ¥3,500 ¥2,200 ¥7,939 ¥2,278 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥2,202 ¥550 ¥300 ¥4,362 ¥525 ............................ (¥86,794) ∂86,794 ¥1,186 ∂2,250 ............................ ¥2,824 ¥518 ............................ (¥52,000) ∂52,000 ¥5,581 ¥632 ¥10,192 ¥5,615 (¥15,715) ¥5,324 ¥257 ¥556 ¥5,377 ∂2,900 ¥5,612 ¥372 ¥73 (∂1,518) ¥385 ¥247 ¥7,159 ∂442 101 ¥56,330 (925,432) (770,230) (11,950) 782,180 73,788 190 497 993 65,000 19,000 14,000 4,000 ............................ 311,510 488,978 ¥74,221 (944,934) (896,469) (75,000) 971,469 76,917 ............................ 496 991 69,860 19,461 14,970 3,434 11,976 329,839 527,944 (100,000) Total, Rural Business-Cooperative Service ....................... (Loan authorization) ................................................. Rural Utilities Service: Rural water and waste disposal program account: Loan authorizations: Direct ............................................................................. Guaranteed .................................................................... Total, Loan authorization .......................................... Loan subsidies and grants: Direct subsidy ............................................................... Guaranteed subsidy ...................................................... Water and waste revolving fund .................................. Water well system grants ............................................. Colonias and AK/HI grants ........................................... Water and waste technical assistance ........................ Circuit rider program .................................................... Solid waste management grants .................................. High energy cost grants ............................................... Water and waste disposal grants ................................ Total, Loan subsidies and grants ............................ Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account: Loan authorizations: Electric: Direct, 5 percent .................................................. (100,000) 36,788 Budget estimate 4,990 2011 appropriation Total, Renewable energy program ..................................... Item (100,000) 496,100 69,454 ............................ 493 985 64,493 18,852 13,891 3,373 ............................ 324,559 724,990 (724,990) ............................ ¥57,963 (674,146) 2,282 House allowance [In thousands of dollars] (100,000) 509,295 70,000 ............................ 422 844 67,200 19,000 15,000 2,919 10,000 323,910 805,689 (730,689) (75,000) ¥31,236 (885,215) 4,500 Committee recommendation ............................ ∂20,317 ¥18,649 ............................ ¥3,788 ¥190 ¥75 ¥149 ∂2,200 ............................ ∂1,000 ¥1,081 ∂10,000 ∂12,400 ∂23,509 ¥165,780 ¥6,917 ............................ ¥74 ¥147 ¥2,660 ¥461 ∂30 ¥515 ¥1,976 ¥5,929 (¥39,541) (∂63,050) (¥165,780) ............................ ∂25,094 (¥40,217) ¥32,288 ¥490 ∂42,985 (¥59,719) Budget estimate 2010 appropriation ............................ ∂13,195 ∂546 ............................ ¥71 ¥141 ∂2,707 ∂148 ∂1,109 ¥454 ∂10,000 ¥649 ∂80,699 (∂5,699) (∂75,000) ∂26,727 (∂211,069) ∂2,218 House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 102 (690,000) (6,790,000) ............................ ............................ (145,000) (250,000) (295,000) (690,000) (7,789,000) 699 38,297 38,996 (7,789,000) (399,200) (399,200) Subtotal, Telecommunications ......................... Total, Loan authorizations ............................... Loan subsidies: Electric: Guaranteed underwriting ..................................... RETLP administrative expenses (transfer to RD) .................. Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account ................................................ (Loan authorization) ................................................. Distance learning, telemedicine, and broadband program: Loan authorizations: Broadband telecommunications .................................... ............................ 17,976 22,275 13,379 68,089 635,029 (9,159,669) 2,430,774 Total, Loan subsidies and grants ................... Total, Rural Utilities Service ........................... (Loan authorization) .................................... Total, Title III, Rural Development Programs .. 2,201,834 576,913 (7,572,180) 47,976 30,000 32,435 39,959 (6,790,000) ............................ 39,959 Loan subsidies and grants: Distance learning and telemedicine: Grants ................................................................... Broadband telecommunications: Direct .................................................................... Grants ................................................................... Total, Loan authorizations ........................................ (6,100,000) (7,099,000) Subtotal, Electric ............................................. Telecommunications: Direct, 5 percent .................................................. Direct, Treasury rate ............................................ Direct, FFB ............................................................ (145,000) (250,000) (295,000) (6,000,000) ............................ (6,500,000) (499,000) Direct, FFB ............................................................ Guaranteed underwriting ..................................... 2,083,472 546,702 (8,225,350) 20,836 5,953 ............................ 14,883 (210,360) (210,360) 29,766 (7,290,000) ............................ 29,766 (7,290,000) (690,000) (145,000) (250,000) (295,000) (6,600,000) (6,500,000) ............................ 2,265,837 593,213 (8,802,661) 46,942 8,000 10,372 28,570 (282,686) (282,686) 36,976 (7,714,286) 594 36,382 (7,714,286) (690,000) (145,000) (250,000) (295,000) (7,024,286) (6,500,000) (424,286) ¥1,430 ∂8,000 ¥7,604 ¥1,034 ∂16,300 (∂1,230,481) ∂64,003 ¥14,275 ¥3,007 ¥21,147 ¥41,816 (¥357,008) ¥164,937 (∂282,686) (∂282,686) ¥2,983 (∂924,286) ∂594 ¥3,577 (∂924,286) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (∂924,286) (∂500,000) (∂424,286) ¥3,865 (¥116,514) (¥116,514) ¥2,020 (¥74,714) ¥105 ¥1,915 (¥74,714) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (¥74,714) ............................ (¥74,714) ∂182,365 ∂46,511 (∂577,311) ∂26,106 ∂2,047 ∂10,372 ∂13,687 (∂72,326) (∂72,326) ∂7,210 (∂424,286) ∂594 ∂6,616 (∂424,286) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (∂424,286) ............................ (∂424,286) 103 68,173,308 5,000,000 1,500 9,000 ............................ 73,183,808 12,046,217 ............................ ............................ ............................ 5,277,574 ¥48 17,323,743 6,734,027 67,613,363 3,000,000 ............................ ............................ ¥97 70,613,266 175,697 19,960 49,401 Total, Child nutrition programs ......................................... Special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children (WIC) ............................................................................. Supplemental nutrition assistance program: (Food stamp program) ........................................................... Reserve .......................................................................... Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion .................... Grants to States and technical assistance .................. .2 Percent (rescission) (discretionary) .......................... Total, Food stamp program ...................................... Commodity assistance program: Commodity supplemental food program ................................ Farmers market nutrition program ........................................ Emergency food assistance program ..................................... 176,788 20,000 50,000 7,390,100 18,810,571 18,770,571 5,000 10,000 25,000 ............................ ............................ 828 811 Food and Nutrition Service: Child nutrition programs ................................................................ Competitive grants ................................................................. School breakfast program grants .......................................... Childhood Hunger challenge grants ...................................... Transfer from section 32 ....................................................... .2 Percent (rescission) (discretionary) ................................... TITLE IV—DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services ...................................................................................................... (456,679) (33,831,552) Budget estimate (496,702) (35,851,821) 2011 appropriation (By transfer) ................................................ (Loan authorization) .................................... Item 141,960 15,000 38,000 71,173,308 68,173,308 3,000,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ 6,001,074 18,770,442 18,770,442 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 684 (430,119) (34,919,768) House allowance [In thousands of dollars] 176,788 16,548 48,000 80,402,722 77,402,722 3,000,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ 6,582,497 18,151,176 18,150,176 ............................ 1,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ 770 (471,866) (36,130,780) Committee recommendation ............................ ¥3,452 ¥2,000 ∂7,218,914 ∂9,789,456 ∂1,091 ¥3,412 ¥1,401 ∂9,229,414 ¥2,000,000 ¥1,500 ¥9,000 ............................ ∂9,789,359 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂97 ¥807,603 ¥659,395 ∂827,433 ¥151,530 ¥620,395 ¥5,000 ¥9,000 ¥25,000 ............................ ............................ ¥58 (∂15,187) (∂2,299,228) Budget estimate ∂6,103,959 ............................ ∂1,000 ............................ ¥5,277,574 ∂48 ¥41 (¥24,836) (∂278,959) 2010 appropriation ∂34,828 ∂1,548 ∂10,000 ∂9,229,414 ∂9,229,414 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂581,423 ¥619,266 ¥620,266 ............................ ∂1,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂86 (∂41,747) (∂1,211,012) House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 104 RELATED PROGRAMS 1,690,000 6,465 355 1,497,000 6,452 354 6,806 199,101 1,891,341 (6,452) Total, CCC Export Loans Program Account ....................... McGovern-Dole international food for education and child nutrition program grants .................................................................................... Total, Title V, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs ......... (By transfer) ...................................................................... 2,129,862 (6,465) 200,500 6,820 2,812 236,195 192,080 2,806 229,730 (6,465) Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress Program Account, Administrative Expenses: Farm Service Agency, Salaries and expenses (transfer to FSA) .... Food for Peace Title II Grants: Expenses .......................................................................................... Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program Account (administrative expenses): Salaries and expenses (Export Loans): General Sales Manager (transfer to FAS) .............................. Farm Service Agency S&E (transfer to FSA) .......................... Total, Salaries and expenses ..................................................... Salaries and expenses ............................................................................. (Transfer from export loans) ........................................................... Foreign Agricultural Service 99,805,397 99,804,569 185,628 (6,452) 95,065,478 Total, Title IV, Domestic Food Programs .................................... TITLE V—FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND 95,064,667 Total, Food and Nutrition Service ............................................... 170,471 249,619 246,126 147,505 Total, Commodity assistance program .............................. 1,081 1,750 1,068 ............................ Nutrition programs administration ................................................. Pacific island and disaster assistance ................................. IT modernization and support ................................................ 1,390,968 (6,415) 178,596 6,767 6,415 352 1,032,084 2,366 177,570 171,155 (6,415) 96,265,493 96,264,809 124,025 195,960 1,000 ............................ 1,935,478 (6,129) 188,000 6,465 6,129 336 1,562,000 2,666 182,476 176,347 (6,129) 105,519,631 105,518,861 140,130 242,336 1,000 ............................ ¥194,384 (¥336) ¥355 ¥341 ∂44,137 (¥323) ¥336 ¥19 ¥323 ¥18 ¥12,500 ¥128,000 ∂65,000 ¥11,101 ¥146 ¥140 ¥53,719 ∂10,454,153 ¥9,604 ∂5,714,234 ∂10,454,194 ¥53,383 (¥336) ∂5,714,292 ¥7,375 ¥9,281 (¥323) ¥7,283 ¥30,341 ¥3,790 ¥81 ¥1,750 ¥68 ............................ ∂544,510 (¥286) ∂9,404 ¥302 ¥286 ¥16 ∂529,916 ∂300 ∂4,906 ∂5,192 (¥286) ∂9,254,138 ∂9,254,052 ∂16,105 ∂46,376 ............................ ............................ 105 (40,122) (14,108) (5,338) (59,568) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 9,980 (3,690,481) (3,690,481) 2,457,001 Subtotal, FDA new user fees (Leg Proposals) ................... Buildings and facilities ........................................................................... Total, FDA (w/user fees, including proposals) ........................... Total, FDA (w/enacted user fees only) ....................................... Total, FDA (excluding user fees) ................................................ (4,360,281) (4,300,713) 2,743,965 13,055 (4,287,658) (3,680,501) Subtotal, FDA (with user fees) ................................................... FDA New User Fees (Leg. proposals): Generic drug review user fees ............................................... Reinspection fees ................................................................... International express courier import fees .............................. Budget estimate 2,730,910 (856,041) (67,118) (21,768) (5,706) (477,000) (12,364) (14,700) (71,066) (19,318) (11,667) 2011 appropriation 2,447,021 (667,057) (61,860) (19,448) (5,397) (450,000) ............................ ............................ ............................ (19,318) (10,400) Salaries and expenses, direct appropriation ........................................... Prescription drug user fees ............................................................ Medical device user fees ................................................................ Animal drug user fees .................................................................... Generic animal drug user fees ....................................................... Tobacco product user fees .............................................................. Food and Feed Export Certification user fees ................................ Food Reinspection fees ................................................................... Voluntary qualified importer program fees .................................... Mammography user fees ................................................................. Export certification user fees .......................................................... Food and Drug Administration DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES TITLE VI—RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION Item (3,677,092) (3,677,092) 2,156,677 8,719 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (3,668,373) 2,147,958 (856,041) (67,118) (21,768) (5,706) (477,000) (12,364) (14,700) (36,000) (19,318) (10,400) House allowance [In thousands of dollars] (3,899,369) (3,899,369) 2,506,003 8,982 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (3,890,387) 2,497,021 (702,172) (57,605) (21,768) (5,706) (477,000) (12,364) (14,700) (71,066) (19,318) (11,667) Committee recommendation (¥460,912) (¥401,344) ¥237,962 ¥4,073 (∂208,888) (∂208,888) ∂49,002 (¥59,568) ¥998 (¥40,122) (¥14,108) (¥5,338) (¥397,271) ¥233,889 (¥153,869) (¥9,513) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ Budget estimate ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (∂209,886) ∂50,000 (∂35,115) (¥4,255) (∂2,320) (∂309) (∂27,000) (∂12,364) (∂14,700) (∂71,066) ............................ (∂1,267) 2010 appropriation (∂222,277) (∂222,277) ∂349,326 ∂263 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (∂222,014) ∂349,063 (¥153,869) (¥9,513) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ (∂35,066) ............................ (∂1,267) House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 106 ¥114,478 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥2,000 ¥165,000 ¥342,000 ............................ ¥50,000 ¥9,000 ¥12,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥5,000 ............................ ............................ ¥223,749 ............................ ¥1,037 ¥10,188 ¥745 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥117,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥15,000 ¥39,000 ¥165,000 ¥350,000 ............................ ............................ ¥119,000 ............................ ............................ ¥134,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥25,000 ............................ 639 1,996 ¥229,582 ¥39,000 ¥1,037 ............................ ............................ ¥13,937 ¥2,137 ¥993 ¥717 ¥3,111 Limit fruit and vegetable program (Sec. 726 (13)) ................................ Section 32 (rescission) (Sec. 726 (13)) .................................................. Forestry Incentives program (Sec. 730) (rescission) ............................... Great Plains Conservation (Sec. 730) (rescission) .................................. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment and Training (rescission) (Sec. 731) ........................................................................ Limit Conservation stewardship (Sec. 726 (1)) ...................................... Limit Dam Rehab (Sec. 726 (2)) ............................................................. Limit Environmental Quality Incentives program (Sec. 726 (3)) ............ Limit Farmland Protection program (Sec. 726(4)) .................................. Limit Grasslands reserve (Sec. 726 (5)) ................................................. Limit Wetlands reserve (Sec. 726 (6)) .................................................... Limit Wildlife habitat incentives (Sec. 726 (7)) ..................................... Limit Voluntary Public Access program (Sec. 726 (8)) ........................... Limit Biomass Crop Assistance program ................................................ Limit Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels (Sec. 726 (9)) ............. Limit Renewable Energy for America (Sec. 726 (10)) ............................. Limit Microenterprise investment program .............................................. Limit Crop Insurance Good Performance (Sec. 726 (11)) ....................... Limit Agriculture management assistance (Sec. 726 (12)) .................... Hardwood Trees (Reforestation Pilot Program) (Sec. 722) ...................... Geographic Disadvantaged farmers (Sec. 721) ...................................... Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and facilities (rescission) ...... Broadband loan balances (rescission) .................................................... NIFA, Buildings and Facilities (rescission) .............................................. Wildlife Habitat Incentives unobligated (rescission) ............................... Water Bank Act unobligated (rescission) ................................................ NRCS expired accounts (rescission) ........................................................ Outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers (rescission) ..................... Rural community advancement program (rescission) ............................. Agriculture Marketing Services (rescission) ............................................ Common Computing Environment (rescission) ........................................ TITLE VII—GENERAL PROVISIONS 2,743,965 2,457,001 Total, Title VI, Related Agencies and Food and Drug Administration ..................................................................................... (62,000) (59,400) INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Farm Credit Administration (limitation on administrative expenses) ..... ¥11,000 ¥210,000 ¥165,000 ¥350,000 ¥50,000 ¥30,000 ¥200,000 ¥35,000 ¥17,000 ¥45,000 ¥50,000 ¥70,000 ¥3,000 ¥25,000 ¥5,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥133,000 ¥150,000 ¥5,500 ¥500 2,156,677 (62,000) ¥11,000 ¥35,000 ¥165,000 ¥350,000 ¥50,000 ¥50,000 ¥200,000 ¥35,000 ¥17,000 ............................ ¥30,000 ¥36,000 ............................ ¥25,000 ¥5,000 600 1,996 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥133,000 ¥150,000 ¥6,000 ¥1,000 2,506,003 (62,000) ∂4,000 ∂4,000 ............................ ............................ ¥50,000 ¥50,000 ¥81,000 ¥35,000 ¥17,000 ∂134,000 ¥30,000 ¥36,000 ............................ ............................ ¥5,000 ¥39 ............................ ∂229,582 ∂39,000 ∂1,037 ............................ ............................ ∂13,937 ∂2,137 ∂993 ∂717 ∂3,111 ¥16,000 ¥150,000 ¥6,000 ¥1,000 ∂49,002 (∂2,600) ¥11,000 ¥33,000 ............................ ¥8,000 ¥50,000 ............................ ¥191,000 ¥23,000 ¥17,000 ............................ ¥30,000 ¥36,000 ............................ ¥25,000 ............................ ∂600 ∂1,996 ∂223,749 ............................ ∂1,037 ∂10,188 ∂745 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥18,522 ¥150,000 ¥6,000 ¥1,000 ¥237,962 ............................ ............................ ∂175,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥20,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂45,000 ∂20,000 ∂34,000 ∂3,000 ............................ ............................ ∂600 ∂1,996 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥500 ¥500 ∂349,326 ............................ 107 ¥935,197 ¥1,664,395 130,559,669 (131,484,699) (¥925,030) ............................ (831,347) (40,493,511) Total, Title VII, General provisions ............................................. Grand total 1 ............................................................................... Appropriations .................................................................... Rescissions ........................................................................ Disaster relief category ..................................................... (By transfer) ............................................................................... (Loan authorization) ................................................................... 132,278,780 (132,756,293) (¥477,513) ............................ (799,540) (38,578,642) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥629 ¥45,000 ¥10,887 ¥25,000 ¥331,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Buildings and Facilities (rescission) .............................................................................. Agriculture Buildings and Facilities (rescission) .................................... Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) (rescission) .......... Broadband grants (rescission) ................................................................ Export credit (rescission) ......................................................................... Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers (Sec. 729) (rescission) ......... Limit Emergency Food Assistance program (Sec. 730) ........................... U.S. Department of Agriculture Unobligated balances (rescission) ........ OAO (rescission) (Sec. 730) ..................................................................... Ocean freight (rescission) (Sec. 730) ...................................................... Public Law 480 Title I (rescission) (Sec. 730) ........................................ Foreign Currency Program (rescission) (sec. 730) .................................. Limit payments to Brazil Cotton Institute ............................................... Watershed and flood protection program ................................................ GSA rent (rescission) ............................................................................... NIFA B&F (rescission) (Sec. 730) ............................................................ Export credit (rescission) (Sec. 730) ....................................................... Emergency Conservation Program (disaster relief category) (Sec. 732) Emergency Forest Restoration (disaster relief category) (Sec. 732) ....... Emergency Watershed Protection (disaster relief category) (Sec. 732) .. Budget estimate 2011 appropriation Item 125,359,837 (125,834,837) (¥475,000) ............................ (718,004) (39,683,133) ¥1,756,023 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥90,000 ¥51,000 ¥63,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 2,977 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ House allowance [In thousands of dollars] 136,955,373 (137,042,404) (¥353,031) (266,000) (790,781) (40,887,762) ¥1,060,435 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥4,000 ¥5,000 ¥3,000 ¥537 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥2,494 ¥15,000 78,000 49,000 139,000 Committee recommendation ∂6,395,704 (∂5,557,705) (∂571,999) (∂266,000) (¥40,566) (∂394,251) ∂603,960 ∂629 ∂45,000 ∂10,887 ∂25,000 ∂331,000 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥4,000 ¥5,000 ¥3,000 ¥537 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥2,494 ¥15,000 ∂78,000 ∂49,000 ∂139,000 2010 appropriation ∂4,676,593 (∂4,286,111) (∂124,482) (∂266,000) (¥8,759) (∂2,309,120) ¥125,238 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥4,000 ¥5,000 ¥3,000 ¥537 ............................ ............................ ............................ ¥2,494 ¥15,000 ∂78,000 ∂49,000 ∂139,000 Budget estimate ∂11,595,536 (∂11,207,567) (∂121,969) (∂266,000) (∂72,777) (∂1,204,629) ∂695,588 ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ∂90,000 ∂51,000 ∂63,000 ¥4,000 ¥5,000 ¥3,000 ¥537 ............................ ¥2,977 ............................ ¥2,494 ¥15,000 ∂78,000 ∂49,000 ∂139,000 House allowance Senate Committee recommendation compared with (∂ or ¥) COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 108 130,559,669 Total 1 .......................................................................................... 125,359,837 2,156,677 ¥1,756,023 24,438,670 (18,293,475) (6,145,195) 780,580 2,083,472 96,265,493 (89,943,750) (6,321,743) 1,390,968 (175,500) 136,955,373 2,506,003 ¥1,060,435 24,959,852 (18,293,475) (6,666,377) 829,007 2,265,837 105,519,631 (98,552,898) (6,966,733) 1,935,478 (179,101) Æ CFTC fiscal year 2011 funding ($202.675 million) ($202.270 million after ATB) provided in Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act. 132,278,780 2,743,965 ¥935,197 2,457,001 ¥1,664,395 1 Excludes 25,433,361 (18,293,475) (7,139,886) 899,558 2,201,834 99,805,397 (91,943,879) (7,861,518) 2,129,862 29,490,110 (22,604,683) (6,885,427) 889,360 2,430,774 95,065,478 (87,937,154) (7,128,324) 1,891,341 RECAPITULATION Title I—Agricultural programs ................................................................ Mandatory ........................................................................................ Discretionary .................................................................................... Title II—Conservation programs (discretionary) ..................................... Title III—Rural development (discretionary) ........................................... Title IV—Domestic food programs .......................................................... Mandatory ........................................................................................ Discretionary .................................................................................... Title V—Foreign assistance and related programs (discretionary) ........ Title VI—Related agencies and Food and Drug Administration (discretionary) ................................................................................................. Title VII—General provisions (discretionary) ........................................... (179,101) (172,847) (Limitation on administrative expenses) .................................... ¥237,962 ¥125,238 ∂49,002 ∂603,960 ∂4,676,593 ¥473,509 ............................ (¥473,509) ¥70,551 ∂64,003 ∂5,714,234 (∂6,609,019) (¥894,785) ¥194,384 ¥4,530,258 (¥4,311,208) (¥219,050) ¥60,353 ¥164,937 ∂10,454,153 (∂10,615,744) (¥161,591) ∂44,137 ∂6,395,704 ............................ (∂6,254) ∂11,595,536 ∂349,326 ∂695,588 ∂521,182 ............................ (∂521,182) ∂48,427 ∂182,365 ∂9,254,138 (∂8,609,148) (∂644,990) ∂544,510 (∂3,601) 109