- TXT
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
Tip
?
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-232
======================================================================
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2018
_______
July 17, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Aderholt, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 3268]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies for fiscal year 2018.
CONTENTS
Page
Title I--Agricultural Programs................................... 4
Title II--Farm Production and Conservation Programs.............. 39
Title III--Rural Development Programs............................ 46
Title IV--Domestic Food Programs................................. 56
Title V--Foreign Assistance and Related Programs................. 61
Title VI--Related Agencies and Food and Drug Administration...... 64
Title VII--General Provisions.................................... 80
OVERVIEW
The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee has
jurisdiction over the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA),
except for the Forest Service, the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and the
Farm Credit Administration (FCA). The Subcommittee's
responsibility covers a vast and diverse group of agencies
responsible for such things as promoting the production of a
plentiful food supply; assisting farmers and ranchers across
the country with sound production practices; improving the
quality of life and vitality of communities in rural America;
assisting indigent populations in the U.S. and abroad with
basic nutritional needs; research and development in
agriculture to improve productivity and stability; overseeing
commodity markets that provide confidence for businesses,
traders, investors, and the public; supporting a safe food
supply; and safe and effective drugs and medical devices. The
activities of these agencies impact every American every day of
the year.
The funding levels provided in this appropriations bill
continue to demonstrate how seriously this Committee takes its
responsibility to fund the highest priority programs and
activities while helping to address the nation's debt, deficit,
and economic challenges.
The Committee does not include funding to begin new
programs and, except where specifically noted, does not provide
additional funding for pay increases. The Committee identifies
savings of almost $1,000,000,000 at USDA and reins in
regulatory overreach at the FDA, USDA, and CFTC.
Oversight and Hearings
Consistent with the Committee on Appropriations Oversight
Plan, as approved and transmitted to the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform and the Committee on House Administration
in January of 2017, the Subcommittee began the fiscal year 2018
process committed to maintaining the Committee's focus on
comprehensive oversight of federal discretionary spending under
the Subcommittee's jurisdiction. In order to thoroughly review
the President's budget request for fiscal year 2018 and examine
how funds appropriated in previous years had been managed, the
Subcommittee held six hearings for the agencies and programs of
the USDA, the FDA, CFTC and the FCA. The hearings included:
USDA Inspector General--February 15, 2017
Farm Credit Administration--February 28, 2017
Member Day--March 9, 2017
Secretary of Agriculture--May 24, 2017
Food and Drug Administration--May 25, 2017
Commodity Futures Trading Commission--June 8, 2017
As stewards of the taxpayer's dollar, the Subcommittee is
responsible for ensuring that the funds under its jurisdiction
are wisely invested and properly used. As such, the
Subcommittee established four objectives to guide its hearings,
oversight activities, and the development of its bill and
report recommendations for fiscal year 2018. These objectives
include evaluating and accounting for taxpayer dollars to
guarantee efficiency and accountability; investing in rural
infrastructure as a catalyst for growth; ensuring support for
American farmers, ranchers, and producers; and protecting the
health of people, plants, and animals.
Through its oversight activities, the Subcommittee can
accomplish its goal of improving the management of agencies and
programs by identifying and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse.
It is joined in this effort by USDA's Inspector General, CFTC's
Inspector General, and the Inspector General's Office of the
Department of Health and Human Services. During the hearing
with USDA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the
Subcommittee focused on USDA financial statements, improper
payments, and how well USDA's agencies are managing their
programs.
For the first time since 1998, the Farm Credit
Administration testified before the Agriculture Subcommittee.
The Subcommittee discussed FCA's role in providing access to
credit, the critical safety net for our nation's producers, and
the state of the American farm economy.
The Subcommittee questioned the Secretary of Agriculture
about spending reductions included in USDA's budget request
that are proposed for some of USDA's most popular and
successful programs, such as Rural Development loan and grant
programs and food aid programs. The Subcommittee also discussed
USDA's proposal to reorganize several mission areas and create
an Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs
as directed by the 2014 Farm Bill.
When the Subcommittee heard from the FDA, it focused on
preventing burdensome regulations for producers and the
American people, in addition to ongoing discussions of how the
FDA is implementing the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA),
addressing opioid abuse, and regulation of tobacco products.
The FDA regulates over 20 percent of every consumer dollar
spent on products in the U.S., and so the Subcommittee reminded
the FDA to be aware of the comprehensive economic impact of
their regulatory decisions.
While examining CFTC's budget request, the Subcommittee
acknowledged the submission provided by the President for a
funding level of $250,000,000. The Subcommittee reviewed how
federal labor laws and collective bargaining agreements can
create a coercive deficiency requiring an Act of Congress to
avoid furloughs or terminations at the agency. Finally, the
Subcommittee continued its oversight into policy issues
including a scheduled, automatic reduction of the Swap Dealer
de Minimis level.
Because the Subcommittee knows that it cannot fulfill all
requests for funding, it focuses on those areas that are most
effective, broadly supported, and capable of delivering
positive outcomes and a substantial return on investment. The
Subcommittee will monitor the issues identified by its
constituents and other stakeholders, those issues discussed at
the hearings, and other high priority matters relevant to the
management of USDA, FDA, CFTC, and FCA. The Subcommittee will
maintain its oversight efforts throughout the 115th Congress to
ensure taxpayer dollars are wisely and prudently used on behalf
of the American people.
TITLE I
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Processing, Research and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $44,555,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 42,064,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 21,703,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -22,852,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -20,361,000
The following table reflects the amount provided by the
Committee for each office and activity:
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Enacted Estimate Provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary................ $5,051 $4,859 $4,850
Office of Tribal Relations............. 502 501 501
Assistant to the Secretary for Rural - - - - - - 800
Development...........................
Office of Homeland Security and 1,496 1,448 1,448
Emergency Coordination................
Office of Advocacy and Outreach........ 1,209 1,171 1,171
Office of the Assistant Secretary for 804 802 800
Administration........................
Departmental Administration............ 24,124 22,501 2,781
Office of the Assistant Secretary for 3,869 3,521 3,091
Congressional Relations...............
Office of Communications............... 7,500 7,261 6,261
--------------------------------
Total.............................. $44,555 $42,064 $21,703
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $21,703,000. The Committee recommendation
includes the following offices under the Office of the
Secretary: immediate Office of the Secretary; Office of Tribal
Relations; Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development;
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination; Office
of Advocacy and Outreach; Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Administration; Departmental Administration; Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations; and Office of
Communications.
Pay Cost.--The Committee does not include requested funding
for a civilian pay increase across the Department. Should the
President provide a civilian pay increase for fiscal year 2018,
it is assumed that the cost of such a pay increase will be
absorbed within existing appropriations for fiscal year 2018.
Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) Obligations and
Commitments.--The Secretary is directed to notify the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in writing
15 days prior to the obligation or commitment of any emergency
funds from the CCC.
CCC Report.--The Committee directs the Secretary to provide
a report on November 15, 2017, and May 16, 2018, on planned
uses of funding under the authorities of Section 4 and Section
11 of the CCC Charter Act.
Crop Biotechnology & Biotech Ingredients.--Public and
private sector scientists knowledgeable in genetic engineering,
toxicology, chemistry, nutrition, and other scientific areas
have carefully evaluated and assessed the safety of genetically
engineered plants, food, and food ingredients and have
determined that such products are safe for human and animal
consumption. The Committee directs USDA to continue
coordination efforts with the FDA to provide education and
outreach to the public on the safety and benefits of crop
biotechnology and food and animal feed ingredients derived from
biotechnology.
Nutrition Research Coordination.--The Committee seeks to
bring more transparency and coordination to nutrition research
and evaluation projects conducted by the Department. The
Secretary is directed to ensure both the Research, Education,
and Economics (REE) and the Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Services mission areas coordinate and finalize the Food and
Nutrition Service (FNS) Research and Evaluation Plan submitted
in fiscal year 2018 to prevent duplication of efforts and
resources. The plan submitted for fiscal year 2018 shall
include a brief description of the projects FNS expects to
pursue and whether or not it was mandated by law.
Section 731 of the bill states that FNS shall not receive
any funding for new research and evaluation projects in fiscal
year 2018 until the Committees on Appropriations of the House
and Senate receive the fiscal year 2018 Research and Evaluation
Plan that has been developed in coordination with REE. In
submitting the fiscal year 2019 budget justification, FNS is
directed to provide its Research and Evaluation Plan
simultaneously with its budget request. There is an expectation
that this process will be followed in the future.
Improper Payments, Unachieved Savings, and Financial
Management.--The Committee remains concerned with USDA's
overall management of crucial financial issues that result in
savings, efficiencies, and transparency for taxpayers. USDA has
not complied with improper payment requirements for five
consecutive years. Progress has been made in the area of
financial statement accuracy and reporting, but work remains.
OIG has also identified in open recommendations $724,000,000 in
unachieved savings at USDA.
Congressional Relations Allocation Notification.--Within 30
days of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall notify
the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate on the
allocation of the funds provided to the Assistant Secretary for
Congressional Relations by USDA agency, along with an
explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution of the funds.
State Office Co-location.--The Committee continues to
direct that any reallocation of resources related to the co-
location of state offices scheduled for fiscal year 2018 and
subsequent years is subject to the Committee's reprogramming
procedures required under law.
Administrative Provision.--The Committee directs the
Secretary to advise the Committees on Appropriations of the
House and Senate, through the Office of Budget and Program
Analysis (OBPA), of the status of all reports requested of the
Department in this bill at the time of submission of the fiscal
year 2019 budget request and monthly thereafter. All
correspondence related to the directives in this bill must be
addressed to the Committee on Appropriations.
Loan and Grant Programs.--The Committee directs the
Department, through OBPA, to provide quarterly reports to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate on the
status of obligations and funds availability for the loan and
grant programs provided in this bill.
The Committee further directs that if an estimate of loan
activity for any program funded in Titles II and III of this
bill indicates that a limitation on authority to make
commitments for a fiscal year will be reached before the end of
that fiscal year, or in any event when 75 percent of the
authority to make commitments has been utilized, the Secretary
shall promptly notify the Committees on Appropriations of the
House and Senate through OBPA.
Communication from USDA.--Members of the Committee must be
informed of the activities, pending and proposed actions, and
expenditures made by USDA and its respective agencies so that
Congress can determine whether laws and programs are being
implemented and carried out in accordance with the intent of
Congress. A collaborative working relationship between the
Committee and the agencies is necessary to ensure efficient and
effective implementation of Congress' funding decisions. USDA
is directed to ensure that the Committee is notified of major
changes to existing policies and any significant developments
in its operations prior to providing non-governmental
stakeholders such information.
Grant Notifications.--Section 722 of the bill requires the
Secretary to notify the Committees on Appropriations of the
House and Senate three business days in advance of the
announcement of discretionary grant allocations or contract
awards totaling $1,000,000 or more. The Committee also directs
USDA to provide quarterly reports on all discretionary grant
awards totaling less than $1,000,000. The Committee expects
these deadlines to be met.
Decentralized Rent and Homeland Security.--In fiscal year
2015, the Committee provided the Department with the authority
to decentralize rent from the General Services Administration
(GSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The
previous Administration requested this authority ``as part of
USDA's implementation of the former President's `Freeze the
Federal Footprint' initiative'' and to encourage efficiencies
across the Department at individual agencies. The Secretary is
directed to build upon these efforts to find savings within the
total estimated costs for fiscal year 2018. If USDA does not
find ways to reduce its physical footprint or the cost of its
existing footprint, such increased costs will need to be
absorbed by the agency to the detriment of the core missions of
these agencies.
Real Property.--The Committee directs the Department to
review their real property portfolio and develop an action plan
which prioritizes actions for the disposal of excess or
underutilized property. Recognizing challenges to property
disposal exist, the Department is encouraged to partner with
Congress to explore ways to improve and expedite the property
disposition process.
FSMA Implementation and Interagency Coordination.--The
Committee provides level funding for the National Institute for
Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to be the sole agency providing
education and technical assistance for farmers in implementing
new requirements resulting from FSMA. The Committee commends
NIFA's extension programs for the relationship they have built
with our nation's producers, and hopes that they will continue
to build this trust through FSMA implementation. The Secretary
is directed to work with the Commissioner of the FDA to ensure
that there is no duplication of efforts and resources for FSMA
education and training at the farm level.
Design-Build.--The Committee encourages the Department to
use the design-build method of project delivery when
appropriate.
Flexibility in Loan and Loan Guarantee Levels.--The bill
includes language to exceed by up to 25 percent the limitation
on loan and loan guarantee levels without budget authority upon
written notification to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House and Senate.
Rural Poverty.--The Department has statutory authorities
and programs designed to help break the multi-generational trap
of poverty in rural counties. The Committee recognizes that
USDA may utilize existing programs and funding within RD and
FNS in order to assist families, create jobs, and develop a
path towards independence and self-sufficiency. Other existing
resources such as the extension service and public universities
can be used for coordination and outreach activities. As of
June 2017, the Committee has not received the detailed plan
required to be submitted by the Secretary which would detail
all funding resources and bundled services to combat rural
poverty.
Urban Agriculture, Vertical Farming, Aquaponics, and Non-
Traditional Agriculture.--The Committee acknowledges the need
for an expanded USDA role in support of the emerging industries
of vertical farming, urban agriculture, aquaponics, and
alternative forms of agriculture in American cities and
surrounding communities. Support from the Department is needed
for producers who often have different needs than traditional
agricultural producers. These non-traditional methods of
agricultural production have the potential to reduce the use of
water and pesticides, improve yields for particular crops,
serve lower income populations, and provide year round crops at
the local level. USDA should consider intramural and extramural
research where the Department and its stakeholders can work
towards advancing technologies in this field. Therefore, the
Committee directs USDA to evaluate current needs in this field,
compare the needs with current or planned activities, and
deliver a report explaining how to further advance urban
agriculture, vertical farming, aquaponics and other forms of
non-traditional agriculture.
Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural
Affairs.--The Committee supports the newly established Under
Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs as
required by the 2014 Farm Bill and subsequent Agriculture
Appropriations Acts. The focus of this office should be not
only the promotion and sales of American agricultural products
but also trade enforcement and related activities, which will
help level the playing field for U.S. agricultural interests in
international markets.
Smart Energy Management Systems.--The Committee encourages
the Department to evaluate emerging energy management
technologies that could assist in creating more reliable and
resilient energy infrastructure for farming operations.
Opportunities to improve smart energy management systems,
including battery life, have a multitude of benefits including
reducing operating costs and extending the life of the system
while assisting utility companies by increasing the resiliency
of the grid and reducing the need for peak power.
Agroterrorism.--The United States enjoys a safe, plentiful,
and inexpensive food supply. The Committee views domestic food
production as a priority for national security. The Committee
is concerned with the growing threats posed by agroterrorism,
which is the deliberate introduction of an animal or plant
disease for the purpose of generating fear, causing economic
losses, or undermining social stability. The dangers to our
food production posed from foreign terrorist organizations are
real. The Committee directs the Secretary to explore the
Department's laboratory and response capacity to address the
reality of agroterrorism, and how national response plans can
better incorporate agroterrorism. The Committee encourages the
Secretary to coordinate with DHS, HHS, intelligence agencies,
Interior, EPA, and other agencies to improve response plans,
conduct vulnerability assessments, and expand monitoring and
surveillance for agroterrorism. The Committee also encourages
the Secretary to focus on bolstering tracking systems for
agricultural products, laboratory networks, and border
inspection training.
Native American Foods.--Native American tribes suffer among
the highest rates of diabetes in the United States. Traditional
Native American diets have been shown to be culturally relevant
and protective against metabolic diseases such as diabetes. The
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) has
increased the variety of traditional foods offered in the
program. The Committee directs USDA to develop programs in
conjunction with Indian Tribal Organizations to restore food
ecosystems and revive traditional foods based on dietary
preferences of Native American populations. USDA shall continue
to collaborate with FDPIR agencies on recommendations for food
package changes, including the addition of traditional foods.
Rural Broadband.--The Committee directs the Department to
continue coordinating with Federal Communications Commission,
National Telecommunications and Information Administration and
other related federal agencies to ensure that policies tied to
one federal program do not undermine the objectives and
functionality of another. The Committee encourages USDA to
continue working with the rural communications industry to
identify and pursue ways to continue broadband deployment and
adoption.
The Committee directs the Department to prepare a report in
collaboration with the Federal Communications Commission and
Department of Commerce detailing areas of responsibility
towards addressing rural broadband issues. The report shall
include, but not be limited to, how the programs work
complimentarily to one another; how they address broadband
issues in unserved and underserved areas, including tribal
lands; identify barriers to infrastructure investment in rural
areas and tribal lands; data speeds which fixed, wireless and
mobile broadband users in rural areas and tribal lands
experience; and cost estimates to increase speeds to 25 mbps in
unserved communities and communities currently being served by
speeds less than 25 mbps. The report shall be submitted to the
Committee within 180 days of enactment of this Act. This
information will help to provide lawmakers with a more complete
understanding of connectivity issues in rural America as the
Committee considers future funding for broadband to bridge the
digital divide.
Cotton Ginning Cost Share Program.--The Committee supports
the establishment of a Cotton Ginning Cost Share Program for
the 2016 cotton crop. The Committee recognizes the significant
challenges cotton producers continue to face. If the Secretary
establishes such a program, the Committee encourages the
Secretary provide such assistance beginning with the 2016
cotton crop and on an ongoing basis, consistent with 7 U.S.C.
1308(b).
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
Plan.--The Committee recognizes that access to broadband is
crucial for better health, educational, and economic
opportunities and appreciates the plan being developed for
increasing access to education in STEM fields through the
Distance Learning and Telemedicine program. The Committee
directs the Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development to
begin implementing the initial phases of this plan no later
than six months after the enactment of this Act.
Technology Enhancements of Ambulances and Medical
Facilities.--The Committee continues to support Distance
Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband program grants that
assist rural communities in connecting to the rest of the world
and overcoming the effects of remoteness and low population
density. The Committee urges the Assistant to the Secretary for
Rural Development to continue implementing the grants used to
upgrade the equipment and facilities of ambulances and other
emergency transportation vehicles and medical facilities, such
as hospital and community health centers, providing such
technical assistance as may be needed.
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities.--The Committee does
not provide funding for the Agriculture Buildings and
Facilities account. The Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2015 provided the Department the authority
to establish the Nonrecurring Expense Fund to invest in and
modernize the Department's facilities infrastructure. The
Committee urges the Department to utilize this authority to
address physical infrastructure needs.
Performance Measures.--The Committee directs USDA agencies
funded by this Act to comply with title 31 of the United States
Code, including the development of their organizational
priority goals and outcomes such as performance outcome
measures, output measures, efficiency measures, and customer
service measures.
Executive Operations
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST
2017 appropriation.................................... $18,917,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 17,211,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 16,777,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -2,140,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -434,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Chief Economist (OCE), the Committee
provides an appropriation of $16,777,000.
Drought Resilience.--The Committee is concerned about the
extent and severity of the drought in the U.S. and recognizes
the importance of understanding and being prepared for drought.
The Committee encourages the OCE to continue research and work
with partners on drought resilience efforts to better address
the serious threat posed by drought in the U.S.
Policy Research.--The Committee includes $4,000,000 for
policy research under 7 U.S.C. 3155 for entities with existing
institutional capacity, including staff, databases, models, and
long-term, well-documented experience, to conduct complex
economic and baseline analysis for the benefit of USDA, the
Congressional Budget Office, and the Congress.
OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
2017 appropriation.................................... $13,399,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 14,716,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 13,399,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. -1,317,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of Hearings and Appeals, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $13,399,000.
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS
2017 appropriation.................................... $9,525,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 9,093,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 9,093,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -432,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $9,093,000.
Office of the Chief Information Officer
2017 appropriation.................................... $49,538,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 58,950,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 49,538,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. -9,412,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO), the
Committee provides an appropriation of $49,538,000. This
includes $33,000,000 for cybersecurity activities, including
support of the Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation program.
IT Purchases and Oversight.--The Committee directs the CIO
to comply with the spirit and letter of the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act and incorporate its
principles into future planning and current oversight of IT
activities across the Department and the performance plan
required in H. Rpt. 113-468.
Digital Workspace.--The Committee recognizes that the use
of digital workspace technologies can increase user
productivity, enhance cybersecurity, and allow workforce
flexibility. The Committee encourages the Department to explore
a broad ecosystem support of multi-factor authentication
solutions to strengthen the Department's cybersecurity posture.
This should include strategies and programs that reduce the
total life cycle costs of traditional legacy workspace
infrastructure.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
2017 appropriation.................................... $8,028,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 5,836,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 5,836,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -2,192,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the
Committee provides an appropriation of $5,836,000.
Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA).--The
Committee supports the work of the CFO to bring the Department
into compliance with the DATA.
Shared Costs Report.--While the Committee notes that the
Department did not find any increased costs in its Shared Costs
Programs per the report required by the 2015 Appropriations
Act, the Department also did not identify any savings. The
Committee continues to direct the production of the report
required in Public Law 113-235 and directs the agency to
identify areas of savings and efficiencies.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
2017 appropriation.................................... $901,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 896,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 800,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -101,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -96,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights,
the Committee provides an appropriation of $800,000.
Office of Civil Rights
2017 appropriation.................................... $24,206,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 23,304,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 23,304,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -902,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of Civil Rights, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $23,304,000.
Hazardous Materials Management
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $3,633,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 3,503,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 3,503,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -130,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Hazardous Materials Management, the Committee provides
an appropriation of $3,503,000.
Office of Inspector General
2017 appropriation.................................... $98,208,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 92,689,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 95,628,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -2,580,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +2,939,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of Inspector General, the Committee provides
an appropriation of $95,628,000. This amount does not include
funding for staff buyouts or reductions in investigations and
audits.
Investigations.--The Committee encourages the Inspector
General to continue its current investigations in a timely
manner and engage in feedback from all stakeholders and
affected parties to ensure that limited resources are provided
to those most in need.
Office of the General Counsel
2017 appropriation.................................... $44,697,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 42,970,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 42,970,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -1,727,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the General Counsel, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $42,970,000.
Office of Ethics
2017 appropriation.................................... $4,136,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 3,538,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 3,945,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -191,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +407,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of Ethics, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $3,945,000.
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
2017 appropriation.................................... $893,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 891,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 800,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -93,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -91,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Research,
Education, and Economics, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $800,000.
Coffee Plant Health.--The Committee appreciates ARS and
NIFA's work to address existing and emerging challenges to
coffee production in the United States and commends the
agency's work with research partners and coffee grower groups.
The Committee encourages ARS, NIFA, and its partners to
maintain support for coffee plant health research.
Food Safety and Defense Technology Research.--The Committee
remains concerned that global competition and the demand for
increased productivity, efficiency, and profitability could put
food safety and security at risk. The ability to rapidly,
accurately, and cost effectively detect pathogens or
contaminants in the food supply chain is critical to protecting
the United States from food-borne illnesses and exploitation.
The Committee directs USDA to invest in the research and
development of novel bio-detection technologies and the
implementation of mobile bio-detection platforms. The
Department should consider technologies currently in use or
under development in other fields, such as medicine or homeland
security, to determine whether the technology can meet the
needs in high volume food production or mobile food defense
monitoring.
Fusarium Mycotoxins.--The Committee recognizes that
Fusarium mycotoxins are harmful to several components of the
poultry industry, negatively affect catfish, horses, and swine,
and are toxic to humans. Due to the endophytic habit of
Fusarium verticillioides, it is also prevalent in corn and
wheat, which are major ingredients in animal feed. Therefore,
the Committee urges USDA to support research programs studying
the endophytic habits and genetic variability of Fusarium
mycotoxins to develop an intervention plan to prevent harm to
humans and animals.
Indirect Costs.--The Committee is concerned that USDA
research programs are inconsistent in the amount of overhead
charges which can be paid to cooperating institutions. The
Committee directs REE to submit a report within 60 days of
enactment of this Act on current policies related to such
indirect costs by account and by program.
Leveraging Plant Genome Information.--The Committee
recognizes the potential impact that variable weather,
environments, and production systems can have on the yield and
quantity of maize and the need for greater prediction of plant
performance under variable growing conditions. The Committee
encourages USDA to support research that leverages plant
genomic information with phenotypic and environmental data
through an interdisciplinary framework, resulting in an
understanding of plant processes that affect productivity and
the ability to predict plant performance.
Office of Pest Management Policy.--The Committee commends
the Office of Pest Management Policy for its work providing the
Department, federal agencies, producers, and other interested
stakeholders scientifically sound analysis of pest management
issues important to agriculture, especially methyl bromide
transition, pesticide resistance management, and the
development of antimicrobials to combat citrus greening. The
Committee encourages the Under Secretary to better utilize this
office and directs ARS to continue to support its vital work.
Pollinators and Colony Health Research.--The Committee
recognizes that Colony Collapse Disorder and related colony
health issues are a significant concern to beekeepers, honey
producers, farmers, researchers, policymakers, and the public.
It appreciates USDA's logical, scientifically based approach to
studying these issues and directs the Department to continue to
focus on the challenges facing pollinators.
Potato Research.--The Committee supports research efforts
to combat crop-threatening pest and disease pressures,
including the potato cyst nematode. The Committee also
recognizes the importance of research initiatives to identify
and improve desired traits for new potato varieties and directs
the Department to continue working with universities, industry
and potato growers on these projects.
Poultry Technology Research.--The Committee understands
that the U.S. poultry industry is the most efficient in the
world. However, with expected global growth in demand and
competition, technological advances in broiler production are
critical to increasing production and profitability. The
Committee supports cooperative research that contributes to
increased efficiencies in housing, equipment, energy and
environmental controls tailored to meet the long-term needs of
the industry.
Screening Technologies.--The Committee encourages the
development of technologies that will provide rapid, portable,
and facile screening of food fish species at port sites and
wholesale and retail centers.
Vector Control.--The Committee encourages USDA to support
research, including the work done through the Biotechnology
Risk Assessment Research Grants program, to develop innovative
vector control technologies targeted to combatting Zika-
carrying Aedes aegypti mosquitos. The Committee is aware that
vaccine development takes time, pesticide use has a variety of
limitations, and human health effects and treatment will be a
challenge for years to come. Therefore, the Committee urges
USDA to utilize pest management programs and partner
organizations to conduct research to develop and test effective
repellents, create new molecular pesticide technologies that
prevent mosquitoes from reproducing, and explore natural
product remedies to deter pests.
Economic Research Service
2017 appropriation.................................... $86,757,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 76,690,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 76,788,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -9,969,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +98,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Economic Research Service (ERS), the Committee
provides an appropriation of $76,788,000. The Committee does
not concur with the request to reduce funding for the
increasing drought resilience survey.
Breastfeeding.--The Committee recognizes the benefits of
human milk in the first year of life as well as the economic
impacts of breastfeeding rates on healthcare costs. The
Committee directs ERS to update its 2001 Jon Weimer study of
the economic benefits of breastfeeding and make it publicly
accessible within 12 months of enactment of this Act. The
updated study should assess the impact of clinically
recommended breastfeeding rates on economic outcomes and
healthcare systems including, but not be limited to, the impact
on direct and indirect costs, including preventable deaths,
preventable medical conditions, and lost workplace
productivity.
Evidence-Based Policymaking.--As part of the bipartisan
effort to improve government capacity for evidence-based
policymaking, the Committee encourages ERS to explore ways to
assist rural communities in using data and evidence to address
local challenges. In particular, ERS should examine ways in
which local governments in rural communities could access the
research and data expertise of public land-grant universities
to help communities address local needs and priorities.
Food Waste.--Food waste is a major problem in the United
States. In 2014, ERS released a study on food waste at the
consumer and retail levels which found that 430 billion pounds
of food were not eaten in the U.S. in 2010. However, there is a
lack of data relating to on-farm food loss and what that means
in terms of lost income and marketing opportunities for
farmers. Such information could help to create new markets for
cosmetically imperfect food, value-added products, or other
business opportunities for farmers. The Committee directs ERS
to conduct a study that describes the quantity and types of
produce wasted on farms, barriers to recovering that produce,
and new market opportunities to increase recovery and farmers'
income.
National Agricultural Statistics Service
2017 appropriation.................................... $171,239,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 185,677,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 183,781,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +12,542,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -1,896,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS),
the Committee provides an appropriation of $183,781,000, of
which $63,350,000 is for the Census of Agriculture.
Agricultural Research Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
2017 appropriation.................................... $1,170,235,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 993,144,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 1,132,625,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -37,610,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +139,481,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Salaries and Expenses of the Agricultural Research
Service (ARS), the Committee provides an appropriation of
$1,132,625,000.
While the Committee does not concur with all of the
proposed decreases for fiscal year 2018, the Committee
encourages ARS to reallocate resources for research that have
been determined by the ARS as mature or where research
objectives have been accomplished to other high priority
research areas. The Committee does not concur with the budget
request regarding the termination of extramural research.
Agricultural Research Facilities.--The Committee does not
concur with the proposed closure of 17 research facilities in
the budget request and is concerned about the continued trend
towards reductions in on-the-ground agricultural research
through proposed cutbacks and consolidations without a clear
plan to ensure that research reflects local needs and growing
conditions. However, the Committee recognizes the need to
increase efficiencies and streamline operations, particularly
as research matures and objectives are met.
The Committee directs ARS to provide a report that
comprehensively evaluates its current and future research
initiatives and facility capabilities. The evaluation should
include, but not be limited to, prioritization of research
being conducted at each facility, costs of facility operations
and maintenance, facility condition including deferred
maintenance needs, scientists' availability to conduct
research, associated costs and long-term savings of closing a
specific facility, economic impact of closure on the existing
community, relocation costs and other effects on employees. In
conducting this evaluation, ARS shall include input from
interested stakeholders, including ARS scientists and other
scientists. Future budget requests with proposals to close
research facilities should include this information to ensure
considerations of consolidation do not jeopardize long-term
research objectives.
Animal Research.--The Committee expects the Department to
keep the Committee informed on the progress of establishing
adequate policies, procedures, and processes of oversight of
animal research at the USMARC as recommended by the USDA Office
of the Inspector General in the U.S. Meat Animal Research
Center Review issued in September 2016. The Committee also
requests updates related to ongoing APHIS inspections and any
findings at ARS research facilities conducting animal research.
Aerial Application Research.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the ARS Aerial Application Technology Program.
The program conducts innovative research making aerial
applications more efficient, effective, and precise. Research
for aerial application serves the public good as a vital tool
for the future, as agriculture strives to meet the food, fiber,
and bio-energy demands of a growing population.
Alfalfa Research.--The Committee supports research into
alfalfa seed and forage systems, which hold the potential to
maximize crop yields, increase milk production, and improve
genetics.
ARS Field Stations.--The Committee recognizes the
successful utilization of authorities granted in previous
annual appropriations Acts to further cooperation between
industry and the ARS Canal Point, Florida Sugarcane Field
Station. However, the Committee is concerned that this
partnership is jeopardized by requirements that are outside the
scope of the functionality of the facilities. The Committee
directs ARS to resolve these issues, thus allowing this model
partnership to continue. Additionally, the Committee recognizes
Florida's importance as a sentinel state in studying invasive
pests and diseases. With new species entering ports every week,
it is critical that ARS devote attention to the need for
research facilities to study these threats.
Aquaculture Industry Coordination.--Nearly half the seafood
consumed across the world is the result of aquaculture, and the
aquaculture industry is a critical and growing part of the U.S.
economy. However, less than one percent of worldwide production
comes from U.S. producers. In January 2016, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine
Fisheries Services issued a final rule to open the federal
waters in the Gulf of Mexico to development of aquaculture. The
Committee is concerned that vital seedstock required to
implement this initiative will be sourced from foreign
aquaculture producers. The Committee encourages the agency to
support and protect the U.S. aquaculture industry by working
collaboratively with U.S. aquaculture producers and research
institutions that specialize in the development of aquaculture
technologies.
Aquatic Animal Health.--The Committee supports ARS' work
with land-grant universities and other federal partners to
develop solutions to aquatic animal pathogens including
Aeromonas in catfish and viral hemorrhagic septicemia in
finfish. ARS is encouraged to collaborate with industry
stakeholders on the development of potential vaccines and
therapeutants.
Blueberry and Cranberry Research.--The Committee directs
ARS to continue researching the cultural needs of blueberries
and cranberries including genetic improvements to increase
genetic diversity and improve resistance to various disease and
insects.
Cereal Rust Research.--The Committee remains concerned
about cereal rust diseases and supports research towards
developing resistance genes against cereal rust races,
including resistance to new cereal rust varieties and
identifying when and how new cereal rust races emerge.
Citrus Greening Disease Research.--The Committee commends
ARS' research efforts on citrus greening disease and encourages
the agency to continue working to develop methods to reduce
transmission and enhance immunity in citrus trees and to work
with industry, universities, growers, and other partners to
develop effective control mechanisms. The Committee also
encourages ARS to coordinate its efforts with the Huanglongbing
Multi-Agency Coordination (HLB MAC) group.
Co-Location of Researchers.--The Committee encourages ARS
to develop a plan to maximize its investments in plant science
facilities and research by taking advantage of the synergies
and efficiencies realized through the co-location of USDA
researchers in state-of-the-art facilities with university and
other stakeholders.
Cotton Ginning.--The Committee recognizes the importance of
pollution abatement, improving fiber quality, ginning
efficiency, cotton seed and other byproducts, and remains
committed to expanding research in cotton ginning and
innovation by existing laboratories.
Floriculture and Nursery Research Initiative (FNRI).--The
Committee values the importance of floral and horticultural
industry as floriculture and nursery crops are the third-
largest domestic crop in value, outranked only by corn and
soybeans. The FNRI is focused on addressing and solving the
industry's challenges and needs. The Committee provides
$500,000 above the fiscal year 2017 funding level to expand
research capacity.
Forest Products Research.--The forest products sector is an
important part of the U.S. economy. The Committee supports
research on wood quality, forest product evaluation standards
and valuation techniques, and ARS' continuing work with the
Forest Products Laboratory.
Germplasm Enhancement of Maize.--The Committee supports the
germplasm enhancement of maize project and encourages continued
cooperation between ARS and industry.
Greenhouse Technology Research.--The Committee recognizes
the importance of advancing greenhouse technology and exploring
its capabilities to address the energy and water challenges
inherent in four-season production systems, beginning in food
insecure communities across the country. The Committee
encourages ARS to work with the Department of Energy (DOE) for
greenhouse technology research that explores how to integrate
ongoing research projects at the various DOE National Labs to
develop affordable, deployable, and energy- and water-efficient
food production platforms for undernourished regions of the
country. By working together, ARS and DOE can bring their
respective strengths and resources to designing the most
desirable, low-cost, and efficient production system. The
Committee also encourages ARS to work with DOE in researching
novel solutions for lowering energy costs for greenhouse
operations while optimizing plant growth and morphology.
Hops Research.--The Committee recognizes that the U.S. hops
industry has experienced unprecedented expansion due to the
brewing industry's economic growth over the past decade. To
sustain this growth, new varieties of hops are needed to
prevent disease and expand production throughout the country.
The Committee provides $1,000,000 for hops-related research.
Horticultural Research and Education.--The Committee
recognizes the U.S. National Arboretum as a prominent research
body staffed with highly skilled and dedicated scientists with
a history of scientific discovery in environmental
horticulture. The Committee encourages continued support of the
Arboretum as its research and academic programs not only work
towards developing new approaches in detecting and treating
plant disease, but also the ability to connect people with
plants in a unique and serene environment that enhances the
public understanding of agricultural plant sciences.
Human Nutrition Research.--There is strong evidence that
nutrition plays a vital role in how a person ages, particularly
its significance for preventative health care and degenerative
and age-related diseases. Research is needed to address the
needs of the rapidly growing number of older Americans. The
Committee encourages ARS to continue research relating to the
effect of nutrition on aging.
Livestock Protection.--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. Researchers have
recently produced an experimental vaccine to protect bighorn
populations from disease, but much work is still required. The
Committee encourages ARS to pursue 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.
Lower Mississippi River Basin.--The Committee recognizes
the groundwater problems in the Lower Mississippi River Basin
and encourages ARS, in collaboration with university research,
extension scientists and local stakeholders, to identify gaps
in water management research and focus efforts on the
development of conservation and irrigation techniques to reduce
water usage in agriculture production while maintaining crop
quality and yield.
National Agricultural Library.--The Committee encourages
ARS to maintain a focus on agricultural-related legal issues
within the National Agricultural Library. The Committee notes
that as the agriculture sector faces increasing financial
stress, there is a necessity that agriculture-related legal
issues be addressed on an increasingly frequent basis. Further,
agriculture-related legal issues are increasingly complex, and
the impact of these legal issues continues to broaden in scope.
The Committee recommends that the National Agricultural Library
play an important role in assisting all stakeholders with
understanding these issues.
Nutrient Runoff Reduction Programs.--The Committee
encourages ARS to study the long-term effectiveness of
voluntary nutrient runoff reduction programs and policy options
that could reduce soil, chemical and nutrient runoff.
Porcine Virus Research.--The Committee is aware of ongoing
research to identify mechanisms of viral pathogenesis,
transmission, and immunity to porcine epidemic diarrhea virus
(PEDv) and encourages ARS to continue its efforts to identify
the genetic virulence factors of PEDv, identify a protective
immune response, including transmission of maternal antibodies
through the milk, and evaluate new vaccine platforms for the
development of improved PEDv vaccines.
Pulse Health Initiative.--The Committee is aware of the
need to investigate the ability of pulse crops, such as dry
beans, dry peas, lentils, and chickpeas, to provide solutions
to critical health issues and to improve the sustainability and
environmental benefits of using pulse crops in cropping
rotations. The Committee encourages ARS to continue its work on
these important issues.
Safe and Abundant Water Supply.--The Committee supports
technological development to address key agricultural water
resource issues across the U.S. to support agricultural
production.
Sage Grouse.--The Committee is aware that listing the
greater sage grouse as endangered under the Endangered Species
Act has the potential to negatively affect rural communities in
the eleven states that have sage brush ecosystems. The
Committee encourages ARS to work with its partners on sage
brush and related rangeland research that will help preserve
the greater sage grouse and the other species that rely on the
sage brush ecosystem.
Sclerotinia Initiative.--The Committee is aware of the
importance of controlling Sclerotinia in sunflowers, soybeans,
canola, edible beans, peanuts, peas, lentils, and chickpeas and
encourages ARS to continue its support of this initiative.
Small Grain Genomics.--The Committee supports research on
small grain genomics to address national genomic and breeding
needs for U.S. crops to keep small grains and feed as viable
crops and continue their substantial contributions to the
agricultural economy.
Sorghum in Agriculture.--The Committee recognizes the
growing significance of sorghum in agriculture due to water
conservation traits and increased utilization. However, the
sugarcane aphid (Melanaphis sacchari), a new and devastating
invasive pest, is an existential threat to the sorghum
industry. Funding is included to pursue research into the
discovery of genetically conferred pest resistance, evaluate
gene flow and advance the durability and sustainability of
fitness traits in sorghum.
U.S. Sheep Experiment Station (USSES).--The Committee
recognizes the unique and valuable contributions the USSES
makes toward increasing the production efficiency of sheep and
improving sustainable rangeland ecosystems. The Committee also
recognizes a unique opportunity to expand other research
initiatives. The Committee encourages ARS to work with various
stakeholders regarding efforts to propose mission improvements
for the USSES. The Committee encourages ARS to hire the two
vacant positions at USSES to help maintain important rangeland
research.
U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab (USWBS).--The Committee
recognizes the importance of the research carried out through
the ARS U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative. Fusarium head
blight is a major threat to agriculture, inflicting substantial
yield and quality losses throughout the U.S.
Wheat Falling Numbers Test Research.--The Committee
recognizes the emerging crisis surrounding wheat starch
degradation, as detected by the Hagberg-Perten Falling Numbers
Test, and encourages ARS to continue researching the accuracy
of the test and the environmental, storage, and genetic
conditions leading to this quality loss.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
2017 appropriation.................................... $99,600,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 60,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -39,600,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +60,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and
Facilities, the Committee provides an appropriation of
$60,000,000 for priorities identified in the USDA ARS Capital
Investment Strategy, April 2012.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
2017 appropriation.................................... $849,518,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 769,613,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 830,402,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -19,116,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +60,789,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Research and Education Activities, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $830,402,000.
Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.--The Committee
continues to direct that not less than 15 percent of the
competitive research grant funds be used for USDA's agriculture
research enhancement awards program, including USDA-EPSCoR, in
accordance with 7 U.S.C. 450i.
Bioactives and Prebiotics Used in Animal Production.--The
Committee supports enhanced research efforts to advance the
development of alternatives to sub-therapeutic doses of
antibiotics used in animal production. The Committee encourages
NIFA to examine nutritional alternatives and feed additives
containing bioactives and prebiotics that may lead to reduced
antibiotic use and boost immune responses in livestock.
Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2019.--The Committee
appreciates NIFA's efforts to provide additional information in
its budget requests over the past four years. For the fiscal
year 2019 budget request, the Committee is particularly
interested in the request for the Agriculture and Food Research
Initiative (AFRI) and requests that the agency provide greater
detail on the levels proposed to be allocated to and the
expected publication date, scope, and allocation level for each
request for awards to be published under each priority area
specified in section 2(b)(2) of the Competitive, Special, and
Facilities Research Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)(2)).
Citrus Disease Research Program.--The 2014 Farm Bill
established the Emergency Citrus Disease Research and Extension
Program, which is intended to discover and develop tools for
early detection, control, and eradication of diseases and pests
that threaten domestic citrus production and processing, and
provided $25,000,000 per year in mandatory funding for the
program through the Specialty Crop Research Initiative. The
Committee believes research projects funded under this
authority should be prioritized based on the critical threat of
citrus greening and encourages NIFA, to the maximum extent
practicable, to follow the recommendations of the National
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Advisory
Board's citrus disease subcommittee and to collaborate with the
HLB MAC group.
Crop Degradation.--The Committee is aware of crop
degradation issues harming agricultural producers. For example,
starch degradation in Pacific Northwest soft white wheat crops
led to significant value losses for producers in late 2016. The
Committee encourages NIFA to conduct research through AFRI into
soft white wheat crop quality loss to mitigate its impact on
producers.
Increasing Diversity in Agricultural Career Fields.--The
Committee is concerned with the low numbers of African
Americans working in agricultural career fields such as
farming, ranching, producing, IT, science, and finance. The
Committee encourages NIFA to develop a working group that
includes leadership from the 1860, 1890, and 1994 institutions
within the land grant university system to develop an
actionable plan aimed at increasing the number of minorities
entering into the agricultural workforce. The Committee also
recommends that the plan include strengthening agricultural
education at the University level and creating partnerships for
feeder programs into graduate studies to foster the career
potential pipeline.
Livestock and Poultry Waste Research.--The Committee
recognizes the benefits of improved methods of managing animal
waste in livestock and poultry production and encourages NIFA
to support research and development of innovative technologies,
particularly those that are operationally and economically
feasible and have a high probability of widespread
implementation. The Committee directs NIFA to submit a report
on what steps it can take to work with other federal agencies
to develop a comprehensive approach to all value chains related
to manure management to include energy production, energy
credits, nutrient credits, and mineral supplements, taking into
consideration the full range of livestock production to include
cattle, poultry, and swine.
Minor Crop Pest Management.--The Committee recognizes that
data collection efforts are needed to maintain and develop the
tools needed to assure adequate vector control and protect
public health. In addition, the Committee supports continuation
of the IR-4 Public Heath Pesticide Program through the Deployed
Warfighter Protection Program to provide critical assistance
for supporting vector control, including regulatory and other
support needed to maintain public health.
Organic Agriculture.--The Committee encourages USDA to
ensure that the needs of the U.S. organic sector are more fully
addressed through AFRI. As USDA's flagship competitive
agricultural research grant program, AFRI funding should be
reflective of the needs of all aspects of U.S. agriculture,
including organic. The Committee directs USDA to develop a plan
for meeting this goal, including how the agency will ensure
organic research conducted through AFRI is not duplicative of
research conducted with mandatory funds through the Organic
Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative and other
research programs, and report back to the Committee within 60
days of enactment of this Act.
Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and Hispanic Serving Institutions.--The Committee encourages
NIFA to continue to support biotechnology by promoting research
at the land-grant colleges and universities, including the
Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic
Serving Institutions, and directs NIFA to encourage
partnerships among universities and industry.
Water Quality.--The Committee encourages USDA to research
alternatives to land application of animal manures in areas
where over-application is harming fresh water drinking
supplies. The Committee also urges USDA to identify alternative
collection and processing options to remove toxic elements and
yield usable material.
Zoonotic Disease Research.--The eradication of zoonotic
livestock diseases has been a priority of federal and state
animal health officials, as was reflected in the 2014 Farm
Bill. The Committee recognizes the need for this research and
encourages NIFA to support the development of improved
management tools for zoonotic livestock diseases that have
significant wildlife reservoirs.
The following table reflects the amounts provided by the
Committee:
National Institute of Food and Ariculture
RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 2018 Committee
Program/Activity Authorization Enacted Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hatch Act.................................... 7 U.S.C. 361a-i................. $243,701 $243,238 $243,701
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act.... 16 U.S.C. 582a through a-7...... 33,961 28,867 33,961
Research at 1890 Institutions (Evans-Allen 7 U.S.C. 3222................... 54,185 54,082 54,185
Program).
Payments to the 1994 Institutions............ 7 U.S.C. 301 note............... 3,439 3,432 3,439
Education Grants for 1890 Institutions....... 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)................ 19,336 19,299 19,336
Education Grants for Hispanic-Serving 7 U.S.C. 3241................... 9,219 9,202 9,219
Institutions.
Education Grants for Alaska Native and Native 7 U.S.C. 3156................... 3,194 3,188 3,194
Hawaiian-Serving Institutions.
Research Grants for 1994 Institutions........ 7 U.S.C. 301 note............... 1,801 1,798 1,801
Capacity Building for Non Land-Grant Colleges 7 U.S.C. 3319i.................. 5,000 - - - - - -
of Agriculture.
Grants for Insular Areas..................... 7 U.S.C. 3222b-2, 3362 and 3363. 2,000 1,996 1,800
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative..... 7 U.S.C. 450i(b)................ 375,000 349,335 375,000
Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment........... 7 U.S.C. 3151a.................. 6,500 4,991 6,500
Veterinary Services Grant Program............ 7 U.S.C. 3151b.................. 2,500 - - - 2,500
Continuing Animal Health and Disease Research 7 U.S.C. 3195................... 4,000 - - - 4,000
Program.
Supplemental and Alternative Crops........... 7 U.S.C. 3319d.................. 825 - - - - - -
Multicultural Scholars, Graduate Fellowship 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)................ 9,000 - - - 9,000
and Institution Challenge Grants.
Secondary and 2-year Post-Secondary Education 7 U.S.C. 3152(j)................ 900 - - - 900
Aquaculture Centers.......................... 7 U.S.C. 3322................... 4,000 - - - 4,000
Sustainable Agriculture Research and 7 U.S.C. 5811, 5812, 5831, and 27,000 19,009 24,667
Education. 5832.
Farm Business Management..................... 7 U.S.C. 5925f.................. 1,450 - - - - - -
Sun Grant Program............................ 7 U.S.C. 8114................... 3,000 - - - - - -
Alfalfa and Forage Research Program.......... 7 U.S.C. 5925................... 2,250 - - - - - -
Minor Crop Pest Management (IR-4)............ 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)................ 11,913 11,890 11,913
Special Research Grants: 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)................ ......... ......... .........
Global Change/UV Monitoring................ ................................ 1,405 - - - - - -
Potato Research............................ 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)................ 2,250 - - - 2,000
Aquaculture Research....................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)................ 1,350 - - - - - -
--------------------------------
Total, Special Research Grants....... ................................ 5,005 - - - 2,000
Necessary Expenses of Research and Education
Activities:
Grants Management Systems................ ................................ 7,830 7,424 7,424
GSA Rent and DHS Security Expenses....... ................................ 5,960 - - - - - -
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ................................ 6,549 11,862 11,862
Expenses.
Total, Necessary Expenses............ ................................ 20,339 19,286 19,286
--------------------------------
Total, Research and Education ................................ $849,518 $769,613 $830,402
Activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND
2017 appropriation.................................... ($11,880,000)
2018 budget estimate.................................. (11,857,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (11,880,000)
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. +23,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the
Committee provides $11,880,000.
EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
2017 appropriation.................................... $477,391,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 462,890,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 475,876,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -1,515,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +12,986,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Extension Activities, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $475,876,000.
Rural Health and Safety Education Programs.--The opioid
abuse epidemic is one of the greatest threats facing rural
America today, and the Committee supports all efforts to
address this problem through improved health and safety
education and outreach. The Committee provides $1,500,000 for
Rural Health and Safety Education Programs to combat opioid
abuse in rural communities.
The following table reflects the amounts provided by the
Committee:
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Program/Activity Authorization Enacted Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c) 7 U.S.C. 343(b) and (c) and $300,000 $299,430 $300,000
programs and Cooperative Extension. 208(c) of P.L. 93-471.
Extension Services at 1890 Institutions...... 7 U.S.C. 3221................... 45,620 45,533 45,620
Extension Services at 1994 Institutions...... 7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3).............. 4,446 4,438 4,446
Facility Improvements at 1890 Institutions... 7 U.S.C. 3222b.................. 19,730 19,693 19,730
Renewable Resources Extension Act............ 16 U.S.C. 1671 et. seq.......... 4,060 - - - 4,060
Rural Health and Safety Education Programs... 7 U.S.C. 2662(i)................ 3,000 - - - 1,500
Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database 7 U.S.C. 7642................... 1,250 1,248 1,250
Program.
Women and Minorities in STEM Fields.......... 7 U.S.C. 5925................... 400 - - - 400
Food Safety Outreach Program................. 7 U.S.C. 7625................... 5,000 4,990 5,000
Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(d):............... 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................. ......... ......... .........
Food and Nutrition Education............. ................................ 67,934 67,805 67,934
Farm Safety and Youth Farm Safety ................................ 4,610 - - - 4,610
Education Programs.
New Technologies for Agricultural ................................ 1,550 - - - 1,550
Extension.
Children, Youth, and Families at Risk.... ................................ 8,395 8,379 8,395
Federally Recognized Tribes Extension ................................ 3,039 3,033 3,039
Program.
--------------------------------
Total, Section 3(d).................. ................................ 85,528 79,217 85,528
Necessary Expenses of Extension Activities:
Agriculture in the K-12 Classroom........ 7 U.S.C. 3152(j)................ 552 551 552
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ................................ 7,805 7,790 7,790
Expenses for Extension Activities.
--------------------------------
Total, Necessary Expenses............ ................................ 8,357 8,341 8,342
================================
Total, Extension Activities...... ................................ $477,391 $462,890 $475,876
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
2017 appropriation.................................... $36,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 20,276,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 35,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -1,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +14,724,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Integrated Activities, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $35,000,000.
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative.--The Committee
supports the critical contributions that labs within the
National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN), including
those located at Colleges of Veterinary Medicine, make in
responding to emerging threats to American agriculture. When
expanding the network, the Committee encourages NIFA to take
into consideration laboratories which would enhance the
capacity for surveillance, monitoring, and response; the
concentration of human and animal populations that are directly
at risk; geography, ecology, and climate; evidence of active
collaboration with, and support of, state animal health
officials; and evidence of stakeholder support and engagement.
The following table reflects the amounts provided by the
Committee:
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Program/Activity Authorization Enacted Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methyl Bromide Transition Program............ 7 U.S.C. 7626................... $2,000 $- - - $2,000
Organic Transition Program................... 7 U.S.C. 7626................... 4,000 - - - 4,000
Regional Rural Development Centers........... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)................ 2,000 - - - 1,000
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative...... 7 U.S.C. 3351................... 8,000 5,684 8,000
Crop Protection/Pest Management Program...... 7 U.S.C. 7626................... 20,000 14,592 20,000
--------------------------------
Total, Integrated Activities............. ................................ $36,000 $20,276 $35,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
2017 appropriation.................................... $901,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 891,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 800,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -101,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -91,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs, the Committee provides an appropriation of
$800,000.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $946,212,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 810,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 906,400,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -39,812,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +96,400,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Salaries and Expenses, the Committee provides an appropriation
of $906,400,000.
The Committee maintains the fiscal year 2017 funding levels
for Avian Health at $55,340,000; Cattle Health at $91,500,000;
National Veterinary Stockpile at $5,725,000; Cotton Pests at
$11,520,000; Wildlife Damage Management at $103,375,000,
Wildlife Services Methods Development at $18,855,000, Overseas
Technical and Trade Operations at $22,115,000, and Animal
Welfare at $28,810,000.
Within the amount included for Specialty Crop Pests, the
Committee includes $59,500,000 for fruit fly exclusion and
detection; $55,830,000 for citrus health, including $2,000,000
for the Huanglongbing Multi-Agency Coordination efforts;
$19,100,000 for the glassy-winged sharpshooter; $6,318,000 for
the pale cyst nematode; $6,621,000 for the light brown apple
moth; and, $5,000,000 for the European grapevine moth.
The following table reflects the amounts provided by the
Committee:
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal Health Technical Services..................... $35,250
Aquatic Animal Health................................ 2,250
Avian Health......................................... 55,340
Cattle Health........................................ 91,500
Equine, Cervid, and Small Ruminant Health............ 19,500
National Veterinary Stockpile........................ 5,725
Swine Health......................................... 24,700
Veterinary Biologics................................. 16,300
Veterinary Diagnostics............................... 36,970
Zoonotic Disease Management.......................... 14,500
------------------
Subtotal, Animal Health.......................... 302,035
Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated).... 27,800
Cotton Pests......................................... 11,520
Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystem Pests............... 8,800
Pest Detection....................................... 27,300
Plant Protection Methods Development................. 20,630
Specialty Crop Pests................................. 160,000
Tree & Wood Pests.................................... 38,000
------------------
Subtotal, Plant Health........................... 294,050
Wildlife Damage Management........................... 103,375
Wildlife Services Methods Development................ 18,855
------------------
Subtotal, Wildlife Services...................... 122,230
Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement......... 16,190
Biotechnology Regulatory Services.................... 18,500
------------------
Subtotal, Regulatory Services.................... 34,690
Contingency Fund..................................... 450
Emergency Preparedness & Response.................... 36,500
------------------
Subtotal, Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness 36,950
Agriculture Import/Export............................ 15,070
Overseas Technical and Trade Operations.............. 22,115
------------------
Subtotal, Safe Trade & International Technical 37,185
Assistance......................................
Animal Welfare....................................... 28,810
Horse Protection..................................... 700
------------------
Subtotal, Animal Welfare......................... 29,510
APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure.......... 4,200
Physical/Operational Security........................ 5,100
GSA Rental and DHS Security Payments................. 40,450
------------------
Subtotal, Agency Management...................... 49,750
------------------
Total, Salaries & Expenses..................... $906,400
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal Welfare.--The bill provides $28,810,000 for the
Animal Welfare program in order to ensure that minimum
standards of care and treatment are provided for certain
animals bred for commercial sale, used in research, transported
commercially, or exhibited to the public. The Committee
maintains the fiscal year 2017 increase of $400,000, of which a
majority of funds can be used to support the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between APHIS and ARS. The MOU is necessary
for ARS to utilize the skills and expertise of APHIS' animal
care staff and to help ARS ensure high standards of care for
animals used in ARS funded research. At a minimum, the MOU
should verify that ARS is adhering to its own standards and
guidelines for research practices as required by the Humane
Animal Care and Use policy, a policy that is closely aligned
with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA); ensure that every ARS
location engaging in research and testing on vertebrate animals
has a fully functioning Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee (IACUC) in place; and ensure that each IACUC produces
a semi-annual report with a description of and the reasons for
any major deviations from the requirements outlined in ARS
policy.
Animal Welfare Inspection Records.--On February 3, 2017,
USDA restricted the public's access to the search tool for the
Animal Care Inspection System in order to conduct a
comprehensive review of the information on its website. Such an
action limited the public's review of inspection reports,
research facility annual reports, and lists of persons licensed
and registered under the AWA, as well as lists of persons
licensed by USDA-certified horse industry organizations and
associations to inspect horses for compliance with the Horse
Protection Act (HPA). While the Committee recognizes the need
to strike a balance between the privacy rights and personal
identifiable information of regulated entities and the public's
need to know if regulated parties or institutions are complying
with federal law, USDA must utilize the resources provided in
this bill to promptly finish reviewing the information on its
website, restore all legally permissible records previously
removed, and resume posting on the USDA website. The online
searchable database should allow analysis and comparison of
data and include all inspection reports, annual reports, and
other documents related to enforcement of the HPA and the AWA.
Antimicrobial Resistance.--The Committee continues to
support funding to collect additional data that will inform
policy related to the appropriate antibiotic use in all
settings across agriculture and clinical medicine. The
Committee provides funds for on-farm surveillance and data
collection to enhance the understanding of on-farm levels of
antibiotic use and the impact on antimicrobial resistance
levels. The information collected should clearly delineate
between antibiotics used for food-producing and companion
animals. Further, to avoid duplication with existing programs
like the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System,
the Committee expects surveys regarding on-farm usage to be
limited to collecting information about the antibiotics used
and should not be utilized for other regulatory purposes. In
designing these surveys, the Committee expects the agency to
work primarily with end-users of antibiotics and veterinarians
providing care to the animals. APHIS will collect this
information through its statistical unit under the Confidential
Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act, which
will guarantee that all information collected is protected from
distribution in a manner that could identify an individual
respondent for the full time the data is in existence. This
information is needed for use in the larger National Strategy
for Combatting Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria with other federal
partners.
Aquatic Animal Health.--The Southeastern United States is a
center for aquatic biodiversity, supporting hundreds of native
species that occur nowhere else on Earth. It also is home to
the vast majority of the pond-based aquaculture operations. The
Southeast is the only region in the country that lacks a multi-
state/regional aquatic animal health plan. The Committee is
aware of multiple pathogenic outbreaks both in wild waters and
commercial ponds. Sick, abnormal, lesioned, or dead fish cause
alarm among local citizens and sport fishers, lessen desire to
go fishing and buy fishing licenses, raise doubts about clean
water, discourage consumers from buying seafood, and tarnish
the image of a tourism destination, thereby affecting local and
regional economies. The Committee directs APHIS to work
collaboratively with ARS, the National Marine Fisheries
Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, state resource
managers, aquatic disease diagnostic labs, and academic
institutions to develop a regional aquatic animal health plan
including appropriate monitoring and detection.
Cattle Health.--The Committee is aware of and concerned
about the recent spread of Cattle Fever Ticks outside the
quarantine area. The Committee requests that APHIS submit a
report on its plans and efforts to control the spread of these
ticks within 90 days of the date of enactment of this Act.
Cervid Health.--Funding is provided in the bill for the
national, voluntary Herd Certification Program (HCP) and
regulations for the interstate movement of farmed or captive
deer, elk, and moose. The cervid industry continues to
participate in the agency's HCP, which supports the domestic
and international marketability of U.S. cervid herds. Funds are
to be used for a combination of surveillance, research, and
indemnification for culling herds where Chronic Wasting Disease
(CWD) infection has been found. Currently the only reliable
test is a brain biopsy. The agency is encouraged to utilize
resources to help speed up the development of a live test for
CWD that would greatly decrease the need for indemnity. The
Committee encourages APHIS to maintain its commitment to the
HCP and the cervid industry, and directs the agency to spend no
less than $3,500,000 for cervid health activities. Within the
funds provided, the agency should give consideration to
indemnity payments if warranted.
Citrus Health Response Program (CHRP).--CHRP is a national
program for the pest and disease exclusion and eradication
activities including those associated with HLB and its vector
the Asian Citrus Psyllid. The survival of the citrus industry
in the U.S. is dependent on this funding, which supports
efforts in citrus-producing states to research, survey, and
combat both the pest and the disease. In addition to the funds
provided in this account, the Committee encourages APHIS to
utilize the funds available in the Plant Pest and Disease
Management and Disaster Prevention Programs account to the
greatest extent possible in an attempt to sustain the economic
viability of the citrus industry.
Cost Sharing with States and Other Cooperators.--The
Committee directs APHIS to maximize the use of cost-sharing
agreements or matching requirements with states, territories,
producers, foreign governments, non-governmental organizations,
and any other recipient of services in order to reduce the cost
burden on the agency.
Cotton Pests.--The Committee encourages APHIS and the
cotton industry to make every effort to ensure the boll weevil
does not re-infest areas of the U.S. where it has been
successfully eradicated. The Boll Weevil Eradication Program,
an outstanding example of a public-private partnership, has
successfully eradicated the boll weevil from all U.S. cotton-
producing regions except for the extreme lower parts of Texas
in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) bordering Tamaulipas,
Mexico. Growers in the LRGV, with assistance from APHIS and the
support of the entire industry, continue to conduct an active
program to eradicate the boll weevil. The LRGV serves as the
barrier between boll weevil infested areas of Mexico and boll
weevil-free areas of the United States.
Emergency Outbreaks.--The Committee continues to include
specific language relating to the availability of funds to
address emergencies related to the arrest and eradication of
contagious or infectious diseases or pests of animals, poultry
or plants. The Committee expects the Secretary to continue to
use the authority provided in this bill to transfer funds from
the CCC for the arrest and eradication of animal and plant
pests and diseases that threaten American agriculture. By
providing funds in this account, the Committee is enhancing,
not replacing, the use of CCC funding for emergency outbreaks.
Export Certification.--The Committee recognizes personnel
constraints placed on Ports of Entry, particularly those on the
U.S.-Mexico Border, with regard to sanitary/phytosanitary
certifications for exported goods. In the best interest of
cross-border trade and agribusiness, any lack of certified
personnel for certification purposes should be addressed by
seeking cooperation between agencies, whether in the form of an
MOU or through the certification process, authorizing
additional hours for existing agents to facilitate the crossing
and trade of perishable goods per USDA and DHS rules. The
Committee believes that dual certification or inspection
capabilities for shared staff, many of whom have prior
experience with the partner agency, will more efficiently
facilitate increased trade and commerce.
Feral Swine Management.--Feral swine are found in at least
41 states and have an estimated population of more than
5,000,000. These invasive species cause more than
$1,500,000,000 in damages and control costs in the United
States each year, with at least $800,000,000 of this due to
direct damage to agriculture. The Committee believes this
damage assessment far underestimates the level of damage when
considering the impact to the environment, native species,
habitat, historic sites, and residential and commercial areas.
The Committee supports APHIS' National Feral Swine Damage
Management Program, which involves feral swine activities in
the areas of research, development, education, outreach, and
coordination. The Committee urges APHIS to spend no less than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2017 and directs APHIS to
use these funds to support its existing cooperative service
agreement process, which identifies and develops unmet needs
for feral swine control nationwide.
Foreign Market Access Requests.--Increasingly, U.S.
agriculture is facing non-tariff trade barriers, which are
limiting the ability for U.S. agriculture to open and maintain
access to key export markets. The Committee directs APHIS to
review and update the list of foreign market access requests
submitted by U.S. producers, producer groups, companies and/or
non-government agencies. All efforts should be made to assign
the appropriate agency resources to opening and maintaining
access to foreign markets for U.S. products. By December 1,
2017, the agency should provide an update to the Committee on
the number of foreign market access requests that have been
successfully granted for U.S. agriculture; export volumes; the
number of foreign market access requests that have been granted
for imports to the U.S. marketplace; and the number of
outstanding requests and the length of time each request has
been pending before the agency. The agency should identify the
limitations in achieving and maintaining foreign market access
for U.S. agriculture.
Foreign Zoonotic Disease Response.--The Committee
recognizes and commends APHIS for its efforts to address the
challenges associated with eradicating foreign zoonotic
diseases such as HPAI and FMD in a timely manner. In order to
reduce the spread of disease outbreaks in the future, the
Committee directs APHIS to use existing funds to undertake a
review of existing protocols for foreign zoonotic disease
eradication, including stamping-out policies, and to develop a
strategy that improves agency, state and local, and industry
responsiveness. This plan should take into consideration
existing technology limitations, adverse weather, lack of
water, and other issues that may hinder APHIS' eradication
efforts in the event of future outbreaks. Furthermore, APHIS
should consider funds available to states through the current
cooperative agreements for surveillance testing and backyard
flock surveillance; grant or cost share opportunities for
farmers to give them the ability to enhance biosecurity
measures at their operations; the need for veterinarian
positions in states for biosecurity activities; and needs to
address the unavailability of vaccine for FMD.
Grapevine Import Regulations.--The Committee urges APHIS to
update its import regulations for grapevines. The current
regulatory review process and requirements for pathogen
screening of imports are expensive, cumbersome and time-
consuming. Complying without the use of available technology
can take in excess of thirteen years to complete. APHIS should
issue new regulations that dramatically shorten the review
timeline by using new technology and prioritize the approval of
new grape varieties suited for colder, harsher climates.
Horse Protection Act.--The Committee has continually
encouraged APHIS to work more closely with stakeholders
pursuant to the HPA. Specifically, the agency has been directed
to provide greater and more consistent transparency, to work
more closely with stakeholders on rules and regulations, and to
move away from the subjective nature of current inspection
methods in favor of objective measurements. While the Committee
recognizes some progress, the agency must work in good faith to
address the Committee's requests, which are intended to further
the dual goals of the HPA to care for animals engaged in the
trade and promote the industry in a safe manner. The Committee
has become aware that APHIS intends to modify regulations
associated with the HPA through rule-making actions and notes
that any substantive changes to the statute or its intent
should be made by Congress through the legislative process.
Huanglongbing Emergency Response.--The Committee maintains
the increased funding levels for HLB emergency response within
the Specialty Crop Pests line item. The Committee encourages
APHIS to allocate sufficient resources in order to continue
vital management, control, and associated activities to address
citrus greening. The disease, for which there is no cure, has
caused a reduction in citrus production by over 60 percent
since 2007 in Florida alone. All citrus producing counties in
Texas are under quarantine, and California has found the Asian
Citrus Psyllid, the vector of the disease, in some backyard
trees but not in the commercial groves to date. The spread of
this disease has called the future of the domestic citrus
industry into question, costing thousands of jobs and millions
of dollars in lost revenue. In addition, the agency is
encouraged to support priorities and strategies identified by
the HLB MAC group to benefit the citrus industry. The agency
should appropriately allocate resources based on critical need
and maximum effect to the citrus industry.
The Committee provides $2,000,000 for citrus health to
support priorities and strategies identified by the HLB MAC
group. The MAC is focused on short-term solutions to help the
citrus industry, and the cooperative nature of federal, state,
and industry representatives in this group is expected to
result in the development of tools and techniques to address
this devastating disease. The MAC has been an effective
resource in helping growers explore new possible solutions. The
agency should appropriately allocate resources based on
critical need and maximum impact to the citrus industry. These
citrus health activities directly protect citrus production on
approximately 765,000 acres in the United States worth more
than $3,300,000,000 for the 2014-2015 growing season.
Light Brown Apple Moth.--The Committee encourages APHIS to
engage state and international regulatory bodies to deregulate
the light brown apple moth. The Committee is concerned that if
APHIS simply withdraws federal regulation without the necessary
work with other regulatory officials, APHIS will shift, not
reduce, the regulatory burden. Should APHIS withdraw the
federal order for the light brown apple moth, it must take
steps to reduce the overall burden on growers. The Committee
maintains flat funding for the light brown apple moth to
support the second phase of the Joint Forward Plan and urges
the Department to develop initiatives for permanent, ongoing
departmental regulatory partnerships while continuing to engage
stakeholders and trading partners throughout North America.
National Animal Health Laboratory Network.--The
laboratories within the NAHLN network are on the frontline for
detection of newly identified and reemerging animal diseases.
NAHLN laboratories provide a critical contribution to animal
and public health. The bill provides funding for NAHLN through
both APHIS and NIFA at approximately $12,000,000 and
$4,300,000, respectively, resulting in a total investment of
$16,300,000 for fiscal year 2018. NAHLN laboratories were
invaluable during the 2015 outbreak of HPAI, which
significantly increased testing needs. At the same time, NAHLN
laboratories must also continue testing for other animal
diseases of concern.
Orobanche Ramosa.--The Committee recognizes that APHIS'
efforts to eradicate Orobanche ramosa, also known as branched
broomrape, in Texas were not completely successful and has
resulted in its reemergence as a threat to agriculture. As
such, the Committee encourages APHIS to work with the
appropriate Congressional Committees, along with states and
local stakeholders to formulate and execute a plan, which will
permanently eradicate the branched broomrape.
Overseas Trade and SPS Disputes.--Funds for the Overseas
Technical and Trade Operations account should help resolve
sanitary and phytosanitary trade issues that could result in
the opening of new markets and retaining and expanding existing
market access for U.S. agricultural products.
Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention
Program.--The Committee believes that the increase of
$12,500,000 for this program in fiscal year 2018 should
dedicate new resources to the clean plant network, citrus
health, and tree and wood pest surveillance.
Predator Control Device Review.--The Committee encourages
APHIS Wildlife Services to review the M-44 devices to ensure
the program is safely operated by qualified and trained
professionals that minimize non-target species while
effectively protecting livestock and poultry from predators.
APHIS is also encouraged to evaluate alternative methods to
determine if there are adequate substitutes based on livestock
protection and overall safety.
Potato Cyst Nematode Eradication.--The Committee includes
funding to maintain resources for the potato cyst nematode
eradication program at the fiscal year 2017 level in order to
continue with successful efforts to eradicate this pest. If
left untreated, this pest could spread, affecting other crops.
Regional Biosecurity Plans.--The Secretary of Agriculture
shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House
and Senate, at the time the President's budget for fiscal year
2019 is submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, United
States Code, a report describing the steps USDA has taken to
implement the Regional Biosecurity Plan for Micronesia and
Hawaii, as developed jointly by the Department and other
federal and non-federal entities. The report shall include an
update on previous and upcoming implementation activities,
including estimates of additional funding to be used or needed
for planned activities.
Vaccine for Foot-and-Mouth Disease.--FMD is a highly
contagious viral disease eradicated from the U.S. in 1929, but
it is still a threat since countries around the globe continue
grappling with the disease. This disease could cause billions
of dollars in damage to the economy if unchecked. APHIS has
publicly stated that the FMD vaccine bank is insufficient to
deal with a large scale FMD outbreak in the U.S. and that a
larger vaccine bank is needed. APHIS has also noted that
expanding the current FMD vaccine supply is an expensive
investment. Having sufficient quantities of vaccine readily
available and deployable to control an FMD outbreak would
appear to be a critical part of the USDA APHIS mission. Rapid
control of FMD protects the security of the U.S. food supply,
limiting the economic damage from livestock losses due to the
disease, and also shortens disruptions to trade and commerce
that would occur as long as FMD goes uncontrolled due to a lack
of vaccine. The Committee is concerned that this potential
vaccine shortage could result in the compromised management of
an FMD outbreak in the United States. In order that the
Committee can better understand the budget implications
required to address this vaccine shortage, APHIS is directed to
report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and
Senate within 90 days of enactment of this Act on contingency
plans to develop an expanded vaccine bank and the estimated
funding necessary for implementation and maintenance.
Wildlife Damage Management.--While receiving support from
cooperators to conduct wildlife management operations, special
emphasis should be placed on those areas such as oral rabies
vaccination, livestock protection, predator damage management
for avian predators such as the blackbird and raven in Western
states and cormorants in the south, and other such activities
that will reduce or eliminate threats to agricultural
industries. The Committee expects APHIS to provide no less than
$28,000,000 for the national rabies control and surveillance
efforts. No less than $250,000 should be available for the
agency to support the use of fixed-wing aircraft to reduce
blackbird depredation in the Northern Great Plains.
Of particular concern is the continued and repeat
depredation by wolves and packs in the Pacific Northwest. In
certain states where state management plans require state
agencies to utilize lethal control of wolves, it is important
these actions are taken to protect livestock. As experts in the
field of managing predators to prevent depredation, USDA has
valuable knowledge, tools and resources that can assist states
in managing the federally reintroduced wolves. The Committee
directs USDA to prioritize and complete the documentation and
processes needed to allow them to assist states and local
livestock producers with managing this situation.
Agricultural Marketing Service
MARKETING SERVICES
2017 appropriation.................................... $84,933,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 77,462,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 77,573,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -7,360,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +111,000
Committee Provisions
For Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS), the Committee provides an appropriation of
$77,573,000. The Committee maintains the fiscal year 2017
funding level for the National Organic Program.
Acer Access.--AMS oversees more than 20 research and
promotion boards that empower producers and agribusinesses to
pool their own resources to develop and strengthen markets and
conduct research and promotion activities. The Committee
encourages AMS to meet with the maple syrup industry, upon
their request, to discuss the steps in creating a Research and
Promotion Program, similar to the process other sectors of the
agriculture industry have undertaken.
Organic Fraud.--The organic industry is valued at
approximately $50,000,000,000 with significant premiums being
paid for organic crops, foods, and products. When consumers pay
these premiums, there needs to be certainty that domestic and
imported products meet all of the required organic standards.
The Committee is concerned about reports of fraud in the
organic program, especially among imports. The Committee is
aware that the OIG is finishing an audit to understand how AMS
evaluates the equivalency of foreign countries' organic
processes, and both AMS and OIG continue to investigate
instances of foreign and domestic fraud. AMS is directed to
provide the Committee with timely updates on the investigation
of allegations of fraud in organic markets, as well as the
results and recommendations of the OIG's audit of organic
equivalency agreements.
Rural Infrastructure.--Inadequate market access is a
critical barrier to economic growth in rural and agricultural
communities. The fiscal year 2017 Consolidated Appropriations
Act provided $1,000,000 for the Transportation Services
Division to continue working with other federal, state and
local agencies, as well as producers and those involved in all
sectors of agricultural transportation, to address rural
infrastructure needs to ensure producers have domestic and
international market access. The Committee urges AMS to make
public the results of the research and agricultural
transportation workshops so that stakeholders, policymakers,
and transportation planners can address rural infrastructure
deficiencies.
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
2017 limitation....................................... ($61,227,000)
2018 budget limitation................................ (60,982,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (61,227,000)
Comparison:
2017 limitation................................... - - -
2018 budget limitation............................ +245,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
The Committee provides a limitation of $61,227,000 on
Administrative Expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY
(SECTION 32)
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... ($20,705,000)
2018 budget estimate.................................. (20,489,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (20,705,000)
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. +216,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Marketing Agreements and Orders Program, the
Committee provides a transfer from Section 32 funds of
$20,705,000.
The following table reflects the status of this fund for
fiscal years 2017 and 2018:
ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD FISCAL YEARS
2017-2018
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 Committee
Enacted Provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30% of Customs Receipts). $10,929,840 $10,370,878
Less Transfers:
Food & Nutrition Service............ -9,503,998 -8,872,010
Commerce Department................. -145,175 -154,868
-------------------------------
Total, Transfers.................. -9,649,173 -9,026,878
Prior Year Appropriation Available, 166,333 125,000
Start of Year..........................
Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS -125,000 -125,000
(F&V;)..................................
Budget Authority, Farm Bill:........ 1,322,000 1,344,000
Rescission of Current Year Funds........ -231,374 -263,393
Appropriations Temporarily Reduced-- -79,626 -77,352
Sequestration..........................
Unavailable for Obligations (F&V; -125,000 -125,000
Transfer to FNS).......................
Budget Authority, Appropriations 886,000 878,255
Act:...............................
Less Obligations:
Child Nutrition Programs 465,000 465,000
(Entitlement Commodities)..........
State Option Contract............... 5,000 5,000
Removal of Defective Commodities.... 2,500 2,500
Emergency Surplus Removal........... 0 0
Disaster Relief..................... 5,000 5,000
Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and 206,000 206,000
Nuts Purchases.....................
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program... 43,000 47,000
Estimated Future Needs.............. 103,355 91,197
-------------------------------
Total, Commodity Procurement...... 829,855 821,697
Administrative Funds:
Commodity Purchase Support...... 35,440 35,853
Marketing Agreements and Orders. 20,705 20,705
-------------------------------
Total, Administrative Funds... 56,145 56,558
Total Obligations............. 886,000 878,255
Unobligated Balance, End of Year........ 0 0
Unavailable for Obligations (F&V; 125,000 125,000
Transfer to FNS).......................
-------------------------------
Total, End of Year Balances......... $125,000 $125,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS
2017 appropriation.................................... $1,235,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 1,109,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 1,109,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -126,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Payments to States and Possessions, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $1,109,000.
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
2017 appropriation.................................... $43,482,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 42,975,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 42,888,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -594,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -87,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards
Administration, the Committee provides $42,888,000.
LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES
2017 limitation....................................... ($55,000,000)
2018 budget limitation................................ (60,000,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (60,000,000)
Comparison:
2017 limitation................................... +5,000,000
2018 budget limitation............................ - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
The Committee includes a limitation on inspection and
weighing services expenses of $60,000,000. The Committee does
not concur with the agency's proposal to remove the limitation
on inspection and weighing services expenses. The agency has
sufficient carryover balances in this account for these
activities. Additionally, the bill includes authority to exceed
by 10 percent the limitation on inspection and weighing
services with notification to the Committees on Appropriations
of the House and Senate.
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety
2017 appropriation.................................... $819,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 814,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 800,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -19,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -14,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $800,000.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
2017 appropriation.................................... $1,032,062,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 1,038,069,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 1,038,069,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +6,007,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the
Committee provides an appropriation of $1,038,069,000.
The following table reflects the Committee's
recommendations for fiscal year 2018:
FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Inspection.................................... $921,762
Public Health Data Communication Infrastructure System 34,580
International Food Safety and Inspection.............. 16,487
State Food Safety and Inspection...................... 61,568
Codex Alimentarius.................................... 3,672
-----------------
Total, Food Safety and Inspection Service......... $1,038,069
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brazilian Beef.--Due to the very high level of health,
sanitation and animal health problems in Brazilian beef exports
found by FSIS inspectors, USDA suspended all imports of fresh
beef from Brazil. The Committee applauds this action. However,
given news reports about the severity of the corruption among
Brazilian health and industry officials, the Committee directs
USDA to conduct a full review of Brazil's food safety
equivalency determination for all products that are eligible to
be exported to the United States, including raw beef. That
review shall be completed within 180 days of enactment of this
Act and a report shall be provided to the Committee and posted
on the Department's website.
Humane Methods of Slaughter.--FSIS shall ensure that
inspectors hired with funding previously specified for
enforcement under the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act focus
their attention on overseeing compliance with humane handling
rules for live animals as they arrive and are offloaded and
handled in pens, chutes, and stunning areas, and that all
inspectors receive robust national training, including on the
Regulatory Essentials, Humane Animal Tracking System, and
Public Health Information System.
Poultry from the People's Republic of China.--Prior to
finalizing any rule allowing poultry raised and slaughtered in
the People's Republic of China (PRC) into the United States,
the Secretary shall provide a report to the Committee, and post
the report on the FSIS website, as to all measures that that
USDA will take to ensure that: (1) the PRC will provide
continuous inspection with government inspection personnel in
all poultry plants exporting to the U.S., including carcass-by-
carcass inspection in slaughter facilities; (2) the PRC will
publicly report all animal disease outbreaks affecting poultry
in a timely fashion; and (3) the PRC will publicly disclose all
recalls of poultry products in a timely fashion.
Public Health Veterinarians.--The Committee is concerned
about the persistent vacancy rate for public health
veterinarians (PHVs) within FSIS. The Committee directs the
Department to continue FSIS' new incentive programs for PHVs
and report the results no later than March 2018. Additionally,
the Committee directs USDA to work with other federal agencies
to explore the authority needed and how special salary rates
may be implemented in the recruitment and retention of PHVs.
Siluriformes Inspection.--Since implementing the
Siluriformes inspection program, FSIS has conducted numerous
inspections and has prevented more than 423 tons of adulterated
or ineligible product from entering the U.S. food supply. FSIS
has exceeded the number of inspections and findings by the FDA
that previously had jurisdiction over the program. Given these
results, the Committee does not concur with the President's
budget request to transfer this responsibility back to FDA.
FSIS is protecting the public health, and the Committee expects
the agency to continue with full compliance by September 1,
2017.
TITLE II
FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation
2017 appropriation.................................... $901,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 896,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 875,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -26,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -21,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production
and Conservation, the Committee provides an appropriation of
$875,000.
Reorganization.--The Committee is supportive of the
Secretary's reorganization of the farm production and
conservation mission areas under one Under Secretary and
expects this position to equally focus on each mission. The
Committee directs the Under Secretary to provide briefings
during fiscal year 2017 on preliminary strategies and plans for
the reorganization related to the consolidation, co-location,
relocation, and closure of field offices and staff; and the
development and combination of information technology systems,
specifically farm program modernization.
Farm Service Agency
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfer from
Appropriation Program Accounts Total, FSA S&E;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 appropriation........................................ $1,206,110,000 ($309,610,000) ($1,515,720,000)
2018 budget estimate...................................... 1,130,163,000 (297,888,000) (1,428,051,000)
Provided in the bill...................................... 1,166,317,000 (297,888,000) (1,464,205,000)
Comparison:
2017 appropriation.................................... -39,793,000 -11,722,000 -(51,515,000)
2018 budget estimate.................................. +$36,154,000 $- - - +($36,154,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Salaries and Expenses of the Farm Service Agency (FSA),
the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,166,317,000 and
transfers of $297,888,000, for a total program level of
$1,464,205,000.
The Committee does not: 1) provide the one-time FY 2017
increases of $6,000,000; 2) accept reductions in non-federal
full time employees (FTE); 3) accept savings from farm program
modernization; and 4) accept any reduction in FTE for
international commodity operations and food aid programs
including Food for Peace Title II and the McGovern-Dole
International Food for Education Program.
The Committee does: (1) accept savings from FTE attrition;
(2) provide funding for CCC audit readiness; (3) accept savings
from federal and non-federal operating expenses; (4) direct
farm program modernization savings to be used for other IT
purposes proposed and as determined by the Secretary; and (5)
accept IT operation maintenance and imaging savings.
The Committee notes that the Department has the authority
to include state organic program fees and transitional
certification fees from programs established under the Organic
Foods and Production Act of 1990 when administering the program
under 7 U.S.C. 6523.
CLEAR Initiative.--The Committee is encouraged by FSA's
announcement of the new Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)
initiative, the Clean Lakes, Estuaries, and Rivers (CLEAR)
initiative, which creates a funding mechanism for the
installation of saturated buffers and denitrifying bioreactors
(NRCS Standard Codes 604 and 605, respectively) into CRP
buffers (CP 21 & CP 22). The CLEAR announcement established
policy to incentivize and allow the installation of bioreactors
into new, existing, and re-enrolled CRP buffers. However,
saturated buffers were only allowed in new and re-enrolled CRP
buffers. The Committee understands this has limited the ability
of stakeholders to install saturated buffers into CRP without
penalty. The Committee recommends FSA look into changing the
CLEAR guidelines to allow the installation of saturated buffers
in new, re-enrolled and existing CRP contracts to allow FSA
cost-shared installation of saturated buffers, and to examine
allowing for installation of saturated buffers through non-
federal programs and initiatives without penalty to landowners.
Emergency Conservation Program (ECP).--The Committee
encourages USDA to continue providing updates of funding needs
for ECP, especially in the aftermath of drought, wildfires, and
other natural disasters. The Committee encourages FSA to be
flexible in meeting new challenges as it was during recent
wildfire outbreaks when it allowed grazing on CRP lands.
Oriental Fruit Fly.--The Committee strongly urges FSA to
make funds available to those farmers who were negatively
impacted by an Oriental Fruit Fly quarantine from October 2015
through February 2016. The farmers, who were unable to bring
their crop to market, sustained devastating losses, although
the quarantine was necessary and successful in eradicating the
Oriental Fruit Fly pest. Because crop insurance and other
similar programs do not apply in instances of a state or
federally declared quarantine, the impacted farmers are in need
of relief. The Committee believes it is within FSA's purview to
make funds available to the impacted farmers.
STATE MEDIATION GRANTS
2017 appropriation.................................... $3,904,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 3,398,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 3,398,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -506,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For State Mediation Grants, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $3,398,000.
GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $6,500,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 6,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -500,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +6,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $6,000,000.
DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... \1\$500,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. \1\500,000
Provided in the bill.................................. \1\500,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
\1\Current indefinite appropriation.
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Dairy Indemnity Program, the Committee provides an
appropriation of such sums as may be necessary (estimated to be
$500,000 in the President's fiscal year 2018 budget request).
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
ESTIMATED LOAN LEVELS
2017 loan level....................................... $8,002,576,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 6,953,884,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 7,163,884,000
Comparison:
2017 loan level................................... -838,692,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +210,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund program account,
the Committee provides a loan level of $7,163,884,000.
Farm Loans.--The Committee encourages FSA to continue
providing updates on the estimates of demand for farm loan
programs. The Committee also encourages the retention and
fulfillment of farm loan program officer positions to
facilitate an orderly processing of applications and prevent
administrative backlogs.
The following table reflects the loan levels for the
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund program account:
AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Loan Programs
Farm Ownership:
Direct...................................... $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000
Unsubsidized Guaranteed..................... 2,750,000 2,500,000 2,500,000
Farm Operating:
Direct...................................... 1,530,000 1,304,851 1,304,851
Unsubsidized Guaranteed..................... 1,960,000 1,393,423 1,593,423
Emergency Loans............................. 22,576 25,610 25,610
Indian Tribe Land Acquisition Loans......... 20,000 20,000 20,000
Conservation Loans:
Unsubsidized Guaranteed..................... 150,000 150,000 150,000
Indian Highly Fractionated Land............. 10,000 - - - 10,000
Boll Weevil Eradication..................... 60,000 60,000 60,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... $8,002,576 $6,953,884 $7,163,884
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Loan Guaranteed Administrative
Subsidy Loan Subsidy Expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 appropriation.............................................. $65,178 $20,972 $317,068
2018 budget estimate............................................ 52,716 15,467 305,291
Provided in the bill............................................ 52,716 15,467 305,291
Comparison:
2017 appropriation.......................................... -12,462 -5,505 -11,777
2018 budget estimate........................................ $- - - $- - - $- - -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table reflects the costs of loan programs
under credit reform:
AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS--SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Enacted Estimate Provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Loan Subsidies
Farm Operating:
Direct................ $65,178 $52,716 $52,716
Unsubsidized 20,972 15,467 17,687
Guaranteed...........
Emergency Loans....... 1,262 1,260 1,260
Indian Highly 2,550 - - - 2,272
Fractionated Land....
-----------------------------------------
Total................. 89,962 69,443 73,935
ACIF Expenses:
Salaries and Expenses..... 306,998 297,386 297,386
Administrative Expenses... 10,070 7,905 7,905
-----------------------------------------
Total, ACIF Expenses.. $317,068 $305,291 $305,291
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk Management Agency
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
2017 appropriation.................................... $74,829,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. \1\55,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. \1\55,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -19,829,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
\1\Does not include $20,000,000 from mandatory funding.
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Risk Management Agency, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $55,000,000.
The Committee supports the President's Budget Request to
use fees for operating expenses and to maintain program
integrity. The Committee advises the agency to provide updates
during fiscal year 2017 on the program impact from this
proposal.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
CONSERVATION OPERATIONS
2017 appropriation.................................... $864,474,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 766,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 858,911,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -5,563,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +92,911,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Conservation Operations, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $858,911,000.
The Committee provides $9,300,000 for the Snow Survey and
Water Forecasting Program; $9,400,000 for the Plant Materials
Centers; and $80,000,000 for the Soil Surveys Program. The
Committee provides $760,211,000 for Conservation Technical
Assistance and includes the requested increase for the
Conservation Delivery Streamlining Initiative.
Agricultural Conservation Easement Program.--Due to the
unique ecological needs of each state, the Committee encourages
NRCS to work with state and local partners to address these
needs and to ensure the priority needs and projects in each
state, such as those that are leveraged by public and private
resources, are addressed.
Cheat Grass Eradication.--The Committee encourages NRCS to
continue to assist farmers and ranchers to eradicate, control,
and reduce the fuel loads associated with cheat grass and to
collaborate with ARS, as appropriate, on research related to
cheat grass.
Community Colleges.--The Committee encourages NRCS to
collaborate with our nation's community colleges for the
advancement of agriculture and the adoption of technology and
conservation practices among producers and landowners. NRCS
should target specific funds to highlight the special
contributions that community colleges can provide in terms of
technical assistance, demonstration, and applied research that
is available through their agriculture programs.
Floodplain Buyouts.--The Committee commends the successful
efforts of NRCS with voluntary floodplain homeowner buyout
projects. The Committee encourages the NRCS to continue
collaborative efforts with participating towns and counties to
mitigate unintended consequences resulting from buyouts, such
as utility cost increases for homeowners in these regions.
Harmful Algal Blooms.--The Committee supports NRCS' ongoing
work to prevent soil erosion leading to harmful algal blooms
through the introduction of cover crops and encourages
continued targeting of watersheds where harmful algal blooms
pose a threat.
Herbicide Resistance.--The Committee reminds NRCS of the
challenges many producers are facing due to the spread of
herbicide-resistant weeds and encourages it to ensure agency
staff, partners, and producers are aware of conservation
practice standards, conservation activity plans to address
herbicide-resistant weeds, and financial assistance available
through conservation programs to assist producers in their
efforts to control these weeds.
Irrigation Agriculture.--The recent drought in the
Southeast brought to light the need for greater irrigation in
regions that have not previously had widespread irrigation
systems. The Committee reiterates its support for irrigation
agriculture and encourages NRCS to leverage all possible
funding streams to support the expansion of irrigation
infrastructure in rural America. The Committee also notes that
it has not received the report required by H. Rpt. 114-531 and
directs NRCS to submit this report.
Locally Led Conservation.--The Committee recognizes that
locally led conservation is the foundation of the nation's
highly successful legacy of conservation and encourages NRCS to
work with state, tribal, local, and other partners on voluntary
stewardship projects that preserve working agricultural lands
while protecting watersheds and wildlife habitat.
Milkweed.--The Committee is concerned about the rapid
decline in milkweed for monarch butterfly habitat. The
Committee encourages NRCS consider the increased benefits of
restoring milkweed for monarch habitat in fiscal year 2018.
National Marine Sanctuaries.--The Committee urges the
agency to continue the collaborative agreement with the Office
of National Marine Sanctuaries to address sources of
agricultural runoff, such as sediments, nitrates, and
pesticides.
Regional Conservation Partnership Program.--The Committee
commends NRCS for the success of RCPP, through which NRCS
provides assistance to producers through partnership
agreements, program contracts, or easement agreements. These
programs allow for diverse and innovative conservation projects
which leverage both public and private funding. The Committee
encourages NRCS to consider the needs of organic farmers, who
implement a wide variety of creative methods to improve water
quality and enhance the environment, while implementing RCPP.
Resource Conservation and Development Councils (RC&Ds;).--
The Committee recognizes RC&Ds; have been valuable partners in
conservation and encourages NRCS to continue working with local
councils, as appropriate, to ensure conservation programs meet
local resource needs.
Sage Grouse Initiative.--The Committee supports NRCS' sage
grouse conservation efforts. Through the initiative, NRCS
provides technical and financial assistance to help landowners
conserve sage grouse habitat on their land. The initiative is
an integral part of efforts by federal agencies, several
western states, and private landowners to help preclude the
listing of the sage grouse as an endangered species.
WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION OPERATIONS
2017 appropriation.................................... $150,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 40,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -110,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +40,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $40,000,000.
WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $12,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 10,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -2,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +10,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Watershed Rehabilitation Program, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $10,000,000.
CORPORATIONS
High-Hazard Dams.--Within the funds provided for the
Watershed Rehabilitation Program, the Committee provides
$5,000,000 for the repair and rehabilitation of high-hazard
dams which pose a threat to human life and safety, in
particular those in rural states which have had recent floods
that resulted in fatalities.
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund
2017 appropriation.................................... \1\$8,667,000,00
0
2018 budget estimate.................................. \1\8,245,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. \1\8,245,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -422,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
\1\Current indefinite appropriation.
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund, the
Committee provides an appropriation of such sums as may be
necessary (estimated to be $8,245,000,000 in the President's
fiscal year 2018 budget request).
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund
REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation................................ \1\$21,290,712,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. \1\17,483,000,000
Provided in the bill.............................. \1\17,483,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation............................ -3,807,712,000
2018 budget estimate.......................... - - -
\1\Current indefinite appropriation.
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Reimbursement for Net Realized Losses to the Commodity
Credit Corporation, the Committee provides such sums as may be
necessary to reimburse for net realized losses sustained but
not previously reimbursed (estimated to be $17,483,000,000 in
the President's fiscal year 2018 budget request).
Cotton.--The Committee encourages the Commodity Credit
Corporation to use some of the funding available for Section 5
of the authorizing Act (15 U.S.C. 714) and Section 32 of the
Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 612c) provided in FY 2017
and available in FY 2018 to be used for purposes of providing
assistance to the cotton sector. The Committee further
encourages the Department to explore and act upon other ways to
assist the sector, including through ginning cost-share
programs, other methods allowable by law, and as a result of
the study directed in the fiscal year 2017 appropriations Act.
The Committee further supports the inclusion of cottonseed as
an oilseed.
Hazardous Waste Management
(LIMITATION ON EXPENSES)
2017 limitation....................................... ($5,000,000)
2018 budget estimate.................................. (5,000,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (5,000,000)
Comparison:
2017 limitation................................... - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Hazardous Waste Management, the Committee provides a
limitation of $5,000,000.
TITLE III
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Rural Development Salaries And Expenses
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Enacted Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations.................................................. $225,835,000 $186,076,000 $220,835,000
Transfer from:
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account................ 412,254,000 244,249,000 401,300,000
Rural Community Facilities Program Account.................. - - - 147,591,000 - - -
Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account................. 4,468,000 - - - 4,230,000
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loan Program 33,270,000 38,027,000 30,750,000
Account....................................................
Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program...... - - - 8,057,000 - - -
-----------------------------------------------
Total, RD Salaries and Expenses......................... $675,827,000 $624,000,000 $657,115,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Salaries and Expenses of the Rural Development mission
area, the Committee provides an appropriation of $220,835,000.
Rural Housing Service
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative
Loan Level Subsidy Level Expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Appropriation........................................ $25,335,133 $89,302 $412,254
2018 Budget Estimate...................................... 24,260,000 - - - 244,249
Provided in the Bill...................................... 25,217,398 49,515 401,300
Comparison:
2017 Appropriation.................................... -117,735 -39,787 -10,954
2018 Budget Estimate.................................. +$957,398 +$49,515 +$157,051
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account, the
Committee provides a loan level of $25,217,398,000.
Section 502 Intermediary Pilot Program.--The bill directs
the Secretary to continue and expand the pilot program for
packaging section 502 direct loans. The pilot requires not less
than ten non-profit organizations to prepare and review
applications for single family loans, saving federal funds and
staff time. The Committee expects the Rural Housing Service to
expeditiously implement this program.
Section 514 Housing.--The Committee recognizes changes in
the agricultural labor market and the effect of these changes
on farm housing utilization. However, any changes to
eligibility for farm housing must not displace any farm worker
who is a United States citizen or a person legally admitted to
the United States. Eligibility changes would only apply to
situations where housing units are currently unoccupied or
underutilized.
Rural Definition.--Communities need transparency and
deserve to understand the criteria that are evaluated when
determining eligibility for RHS programs. The Committee directs
RHS to submit a report listing the criteria used to define
``rural in character'' in determining program eligibility.
The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural
Housing Insurance Fund program account:
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Enacted Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loans:
Single Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct.................................................. $1,000,000 $- - - $900,000
Unsubsidized Guaranteed................................. 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
Housing Repair (sec. 504)................................... 26,278 - - - 24,000
Rental Housing (sec. 515)................................... 35,000 - - - 28,398
Multi-family Guaranteed (sec. 538).......................... 230,000 250,000 230,000
Site Development Loans...................................... 5,000 - - - 5,000
Credit Sales of Acquired Property........................... 10,000 10,000 10,000
Self-help Housing Land Development Fund..................... 5,000 - - - 5,000
Farm Labor Housing.......................................... 23,855 - - - 15,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total, Loan Authorization............................... $25,335,133 $24,260,000 $25,217,398
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table reflects the costs of loan programs
under credit reform:
ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2017 FY 2018 Committee
Enacted Estimate Provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program
Account (Loan Subsidies and Grants):
Single Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct......................... $67,700 $- - - $34,650
Housing Repair (sec. 504).......... 3,663 - - - 2,959
Rental Housing (sec. 515).......... 10,360 - - - 7,472
Farm Labor Housing................. 7,051 - - - 4,008
Site Development (sec. 524)........ 111 - - - 58
Self-Help Land (sec. 523).......... 417 - - - 368
Total, Loan Subsidies.......... 89,302 - - - 49,515
Farm Labor Housing Grants.......... 8,336 - - - 6,000
RHIF Expenses:
Administrative Expenses........ $412,254 $244,249 $401,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $1,405,033,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 1,345,293,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 1,345,293,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -59,740,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rental Assistance Program, the Committee provides a
program level of $1,345,293,000.
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT
2017 appropriation.................................... $41,400,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 20,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 35,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -6,400,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +15,000,000
For the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account,
the Committee provides an appropriation of $35,000,000,
including $20,000,000 for the rural housing voucher program.
MUTUAL AND SELF HELP HOUSING GRANTS
2017 appropriation.................................... $30,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 25,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -5,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +25,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $25,000,000.
RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $47,100,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 147,591,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 4,849,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -42,251,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -142,742,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Community Facilities Program Account, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $4,849,000.
The Committee provides funding for Community Facility
grants in the Rural Economic Infrastructure account.
The Committee continues to take the Rural Development
administrative expense transfer from the Rural Housing
Insurance Fund (RHIF) and does not accept the proposed transfer
from the Rural Community Facilities program account.
Power Plus.--The Committee encourages USDA to give
consideration to Community Facility investments in coal
communities that have been negatively impacted by changes in
the coal industry and power sector.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the budget request:
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Levels:
Community Facility Direct Loans.................... ($2,600,000) ($3,000,000) ($2,600,000)
Community Facility Guaranteed Loans................ (148,305) (- - -) (148,305)
Subsidy and Grants:
Community Facility Guaranteed Loans................ 3,322 - - - 4,849
Community Facility Grants.......................... 30,000 - - - - - -
Rural Community Development Initiative............. 4,000 - - - - - -
Economic Impact Initiative......................... 5,778 - - - - - -
Tribal College Grants.............................. 4,000 - - - - - -
Administrative Expense Transfer.................... - - - 147,591 - - -
--------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Community Facilities Program $47,100 $147,591 $4,849
Subsidy and Grants............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $65,319,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 58,251,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -7,068,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +58,251,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Business Program Account, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $58,251,000.
The Committee provides resources to operate programs under
the Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS). RBS programs
complement lending activities of the private sector by
promoting economic prosperity in rural communities through
improved access to capital and economic development on a
regional scale.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the budget request:
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimated Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Level:
Business and Industry Guaranteed Loans............. ($919,765) $- - - ($819,000)
Subsidy and Grants:
Business and Industry Guaranteed Loans............. 35,319 - - - 33,251
Rural Business Development Grants.................. 24,000 - - - 20,000
Delta Regional Authority/Appalachian Regional 6,000 - - - 5,000
Commission........................................
Total, Rural Business Program Subsidy and $65,319 $- - - $58,251
Grants........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following programs are included in the bill for the
Rural Business Program account: $500,000 for rural
transportation technical assistance and $4,000,000 for
Federally Recognized Native American Tribes, of which $250,000
is for transportation technical assistance. The Committee notes
that the 2014 Farm Bill consolidated the Rural Business
Opportunity and Rural Business Enterprise grant programs.
Rural Business Development Grants.--The Committee
understands the important role that rural business development
grants have in supporting the development or expansion of
businesses in rural areas.
INTERMEDIARY RELENDING PROGRAM FUND ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative
Loan Level Subsidy Level Expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Appropriation..................................... $18,889 $5,476 $4,468
2018 Budget Estimate................................... - - - - - - - - -
Provided in the Bill................................... 17,500 4,041 4,230
Comparison:
2017 Appropriation................................. -1,389 -1,435 -238
2018 Budget Estimate............................... +$17,500 +$4,041 +$4,230
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account, the
Committee provides for a loan level of $17,500,000.
For the loan subsidy, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $4,041,000. In addition, the Committee
provides $4,230,000 for administrative expenses.
RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Appropriation.................................... $42,213,000
2018 Budget Estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the Bill.................................. 33,077,000
Comparison:
2017 Appropriation................................ -9,136,000
2018 Budget Estimate.............................. +$33,077,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account,
the Committee provides for a loan level of $33,077,000.
Review and Selection Process.--The Committee recognizes
that demand for the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant
Program remains high. The Committee encourages the Rural
Business-Cooperative Service to award funds on a first-come
first-serve basis, after taking all other eligibility
requirements into account, and not the prioritization system
utilized in fiscal year 2016. The Committee supports utilizing
a first-come first-serve award system as the most expeditious
means to award funds to eligible projects.
RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
2017 appropriation.................................... $26,550,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 21,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -5,550,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +21,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Rural Cooperative Development Grants, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $21,000,000. This total includes
$2,500,000 for a cooperative agreement for the Appropriate
Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program and $10,000,000 for
the value-added agricultural product market development grant
program.
The Committee notes that the 2014 Farm Bill provided
mandatory funding for value-added agricultural product market
development grants.
RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $352,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 291,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -61,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +291,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Energy for America Program, the Committee
provides a loan level of $7,520,000 and an appropriation of
$291,000 for the loan subsidy to make loans as authorized by
section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107).
The Committee notes that the 2014 Farm Bill provides
mandatory funding for this program.
Rural Utilities Service
RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $571,190,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 472,700,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -98,490,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +472,700,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $472,700,000. Rural
areas continue to face immense needs and challenges in
attaining safe and clean water, and the USDA Water and Waste
Disposal program provides targeted and coordinated support for
these communities and is essential for the delivery of safe,
dependable and affordable water and wastewater to rural
America. The Committee believes this program is complimentary,
not duplicative of other federal programs and critical in
supporting quality of life, economic development and health to
rural communities.
Water Supplies for Very Small Communities.--The Committee
is aware of concerns that Rural Utilities Service (RUS) grant
programs do not adequately help small, disadvantaged, and
severely disadvantaged communities access the funding and
expertise necessary to develop sustainable water supplies or
otherwise improve their wastewater systems, and it directs the
agency to focus its efforts to assist these communities with
predevelopment planning to help them address their water supply
needs.
Carryover Balances for AK, HI, and Colonias Grants.--The
Committee is aware of carryover balances of unobligated funds
provided in prior year appropriations for Water and Waste
Disposal grants for Alaskan villages, Native American Tribes,
Hawaiian Homelands, and the Colonias. The Committee urges the
Department to work with state, local and tribal organization
stakeholders to provide assistance via water and waste disposal
grant programs as long as such assistance was requested by the
respective groups in the year in which the funds were
appropriated. The Department has flexibility to shift these
prior year funds among the four areas through a reprogramming
of funds. Further, the Committee provides flexibility in fiscal
year 2018 to move funds to other water and waste disposal
priorities in order to reduce the backlog of related needs
nationwide.
Open and Free Competition Policy.--The Committee supports
the Department's underlying adherence to free and open
competition on water and waste projects as contained in 7 CFR
1780.70(b) and (d). The Committee supports efforts to eliminate
arbitrary actions in the procurement process but is concerned
that the Department is undermining the ability of local
communities and the engineer of record to design water and
wastewater projects in the manner that best serves the unique
needs and considerations of local communities. In particular,
the Committee is concerned about the May 17, 2012, memorandum
and the implementation of pipe materials. The Committee
believes that the Department must apply its policy uniformly to
all building materials but is concerned with the Department
requirements that would unnecessarily delay projects by
including onerous approval processes. Communities and
professional engineers are different and specify the pipe
materials that best suit the needs of their community and
project. These communities and engineers, therefore make
different determinations depending on what is suited for a
given community, including the existence of applicable federal,
state, or local ordinances or standard specifications. The
Committee encourages the Department to defer to the engineer of
record in the selection of materials that meet nationally
recognized standards, including pipe, absent extraordinary
circumstances demonstrating arbitrary action.
Domestic Preference.--The bill includes language specifying
that RUS' Rural Water and Waste Disposal program account that
projects utilizing iron and steel shall use iron and steel
products produced in the United States. RUS shall apply the
Environmental Protection Agency's definition of public water
systems while implementing the domestic preference provision.
RUS Contracting.--The Committee encourages RUS to review
construction contract procedures to identify means to more
efficiently build and expand critical power and communications
infrastructure across rural America. Specifically, the
Committee is interested in Form 773 contracts and benefits or
detriments towards increasing the limit of the contracts to
$1,000,000 and enabling subcontracting opportunities under the
contracts. The Committee is also interested in any changes to
bonding requirements should the contract limit be increased and
what, if any, controls are lost when executing a minor
construction project over the RUS Form 515 that is currently
utilized for projects over $250,000.
Unserved and Underserved Rural Communities.--The Committee
recognizes there are unserved or underserved rural areas within
the U.S. that lack the technical, financial, or managerial
capacity to adequately operate, maintain or provide safe and
affordable water and wastewater service necessary to protect
and enhance the public health and economic vitality of their
communities. It is noted that many contiguous and local
utilities located outside the unserved or underserved service
area have the capacity to provide sustainable, essential water
and wastewater services to these areas. The Committee directs
the Secretary to explore the potential of providing financial
and other incentives to the local or contiguous utilities that
have the demonstrated capacity and ability to provide essential
water and waste water services to these unserved or underserved
communities. The Secretary shall provide a report to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate with
findings and recommendations within 180 days of enactment of
this Act.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the budget request:
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Levels:
Water and Waste Direct Loans....................... ($1,200,000) $- - - ($1,200,000)
Water and Waste Guaranteed Loans................... (50,000) - - - (50,000)
Subsidy and Grants:
Direct Subsidy..................................... 52,080 - - - 25,680
Guaranteed Subsidy................................. 240 - - - 230
Water and Waste Revolving Fund..................... 1,000 - - - 1,000
Water Well System Grants........................... 993 - - - 993
Grants for the Colonias and AK/HI.................. 64,000 - - - 45,000
Water and Waste Technical Assistance Grants........ 20,000 - - - 20,000
Circuit Rider Program.............................. 16,897 - - - 16,897
Solid Waste Management Grants...................... 4,000 - - - 4,000
High Energy Cost Grants............................ 10,000 - - - - - -
Water and Waste Disposal Grants.................... 391,980 - - - 358,900
306A(i)(2) Grants.................................. 10,000 - - - - - -
--------------------------------------------------------
Total, Subsidies and Grants.................... $571,190 $- - - $472,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative
Loan Level Subsidy Level Expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Appropriation..................................... $6,940,000 $3,071 $33,270
2018 Budget Estimate................................... 6,190,000 863 38,027
Provided in the Bill................................... 6,940,000 863 30,750
Comparison:
2017 Appropriation................................. - - - -2,208 -2,520
2018 Budget Estimate............................... +$750,000 $- - - -$7,277
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans
Program Account, the Committee provides a loan level of
$6,940,000,000. In addition, the Committee provides $30,750,000
for administrative expenses.
The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural
Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account:
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Authorizations:
Electric:
Direct, FFB.................................... $5,500,000 $5,500,000 $5,500,000
Guaranteed Underwriting........................ 750,000 - - - 750,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal....................................... 6,250,000 5,500,000 6,250,000
Telecommunications:
Direct, Treasury Rate.............................. 345,000 345,000 345,000
Direct, FFB........................................ 345,000 345,000 345,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan Authorizations..................... $6,940,000 $6,190,000 $6,940,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BROADBAND PROGRAM
[Dollars in Thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
FY 2017 Enacted FY 2018 Estimate Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broadband Program:
Loan Authorization................................. $27,043 $26,991 $26,991
Loan Subsidy....................................... 4,500 4,521 4,521
Grants............................................. 34,500 - - - - - -
Distance Learning and Telemedicine:
Grants............................................. 26,600 - - - - - -
--------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan Subsidy and Grants................. $65,600 $4,521 $4,521
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Broadband Program, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $4,521,000.
The Committee has provided appropriations for the Distance
Learning, Telemedicine and Community Connect program under the
Rural Economic Infrastructure account.
Broadband Loan Program Priorities.--The Committee
recognizes the advantages of extending broadband services,
including the economic development opportunities and improved
health care services that broadband technology provides.
Funding provided for the broadband loan program is intended to
promote availability in those areas where there is not
otherwise a business case for private investment in a broadband
network. The Committee directs RUS to focus expenditures on
projects that bring broadband service to underserved households
and areas.
Tribal Communities.--The Committee notes that tribal
communities continue to struggle with gaining access to
broadband service. The Committee encourages the Secretary to
provide a report that identifies the specific challenges Indian
Tribal Organizations (ITOs) have in gaining access to broadband
service and provide a plan for addressing these challenges,
including how the Community Connect program can assist ITOs.
Rural Economic Infrastructure Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $- - -
2018 budget estimate.................................. 161,893,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 122,692,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +122,692,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -39,201,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Rural Economic Infrastructure Account, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $122,692,000.
The Rural Economic Infrastructure Account uses the existing
grant authorities under the Rural Housing Assistance Grant
accounts, Rural Community Facilities Program account, and
Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program account,
providing the Department with flexibility to maximize economic
impact. The bill includes language requiring at least 15
percent of resources be allocated to each program area within
the account.
TITLE IV
DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Services
2017 appropriation.................................... $814,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 809,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 800,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -14,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -9,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition,
and Consumer Services, the Committee provides an appropriation
of $800,000.
Public Release of Information.--The Committee directs FNS
to continue making all policy documents related to the WIC
program (including, but not limited to, instructions,
memoranda, guidance, and questions and answers) available to
the public on the Internet within one week of their release to
WIC state administrators.
Program Eligibility.--The Committee directs FNS to work
with states to ensure full compliance with the law mandating
that every WIC and SNAP participant meet all program
eligibility requirements. FNS is also directed to ensure these
programs are not being promoted to ineligible individuals,
which would increase program costs.
Fruit and Vegetable Consumption.--The Committee continues
to urge FNS to recognize in relevant agency publications and
regulations related to all federal nutrition programs,
including nutrition education programs and child nutrition
programs, the nutritional benefits provided by all forms of
fruits, vegetables, and beans, whether canned, dried, fresh, or
frozen.
Food and Nutrition Service
CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $22,793,982,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 24,256,266,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 24,280,944,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +1,486,962,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +24,678,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Child Nutrition Programs, the Committee provides
$24,280,944,000, which includes $25,000,000 for school meals
equipment grants. School districts across the country continue
to be in need of equipment to serve healthy meals; therefore,
the Committee continues this program.
Afterschool Programs.--The Committee supports the efforts
of approved food sites to serve students nutritious meals
through the Summer Food Service Program and the Child and Adult
Care Food Program. FNS is directed to provide a report on the
options and costs for serving at-risk, low income children with
snacks or meals beyond the current limit of two meals per day
that is established for these programs.
School Meals.--The Committee remains concerned about the
challenges and costs that local schools face in implementing
the various regulations from the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act
of 2010. In order to provide schools with the certainty and
flexibility they need for the 2018-2019 school year, the
Committee continues to extend the whole grain waiver provision
to those school food authorities demonstrating a hardship in
implementing the whole grain standards. Schools will not be
required to meet the Target 2 levels for sodium and will remain
compliant if they meet Target 1. Further, schools will have
flexibility in serving low-fat flavored milk.
The Secretary is taking positive steps to provide greater
flexibility and restore local control in serving healthy meals.
The Committee directs USDA to continue to provide flexibilities
to implement the requirements under Subsection (p) of section
12 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act so that
local authorities can make decisions on school lunch pricing.
The Committee encourages the Department to find additional ways
to provide schools with school lunch pricing flexibility and
other long-term certainty in implementing the school meals
programs.
Training and Technical Assistance.--The Committee is aware
of the need for training of school nutrition personnel that
focuses on school food service meal preparation and workforce
development. Within available funds for Team Nutrition, the
Committee encourages the Department to allow non-regulatory
allied professional associations to assist in training school
food service professionals.
Unpaid School Lunch Fees.--The Committee is concerned with
reports that some students with unpaid school lunch fees are
treated unfairly and being publicly embarrassed. The Committee
directs the Secretary to issue recommended standards schools
may adopt to address the issue of shaming school children for
unpaid school lunch fees, including standards that protect
children from public embarrassment; that strongly encourage all
communications about unpaid school lunch fees be directed at
the parent or guardian, not the child; and that encourage
schools to take additional steps to work with families falling
behind in their school lunch fees.
The following table reflects the Committee recommendations
for the child nutrition programs:
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Nutrition Programs:
School Lunch Program............................. $13,010,053
School Breakfast Program......................... 4,775,629
Child and Adult Care Food Program................ 3,919,384
Summer Food Service Program...................... 639,789
Special Milk Program............................. 8,759
State Administrative Expenses.................... 299,139
Commodity Procurement............................ 1,489,349
Food Safety Education............................ 2,864
Coordinated Review............................... 10,000
Computer Support and Processing.................. 11,880
Training and Technical Assistance................ 13,578
CNP Studies and Evaluations...................... 21,251
CN Payment Accuracy.............................. 10,858
Farm to School Team.............................. 3,407
Team Nutrition................................... 15,504
Healthier U.S. Schools Challenge................. 1,500
School Meals Equipment Grants.................... 25,000
Summer EBT Demonstration......................... 23,000
------------------
Total........................................ $24,280,944
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN
(WIC)
2017 appropriation.................................... $6,350,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 6,150,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 6,150,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -200,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children, the Committee provides an appropriation
of $6,150,000,000. The Committee provides for continuation of
the breastfeeding peer counselor program and infrastructure.
USDA data shows that WIC participation rates have decreased
steadily since fiscal year 2010. The President's budget request
includes a projection of an average monthly participation rate
of 7.2 million women, infants, and children for fiscal year
2018. Birth rates also remain at an all-time low according to
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
USDA is estimating recovery and carryover funds to be
higher than average. Furthermore, the Secretary has a
sufficient WIC contingency reserve fund as a safety net to meet
unexpected demand. With lower participation rates, higher
carryover funds, and an ample reserve fund, the Committee
provides funding that will ensure all eligible participants
will be served. The Committee will continue to monitor WIC
participation, carryover funds, and food costs and take
additional action as necessary to ensure that funding provided
in fiscal year 2018 remains sufficient to serve all eligible
applicants.
WIC Eligibility of Multivitamins.--H. Rpt. 114-531
encouraged FNS to prepare a report assessing the inclusion of
vitamins eligible for purchase as part of the supplemental
foods under the WIC program. FNS is directed to complete this
report by the required due date.
Zika Outreach and Education.--The Committee is supportive
of ensuring pregnant women are educated on the various methods
for preventing exposure to the Zika virus during pregnancy. The
Committee directs the Department, in consultation with the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to either continue
or expand its education and outreach efforts through the WIC
program to provide pregnant women with the information they
need to prevent Zika.
SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $78,480,694,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 73,612,500,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 73,609,950,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -4,870,744,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -2,550,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the
Committee provides $73,609,950,000. The total amount includes
$3,000,000,000 for a contingency reserve to be used only in the
amount necessary.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Equipment.--The Committee
is aware that some farmers markets and farmers selling directly
to consumers are interested in EBT equipment that operates for
a variety of federal nutrition programs. FNS is encouraged to
assist farmers markets and direct-selling farmers in obtaining
EBT equipment that allows participation in both SNAP and WIC.
Nutrition Education.--The Committee encourages FNS to work
with states to fund projects that collaborate with local
farmers, farmer's markets and community based childhood obesity
programs in carrying out SNAP nutrition education programs.
These nutrition education projects should include fitness and
behavioral health.
Recruitment Activities.--The Committee continues to direct
USDA to ensure that Section 4018 of the 2014 Farm Bill is
implemented and enforced in a manner consistent with the
statute which prohibits USDA from conducting recruitment
activities, advertising the program, or entering into
agreements with foreign governments to promote SNAP benefits.
The Committee continues to direct USDA to enforce this
provision to ensure that state agencies are not reimbursed for
such activities consistent with the statute.
SNAP Employment and Training Report.--Not later than 12
months after enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit
a report to the Committees on Appropriations and Agriculture of
both Houses of Congress reviewing state SNAP Employment and
Training programs and services that are specifically designed
to address barriers to work for ex-offenders, including the
number served or estimated to be served, the types of services
provided, and outcome measures such as completion rates and
increased earnings, if available.
The following table reflects the Committee recommendations
for SNAP:
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Account:
Benefits......................................... $62,639,315
Contingency Reserve.............................. 3,000,000
Administrative Costs:
State Administrative Costs....................... 4,483,411
Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant 421,000
Program.........................................
Employment and Training.......................... 476,706
Mandatory Other Program Costs.................... 183,880
Discretionary Other Program Costs................ 998
------------------
Administrative Subtotal...................... 5,565,995
------------------
Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico (NAP)........... 1,928,995
American Samoa....................................... 7,747
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations..... 153,000
TEFAP Commodities.................................... 288,750
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands......... 12,148
Community Food Project............................... 9,000
Program Access....................................... 5,000
------------------
Subtotal......................................... 2,404,640
------------------
Total........................................ $73,609,950
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
2017 appropriation.................................... $315,139,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 293,591,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 317,139,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +2,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +23,548,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
The Committee provides an appropriation of $317,139,000 for
the Commodity Assistance Program. The recommended funding level
for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program is $238,120,000.
The Committee recommendation continues to provide
$18,548,000 for the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program as this
program provides WIC participants with access to fresh fruits
and vegetables. The Committee has included $59,401,000 for
administrative funding for The Emergency Food Assistance
Program (TEFAP). For the Food Donations Programs, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $1,070,000 for Pacific Island
Assistance.
TEFAP Handling and Distribution Costs.--In addition to
grant funds supporting commodity handling and distribution
costs, the bill permits states to use up to 10 percent of the
funds provided for purchasing TEFAP commodities to help with
the costs of storing, transporting, and distributing
commodities. The Committee expects state agencies to consult
with their emergency feeding organizations on the need for the
conversion of such funds.
NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
2017 appropriation.................................... $170,716,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 148,541,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 148,541,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -22,175,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Nutrition Programs Administration, the Committee
provides $148,541,000. This amount includes $2,000,000 to
continue the Congressional Hunger Center Fellows Program, which
has been instrumental in developing leaders in combatting
domestic and global hunger.
TITLE V
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural
Affairs
2017 appropriation.................................... $- - -
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 875,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ +875,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +875,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign
Agricultural Affairs, the Committee provides an appropriation
of $875,000. The 2014 Farm Bill required that an Under
Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs be
established. The office was recently proposed by the Secretary
after the submission of the President's budget proposal and did
not receive funding in the prior year or the budget.
Interagency Cooperation.--The Committee encourages the
Under Secretary to be cognizant and steadfast in raising trade
enforcement issues related to the agricultural policies of
foreign nations in cooperation with the Under Secretary for
Farm Production and Conservation, the U.S. Trade
Representative, and the Department of Commerce. The Committee
further encourages the Under Secretary to prioritize trade
issues related to biotechnology and minimizing trade
disruptions from avian influenza outbreaks by pursuing
localization policies.
Low-Level Presence Trade Policies.--The Committee directs
the Under Secretary to work with the U.S. Trade Representative
and other relevant agencies to develop low-level presence
policies that allow for uninterrupted trade practices in
agricultural, biotech, and food arenas, specifically related to
sanitary and phyto-sanitary issues. These policies should be
risk-based and attempt to minimize disruptions to trade.
Potable Water.--The Committee encourages the use of
recently developed potable water technologies in development
and long-term sustainability projects.
Foreign Agricultural Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfer from
Appropriation Export Loan Total
Account
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 appropriation..................................... $196,571,000 $6,074,000 $202,645,000
2018 budget estimate................................... 188,167,000 6,382,000 194,549,000
Provided in the bill................................... 195,268,000 6,382,000 201,650,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................. -1,303,000 +308,000 -995,000
2018 budget estimate............................... +$7,101,000 $- - - +$7,101,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $195,268,000 and transfer of
$6,382,000, for a total appropriation of $201,650,000.
The Committee provides increases in funding for
International Cooperative Administrative Support Services and
$2,000,000 above estimated amounts for the Country Strategy
Support Fund. The Committee accepts reductions in funding for
Capital Security Cost Sharing, headquarters savings, and
reductions in FTE not to exceed $2,000,000.
Farmer-to-Farmer.--The Committee directs that USDA evaluate
the John Ogonowski and Doug Bereuter Farmer-to-Farmer program
and develop strategies that will allow the program to be fully
integrated and enhanced. Farmer-to-Farmer is an effective model
of partnership that can leverage volunteer labor for technical
assistance and capacity building and should be an integral part
of the Global Food Security Strategy.
International Program Proposals.--The Committee does not
accept the legislative proposal to eliminate mandatory
marketing export promotion programs or any staffing reductions
due to the planned elimination of the McGovern-Dole
International Food for Education Program. The Committee
supports expanding export promotion program activities in
preparation for needed bilateral trade agreements.
U.S.-Central America, Mexico Cooperation.--The Committee
directs the agency to work with its counterparts in Central
America and Mexico to develop an agricultural working group
improving the efficiency of the inspection process, the trade
supply chain, and transportation costs, among other issues. In
addition, the agency shall use existing programs for academic
exchanges in agriculture related fields of study in this
region. The agency shall brief the Committee within 180 days of
the date of enactment on current efforts in these areas.
Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress Program
Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $149,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 149,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 149,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For administrative expenses to carry out the credit program
of Food for Peace Title I, Food for Peace Act, and the Food for
Progress Act, the Committee provides an appropriation of
$149,000.
Food for Peace Title II Grants
2017 appropriation.................................... $1,466,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 1,400,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -66,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. +1,400,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Food for Peace Title II grants, the Committee provides
$1,400,000,000, of which $350,000,000 is for non-emergency
assistance. The bill requires Congressional notification for
waiving the non-emergency assistance level set forth in the
Food for Peace Act (FFPA) to meet emergency needs.
Food for Peace Title II Budget Proposal.--The Committee
supports the intent, facets, and structure of the FFPA. These
include 1) requiring the purchase of U.S. commodities; 2)
requiring the use of U.S.-flagged, maritime ships and sailors
to ship commodities; and 3) the use of FFP funds to meet the
non-emergency funding set-aside for development projects. The
FFPA embodies the spirit of the President's Executive Order to
``Buy American, Hire American'' while simultaneously lending a
hand to those in need and furthering national security
objectives. The Committee supports the use of the Bill Emerson
Humanitarian Trust to meet additional emergency food aid needs
and will judiciously consider reimbursements to the Trust in
future fiscal years following its use.
Central American Food Assistance.--The Committee directs
the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International
Development to continue briefing the Committee on its efforts,
including the amount and type of food aid, in Central America.
MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD
NUTRITION PROGRAM GRANTS
2017 appropriation.................................... $201,626,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. - - -
Provided in the bill.................................. 201,626,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. +201,626,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program Grants, the Committee provides an
appropriation of $201,626,000.
McGovern-Dole Budget Proposal.--The Committee continues to
support the McGovern-Dole program. The program serves a unique
purpose and population, and it requires the purchase and hire
of American commodities and maritime assets to feed people in
need overseas. The program's most recent audit, performed over
five years ago, identified weaknesses in monitoring and
evaluation controls. These issues have been addressed and a
2016 GAO report (16-861R) found that USDA addressed and
required the majority of the leading practices for monitoring
and evaluation policies, consistent with other international
affairs agencies.
COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT (LOANS)
CREDIT GUARANTEE PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
2017 appropriation.................................... $8,537,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 6,735,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 6,735,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -1,802,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For administrative expenses of the Commodity Credit
Corporation Export Loans Credit Guarantee Program Account, the
Committee provides an appropriation of $6,735,000.
TITLE VI
RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[Dollars in Thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, FDA
Appropriation User Fees S&E;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Appropriation............. $2,759,378 $1,895,711 $4,655,089
2018 Budget Estimate........... 1,819,718 3,164,392 4,984,110
Provided in the Bill........... 2,759,378 2,386,567 5,145,945
Comparison:
2017 Appropriation......... - - - +490,856 +490,856
2018 Budget Estimate....... +$939,660 -$777,825 +$161,835
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee provides an appropriation of $2,759,378,000
in new budget authority for the FDA. In addition, the Committee
recommends the following user fee amounts: $937,434,000--
prescription drugs; $193,291,000--medical devices;
$493,600,000--human generic drugs; $54,000,000--biosimilar
biologicals; $24,142,000--animal drugs; $12,100,000--animal
generic drugs; and $672,000,000--tobacco products. The
combination of new budget authority and definite user fees
provides the FDA with a total discretionary salaries and
expenses level of $5,145,945,000. This total does not include
permanent, indefinite user fees for the Mammography Quality
Standards Act; Color Certification; Export Certification;
Priority Review Vouchers for Pediatric Disease; Food and Feed
Recall; Food Reinspection; Voluntary Qualified Importer
Program; the Third Party Auditor Program; Outsourcing Facility;
and Medical Countermeasure Priority Review Vouchers.
The Committee recommendation does not include proposed user
fee increases for Export Certification, Food Facility
Registration and Inspection, Food Import, International
Courier, Cosmetics, or Food Contact Notification.
The Committee does not include funding for a civilian pay
increase across the agency. Should the President provide a
civilian pay increase for fiscal year 2018, it is assumed that
the cost of such a pay increase will be absorbed within
existing appropriations for fiscal year 2018.
The Committee recommendation maintains fiscal year 2017
funding levels for the medical countermeasures initiative.
Nothing in this section relating to compounding shall be
construed to compromise patient safety.
Food Safety Modernization Act Funding.--The Committee
continues to support the food safety activities related to
FSMA. Congress has provided more than $300,000,000 in FDA's
base appropriation for FSMA since fiscal year 2011. The
Committee directs FDA to continue their outreach and education
efforts to inform the regulated industries how they come into
compliance with the FSMA foundational regulations. As
previously noted, it is the intent of Congress for FDA to
ensure an even playing field in the application of FSMA
regulations as it relates to both domestic and imported
producers, processors, and manufacturers of food and animal
feed. Also, the Committee believes that FSMA implementation
places additional requirements on state governments and private
stakeholders, and therefore urges the FDA to provide sufficient
resources to state education and inspection programs to address
these needs.
Medical Product Safety Funding.--The Committee expects FDA
to maintain the increased funding levels provided by Congress
in the past three years for the Precision Medicine Initiative;
animal drug and medical device review; over-the-counter
sunscreen ingredient review; The Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act implementation; the Combating
Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria (CARB) initiative; Pharmacy
Compounding; and Counterfeit Drug enforcement.
Proposed Reductions.--While there is no change in the
overall discretionary funding level, the Committee accepts
$2,000,000 in savings within the Office of the Commissioner.
Animal Drug Compounding.--The Committee has been concerned
that the FDA's proposed draft Guidance for Industry (GFI) for
animal drug compounding (#230) would apply certain human drug
compounding requirements to animal drug compounding. There also
is concern that some state regulatory agencies are implementing
the guidance even though it is not finalized. The Committee
appreciates that in the FY 2018 budget request FDA stated, ``In
the draft guidance, FDA is not proposing to apply sections 503A
or 503B of the FDCA to the compounding of animal drugs from
bulk drug substances.'' FDA further explains how some of the
concepts may be appropriate for animal drugs as well as human
drugs.
Within 30 days of enactment of this Act, the Committee
directs FDA to communicate to state regulatory agencies that
the guidance is still in draft form. The Committee expects that
any final guidance on animal drug compounding will only
reference statutory provisions that specifically relate to
veterinary practices and will not exceed statutory authority.
Antibiotics.--The Committee urges the FDA to work to foster
the development of new antibiotics by supporting greater
collaboration between industry and the FDA around adaptive
clinical trials and labeling changes. Robust drug development
will be needed to ensure patients are protected from bacterial
resistance.
Biosimilars.--The Committee recognizes that biosimilars
offer an important opportunity for expanding the market and
reducing costs for patients. The Committee urges the FDA to
partner with external stakeholders including patient
organizations on educating patients and professionals about
biosimilars, with a focus on populations for which approved
biosimilars are indicated.
Centers of Excellence.--The Committee is encouraged by the
ongoing research and collaboration underway at the Centers of
Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI)
program. The Committee believes that these programs will help
the agency improve public health, address scientific challenges
presented by revolutions in medical product development, and
improve food safety and quality. The Committee commends the
agency for launching this program in 2011 and expanding it in
2014. For this reason, the Committee believes that the agency
should continue to invest in the existing four locations in the
CERSI network at their original funding level to ensure their
efficacy and to capitalize on existing studies.
Continuous Manufacturing Initiative.--Of the $60,000,000
made available to the FDA in the 21st Century Cures Act for
fiscal year 2018, FDA is directed to obligate $10,000,000 to
create a Continuous Manufacturing Initiative and award grants
to institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations
for the purpose of studying and recommending improvements to
the process of continuous manufacturing of drugs and biological
products similar innovative monitoring and control techniques.
The Committee expects the FDA to partner with existing entities
with demonstrated capacity and experience on advanced
manufacturing technologies to lower pharmaceutical costs and
where limited federal funds will be matched by non-federal
resources.
Critical Path Institute.--Innovation in the development of
new medicines and other therapies can be enhanced by enabling
FDA to focus on specific program areas such as those outlined
in FDA's Critical Path Initiative and their Regulatory Science
objectives. These types of programs which FDA often
accomplishes through public-private partnerships expand the
knowledge base for those developing medical products and those
conducting regulatory review. The Committee provides an
increase of $400,000 in support of this initiative.
Crop Biotechnology & Biotech Ingredients.--Plants, food,
and food ingredients developed using genetic engineering were
introduced into the U.S. food supply in the 1990s. Public and
private sector scientists knowledgeable in genetic engineering,
toxicology, chemistry, nutrition, and other scientific areas
have carefully evaluated and assessed the safety of these
products and have determined that such products are safe for
human and animal consumption. The Committee provides $1,500,000
for USDA and the FDA to continue efforts to educate the public
on the safety and benefits of crop biotechnology and food and
animal feed ingredients derived from biotechnology.
Dairy Labeling Requirements.--The Committee is aware of the
concerns with labeling certain foods and beverages as a dairy
product when the product is plant-based rather than derived
from animals. The Committee directs the FDA to develop a
standard of identity for dairy products based upon the dairy
product terms described in parts 131, 133, and 135 of
subchapter B of chapter I of title 21, Code of Federal
Regulations within 180 days from the date of enactment of this
Act. The FDA should issue guidance to industry on how to
implement the standard of identity, including how this standard
will be enforced.
Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.--The Committee is encouraged
by FDA's recent approvals of therapies to treat Duchenne
Muscular Dystrophy and is aware of the authorities within the
21st Century Cures Act that clarify the agency's ability to
allow sponsors of targeted rare disease therapies to use data
from previously approved applications. The Committee is aware
of the relevance of this policy to Duchenne and other rare
disease therapy development and of the agency's work to
implement the law. The Committee requests an update on these
efforts within 180 days of enactment of this Act, including a
description of any challenges or impediments faced by the
agency in implementing these new authorities.
Expedited Programs.--The Committee directs the FDA to
exercise its current law authorities, as provided under the FDA
Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) and the 21st Century Cures
Act, when reviewing new drug applications for patients with 100
percent fatal and debilitating diseases. FDASIA expanded FDA's
authorities and strengthened the agency's focus on accelerating
the approval of drugs that treat unmet medical needs,
prioritizing the patient perspective in evaluating new drugs
and treatments and providing reviewers with flexibility when
evaluating drugs for a life-threatening illness.
FDA Partnerships under FSMA.--The purpose of FSMA is to
reform the nation's food safety laws to ensure a safe public
food supply. As FDA continues implementation of FSMA, the
Committee encourages FDA to work in partnership with existing
government food safety programs through MOUs to verify
compliance with FSMA to rules once they are finalized as a way
to eliminate duplication of activities under the law. In
addition, the Committee continues to provide $5,000,000 for the
Food Safety Outreach Program under NIFA and expects that NIFA
will serve as the sole agency providing food safety training,
education, outreach, and technical assistance at the farm
level.
Federal Employee Conduct.--Public service is a public trust
that requires federal employees to place ethical principles
above private gain. Federal employees are reminded that they
shall not advance a personal agenda or give preferential
treatment to any outside organization or individual within the
government programs which they administer. Information that is
received by the employee, including information from other
employees, offices, or Congress should be handled in a
professional and confidential manner in accordance with Code of
Federal Regulations regarding the basic obligation of public
service (5 CFR 2635.101).
Feminine Hygiene Cosmetics.--The Committee is concerned
about the use of unsafe colorants by manufacturers of feminine
hygiene cosmetic products. The Committee strongly encourages
the FDA to issue appropriate guidance on the use of colorants
in such products, and expects a prompt final response to the
citizen petition submitted by Women's Voices for the Earth on
August 18, 2015.
Fish Decomposition Standards and Testing.--The Committee is
concerned with particular methods FDA utilizes for seafood
inspections. While food safety remains the top priority, the
methodology used to determine whether any size shipment
receives a pass or rejection for seafood needs clarification.
The Committee directs the FDA to provide a report to the
Committee on the process and criteria used to reject seafood
import shipments. In addition, FDA should inform the Committee
on the scientific tools available to the agency in determining
decomposition and what field-deployable, technology-based tools
may still be developed to minimize the current subjectivity in
the decomposition decision-making process. The Committee
provides $2,800,000 to support intramural work and extramural
collaborations necessary to begin developing the appropriate
lab methods to detect evidence of seafood decomposition.
Food Contact Notification User Fees.--The funds made
available by this Act include sufficient monies to fund the
FDA's Food Contact Notification Program and shall be deemed to
satisfy the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 348(h)(5)(A). The
Committee recommendation does not include proposed user fees.
Foreign High Risk Verifications.--The bill maintains the
fiscal year 2017 funding level of $7,500,000 for the FDA's
Office of Global Regulatory Operations and Policy to enhance
the compliance of foreign manufacturers and exporters of food,
medical devices and pharmaceuticals through the use of business
date and on-premises site verification.
Genomic Editing.--The Committee understands the potential
benefits to society in the genetic modification of living
organisms. However, researchers do not yet fully understand all
the possible side effects of editing the genes of a human
embryo. Editing of the human germ line may involve serious and
unquantifiable safety and ethical issues. Federal and non-
federal organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences
and National Academy of Medicine continue to understand the
potential risks of genome editing and a broader public
discussion of the societal and ethical implications of this
technique is still ongoing. In accordance with the current
policy at the National Institutes of Health, the Committee
includes bill language that places a prohibition on the FDA's
use of funds involving the genetic modification of a human
embryo. The Committee continues to support a wide range of
innovations in biomedical research, but will do so in a fashion
that reflects well-established scientific and ethical
principles.
Grape Varietals.--The Committee is aware that the FDA has
excluded certain produce that is rarely consumed raw from
having to comply with the FSMA Produce Safety Final Rule
entitled ``Standards for Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and
Holding of Produce for Human Consumption.'' There is concern
that the FDA has not been able to distinguish between grape
varietals that are consumed raw and those that are grown,
harvested and used for wine and further processing. The
Committee directs the FDA to initiate a process within 30 days
of enactment of this Act that makes a distinction between grape
varietals so that wine grape varietals may be included on the
list of produce that is rarely consumed raw.
Harm Reduction.--It is the Committee recommendation that
the FDA consider the benefits of harm reduction as part of
evaluations under the Deeming regulations for tobacco products.
Hereditary Angioedema Research.--The Committee is concerned
that FDA's funding of studies regarding the Evaluation of
Thromboembolic Events Following C1-Inhibitor Therapy may cause
access issues for patient communities that have safely used C1-
Inhibitor for many years to treat life-threatening conditions,
including hereditary angioedema. FDA is encouraged to clarify
its intentions for this area of inquiry to the Committee within
90 days.
Human Drug Compounding--Permissible ``Office Use''.--The
Committee continues to believe that patient access to the right
drug at the right time is of utmost importance. In instances
where a commercially manufactured drug is not appropriate for a
patient for a specific reason, a compounded drug may be the
difference between life and death. Since passage of the Drug
Quality and Security Act (DQSA) of 2013, the Committee has had
concerns that the FDA interpreted provisions of Section 503A of
the FDCA in a manner that might jeopardize the availability of
compounded medications for ``office use''. The practice of
``office use'' occurs when a compounder will compound a batch
of drugs in anticipation of receiving patient-specific
prescriptions at a later time. It may also be the case of a
doctor in his or her office maintaining compounded drugs on
site because it is unsafe or impractical to issue a traditional
prescription. This practice is authorized in the vast majority
of states and was intended to be allowable under DQSA. The
Committee directed the FDA to issue a Final Guidance that
provides for ``office-use'' compounding of drugs, in
appropriate circumstances as well as including drugs compounded
in anticipation of a prescription for an identified individual
patient. Such ``anticipatory'' compounded drugs is based on the
history of previous valid compound prescription orders, and on
an established history between prescriber, patient and
compounder. Despite clear directives in previous reports
accompanying FDA's appropriations bills for the agency to
finalize guidance that authorizes office-use compounding, in
December of 2016, the FDA finalized a Guidance for Industry
(GFI) entitled ``Prescription Requirement Under Section 503A of
the FDCA,'' which expressly prohibits office-use compounding.
The Committee directs the FDA to rescind this GFI and issue a
proposed rule, subject to the notice and comment provisions in
the Administrative Procedure Act. The proposed rule should be
consistent with Congressional intent as stated in both
Appropriations Reports and the DQSA, and that also allows for
office-use compounding as authorized by state law. In the
proposed rule, FDA should lay out the means by which office use
is permissible while addressing such critical safety matters,
such as maintaining controls on quantity and safety issues such
as those related to office stock shelf life. Lastly, FDA's
clarification on the line between traditional compounding and
outsourced compounding will support state regulators,
outsourcing facilities, and traditional compounders in their
efforts to ensure that patients have access to safe compounded
drugs while reducing the risks associated with sterile drugs
produced in bulk.
Human Drug Compounding--Draft MOU.--The Committee is also
very concerned with the draft MOU issued February 13, 2015,
entitled ``Draft Memorandum of Understanding Addressing Certain
Distributions of Compounded Human Drug Products Between the
State of ( ) and the Food and Drug Administration'' as it
applied to Section 503A of the FDCA. The proposed MOU would
complicate patient and prescriber access to compounded
medications, and may have a deleterious effect on small
pharmacies. Under the draft MOU, the FDA attempts to describe
``distribution'' as occurring when ``a compounded human drug
product has left the facility in which the drug was
compounded.'' In the DQSA, Congress only allowed the FDA to
regulate ``distribution.'' But the MOU appears to exceed the
authority granted in the statute by redefining ``distribution''
in a manner that includes dispensing--something unprecedented.
This overreach could generate exactly the kind of costly and
confusing litigation that Congress intended to avoid when it
amended and reinstated Section 503A. The Committee expects
that, when a final MOU is proposed as a model agreement for the
states to consider, that distribution and dispensing are
treated as the different and separate activities that they
actually are.
Human Drug Compounding--Compound Pharmacist on Pharmacy
Compounding Advisory Committee.--The Committee is concerned
that the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee (PCAC)
established under the DQSA does not adequately represent the
interests and needs of providers and patients who use and
depend on compounded medications. The Committee expects that,
at the earliest possible date, whether filling open positions
or replacing existing members, the FDA shall appoint voting
members with recent, actual, and diverse experience in the
preparation, prescribing, and use of compounded medications.
Infant Formula.--The Committee requests a report on what
processes and controls are in place to monitor the water used
in the manufacture of liquid infant formula, including what
steps FDA takes to work with the Environmental Protection
Agency as part of their regulatory responsibility for the
primary drinking water used in infant formula.
In Silico Clinical Trials.--In Silico clinical trials use
computer models and simulations to develop and assess devices
and drugs, including their potential risk to the public, before
being tested in live clinical trials. Advanced computer
modeling can also be used to predict how a drug or device will
behave when deployed in the general population, thereby
protecting the public from the unintended consequences of side
effects and drug interactions. In Silico trials protect public
health, advance personalized treatment, and can be executed
quickly and for a fraction of the cost of a full scale live
trial. By understanding the impact a drug or device will have
on the human body immediately and over time, as well as within
different populations, millions of dollars in development costs
can be saved. A mere ten percent improvement in predicting
failures before a clinical trial could save $100,000,000 in
development costs per drug. As such, the Committee directs the
FDA to expand its use of in silico clinical models through a
pilot project aimed at creation of a full human in silico model
able to test drugs and devices across the entire body,
including long-term effects and among distinct populations. If
necessary to enact this project, the FDA shall issue a unified
guidance to allow the model to be used to test both drugs and
devices. The Committee requests a written report outlining the
FDA's plans for development of the model within 120 days of
enactment of this act.
Laboratory Developed Tests.--The FDA's draft guidance
issued on October 3, 2014, titled ``Framework for Regulatory
Oversight of Laboratory Developed Tests'' (LDTs), puts forth a
proposed regulatory framework that is a significant shift in
the way LDTs are regulated. Such a shift deserves input from
the public, and Congress has been working with stakeholders,
constituencies, and the FDA to find common ground on regulating
LDTs. The FDA's guidance circumvents the normal rulemaking
process and changes expectations for patients, doctors, and
laboratories for the first time since the Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments Act was passed in 1988. The Committee
maintains its position that FDA should suspend further efforts
to finalize the LDT guidance and continue working with Congress
to pass legislation that addresses a new pathway for regulation
of LDTs in a transparent manner.
Laboratories Near High Volume Ports.--The Committee directs
the FDA to submit a report within 90 days of enactment of this
Act on the potential for implementing pilot programs which will
allow for public-private partnerships at high volume ports of
entry in an effort to increase the number of FDA-certified
public or private labs located near major ports of entry to
provide services on weekends and holidays, reduce the risk of
food borne illnesses, and enhance the capacity of local
officials in dealing with foodborne threats.
Local Port Cooperation.--The Committee directs the FDA to
work with local governments at high volume ports of entry to
explore activities which reduce the risk of food borne
illnesses and enhance the capacity of local officials in
dealing with food borne threats and report back to the
Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act on its
efforts.
Mammography Exam Reports.--More than five years ago, in
November 2011, the National Mammography Quality Assurance
Advisory Committee approved a change to the mammogram patient
report and physician report to include information regarding an
individual's breast density. This process has not been
completed. The Committee again urges the FDA to implement this
change in an expedited manner and must report to Congress on
the status of this change no more than 60 days from the
enactment of this Act.
Medical Countermeasures.--The Committee directs that not
less than $24,552,000 shall be available for the FDA's Medical
Countermeasures Initiative. This total is in addition to the
unobligated funds remaining to support the FDA's emergency
response to Zika, Ebola, and related disease outbreaks.
Medical Gas Rulemaking.--The Committee is concerned that
the FDA has not initiated a rulemaking on medical air labeling,
adverse event reporting, or the numerous longstanding medical
gas regulatory issues identified at the December 6, 2013 public
meeting. While Section 1112 of Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) required the Secretary to
make a determination on whether to propose new regulations for
medical gases, the fiscal year 2017 appropriations Act required
the Secretary to issue new regulations by July 15, 2017.
Congress has twice enacted laws on this issue and expects the
FDA to reach a consensus with industry by incorporating general
concerns, either through reference or principle-based
regulation, into regulation at the discretion of the agency.
FDA's role as a regulator is to vet and propose regulations,
especially when directed to do so by Congress. Resources have
been provided to the FDA through discretionary appropriations
and user fees to accomplish its mission. FDA is directed to
convene with stakeholders in a public meeting on the regulation
of medical gases, provide a written report to Congress
including a description of the section of the Code of Federal
Regulations that will be updated no later than December 31,
2017 and issue the final regulations required by Public Law
115-31 no later than July 15, 2018.
Medical Product Shipment Delays.--The Committee
acknowledges FDA's vital responsibility to conduct risk-based
screening of imported products under its jurisdiction at ports
and distribution hubs across the country. However, any delay of
critically important medical products places risks to patients
and can unnecessarily disrupt medical services. The Committee
directs FDA to examine trends in possible delays of medical
product shipments, report back to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House and Senate within 90 days of
enactment, and, if necessary, allocate existing resources to
adequately staff centralized points of entry for imported,
time-sensitive medical products so that commerce and critical
medical care is not unduly delayed. The Committee provides the
agency with an increase of $300,000 to help expedite the
clearance of these products.
Menu Labeling.--The FDA extended the compliance date for
menu labeling requirements until May 7, 2018, stating that,
``This extension allows for further consideration of what
opportunities there may be to reduce costs and enhance the
flexibility of these requirements beyond those reflected in the
final rule.'' In providing flexibility, the Committee urges FDA
to consider provisions of H.R. 772 as well as other proposals
that reduce burden and add flexibility for businesses to
implement the rule and provide consumers with certain nutrition
information. FDA should ensure that businesses are protected
from regulatory enforcement from federal, state, municipal or
other oversight agencies until after a potential revised rule
is promulgated and effective.
Natural Definition.--The Committee commends the FDA for
taking the first step towards defining the term ``natural'' and
regulating its use on food labeling by requesting public
comment on a number of relevant questions in a November 2015
Federal Register notice. The Committee directs FDA to provide a
report within 60 days of enactment of this Act on the actions
and timeframe for defining ``natural'' so that there is a
uniform national standard for the labeling claims and consumers
and food producers have certainty about the meaning of the
term.
New Technologies to Promote Food Safety.--The Committee
encourages the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine to conduct a study on new technologies to promote
microbiological food safety and prevent foodborne illnesses.
The study should review methods that have been developed but
not implemented, are in development, or have been proposed but
not well developed. The study also should identify any
regulatory, economic, or other barriers to implementing
technologies. The review should encompass methods that could be
applied on farms and feedlots, in feed- and food-production and
processing facilities, restaurants and supermarkets, and
elsewhere in the food supply chain. The various methods should
be applicable to meat and poultry products, dairy foods,
seafood, plant products, processed and packaged foods, and
other foods.
Nutrient Value of Fish during Pregnancy.--The Committee
understands the FDA and EPA issued final advice regarding fish
consumption in January 2017 as a follow up to draft advice
issued in June 2014. The Committee directs the FDA to
incorporate the specific nutrient value of fish consumption in
pregnancy on the FDA website ``Eating Fish: What Pregnant Women
and Parents Should Know.'' The information on the nutrient
value of fish should focus on the specific benefits of seafood
consumption for pregnancy and fetal development. The Committee
requests a report within 120 days of enactment of this Act on
the FDA's plan to add information on the nutrient value of fish
and to develop a plan to assess the efficacy of this change on
women's dietary choices related to seafood consumption,
particularly during pregnancy. This update should be published
on the current FDA fish advice website and in other materials
developed by the FDA.
Nutrition Facts Label.--On June 13, 2017, the FDA announced
that it would extend the compliance date for the final rule
entitled ``Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and
Supplemental Facts Labels'' and that details of the extension
would be provided through a Federal Register notice at a later
time. Food manufacturers are facing different compliance dates
with multiple food labeling changes, such as those required
under the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (Pub.
L. 114-216). The Committee encourages the Commissioner of FDA
and the Secretary of USDA to harmonize the labeling compliance
dates to allow food manufacturers to update labels after clear
guidance has been provided and in a manner that is cost
effective and avoids consumer confusion.
The Committee also notes that the FDA has not issued final
guidance regarding the definition of dietary fiber and labeling
of added sugars. The Committee encourages the FDA to issue
these final guidance documents and provide sufficient time for
food manufacturers to comply.
Office of Cosmetics and Colors.--The Committee
recommendation includes not less than $11,700,000 for cosmetics
activities, including not less than $7,200,000 for the Office
of Colors and Cosmetics (OCAC). Funding provided for OCAC is
for direct support of the operation, staffing, compliance,
research and international activities performed by this office.
The Committee welcomes FDA's support of the Cosmetic Ingredient
Review and FDA's participation in that program as an ex officio
member, as well as the FDA efforts in maintaining the Voluntary
Cosmetic Reporting Program and the CFSAN Adverse Event
Reporting System (CAERS). The Committee appreciated OCAC's
willingness to engage with China in May 2016 for a cosmetics
regulatory dialogue. In light of China's interaction with U.S.-
based manufacturers and consumers, the Committee directs FDA to
seek ways to continually enhance engagement with Chinese
regulators on cosmetic technical and regulatory issues. The
Committee directs FDA to promote international regulatory
harmonization in cosmetic products by continued support to the
International Cooperation on Cosmetics Regulation (ICCR)
initiative, participation in ISO Technical Committee 217--
Cosmetics and supporting trade through other bilateral and
multilateral trade agreements.
Olive Oil.--In H. Rept. 114-531, the Committee directed FDA
to sample imported olive oil products for potential
adulteration or misbranding and report to Congress. The
Committee commends FDA in its response for committing to
developing better methods to detect adulteration of olive oil
and to increasing monitoring of the marketplace for adulterated
olive oil products. However, in FDA's report to Congress, the
agency's findings were based on a survey of olive oil products
conducted in 2014. The Committee directs FDA to update its 2014
survey and report on its findings within 180 days of enactment
of this Act.
Oncology Clinical Trials.--The Committee recognizes the
value of clinical trials in the development of innovative
procedures, diagnostics, and drugs to prevent, detect, and
treat cancer. The Committee understands that the percentage of
cancer patients who participate in oncology clinical trials
remains low, especially among minorities and those
socioeconomically disadvantaged, and barriers to participation
include ancillary financial costs, such as travel and lodging
expenses. Many clinical sites and sponsors of clinical trials
are wary of working with independent third parties to provide
even ancillary financial support given current guidance warning
against anticipated financial benefits that may create
``coercion or undue influence'' to research participants under
21 CFR 50.20. The Committee believes that the reimbursement of
ancillary costs by independent third parties does not
constitute coercion or undue influence and instead helps
improve access to cancer clinical trials. As noted in FDA's
draft guidance entitled ``Informed Consent Information Sheet:
Guidance for IRBs, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors,'' the
FDA considers payment to clinical trial subjects to be
compensation for ``expenses and inconveniences'' and not a
benefit of participation. Therefore, the Committee encourages
the FDA to develop more precise guidance regarding the meaning
of ``coercion or undue influence'' as it relates to the
reimbursement of ancillary expenses to research participants
under 21 CFR 50.20 in finalizing the draft guidance on informed
consent content and the informed consent process (``Informed
Consent Information Sheet: Guidance for IRBs, Clinical
Investigators, and Sponsors''') so as to increase enrollment,
retention, minority participation, and equitable access to
oncology clinical trials.
Opioid Abuse.--The abuse, misuse, and diversion of opioid
painkillers has precipitated an epidemic in the United States.
The CDC indicates that one American loses his or her battle
with addiction every twenty minutes. For years, the Committee
has encouraged the FDA to utilize the full breadth of its
regulatory authority to address this challenge. The Committee
is pleased that, with the Opioids Action Plan and Opioid Policy
Steering Committee, the FDA has acknowledged that the agency
shoulders some responsibility for turning the tide of abuse.
The FDA's recent regulatory changes related to scheduling and
labeling of opioids are positive developments, as are efforts
to encourage the development of abuse-deterrent formulations
(ADF) and new evidence-based medication-assisted therapies
(MAT). The use of opioids as first-line therapies for any form
of pain has led to over-prescribing, and the CDC has made clear
that clinicians should consider opioid therapy only if expected
benefits for both pain and function are anticipated to outweigh
the risks to the patient. With respect to prescribing patterns,
the Committee supports efforts to incentivize ADF use by
clinicians and to increase the number of prescribers who
receive training on pain management and safe prescribing of
opioid drugs in order to decrease inappropriate opioid
prescribing. The Committee notes that treatment is not a ``one
size, fits all'' enterprise and that every patient's treatment
regimen should be tailored by his or her doctor to his or her
unique needs. The federal government, therefore, should be
promoting the full suite of available treatment options,
including abstinence-based models and non-opioid medications,
rather than picking winners and losers. The Committee supports
efforts at the FDA and elsewhere to develop MATs that improve
the efficacy of daily administration, are resistant to
diversion and misuse, and/or help patients on a path to
recovery. Finally, the Committee has been supportive of
naloxone distribution among trained licensed healthcare
professionals and emergency responders. When considering the
appropriateness of providing naloxone over-the-counter, the
Committee directs the FDA to ensure that the administration of
naloxone serves as a point of intervention to spur an honest
conversation between the patient and his doctor about addiction
and treatment.
Packaged Ice.--The Committee recognizes that packaged ice
is produced in the U.S., traded internationally, and consumed
as both a packaged food and a food ingredient. The FDA has had
a citizen petition regarding a proposed standard of identity
for packaged ice for a significant and unacceptable length of
time and is directed to provide quarterly status reports to the
Committee on this effort until the agency responds to the
petition. Further, the Conference for Food Protection recently
reviewed issues related to commercial ice machines in the
retail environment and found that research is needed to
identify the type of microbial growth and locations of concern
within these machines. Therefore, the FDA is directed to study
the issue more carefully and establish a cleaning and
sanitizing frequency standard for commercial ice machines.
Pediatric Devices.--The Committee directs the agency to
spend no less than $6,000,000, the same level provided in
fiscal year 2017, for the development of pediatric medical
devices through the Pediatric Device Consortia. The program
funds consortia to assist innovators in developing medical and
surgical devices designed for the unique needs of children that
often go unmet by devices currently available on the market.
Performance Measures.--The Committee directs FDA to comply
with title 31 of the United States Code, including the
development of their organizational priority goals and outcomes
such as performance outcome measures, output measures,
efficiency measures, and customer service measures.
Pet Food Imports.--As of December 31, 2015, the FDA had
received approximately 5,200 complaints of illness related to
consumption of chicken, duck, or sweet potato jerky treats,
nearly all of which are imported from China. The reports
involve more than 6,200 dogs, 26 cats, three humans and include
more than 1,140 canine deaths. These incidents date back to
2007. The Committee requests that the FDA provide it with a
timeline of all activities associated with the investigation
into the pet illnesses associated with these products,
including any import alerts and import refusals, within 60 days
of the enactment of this Act. In addition, the Committee
requests that the agency provide it with semi-annual reports on
the status of the investigation into these illnesses beginning
in July 2017 and continuing until the issue has been resolved.
Premium Cigars.--The Committee includes statutory language
exempting premium and traditional large cigars, in keeping with
FDA's intent under Option 2 of its proposed rule ``Deeming
Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and
Tobacco Control Act (TCA); Regulations on the Sale and
Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required Warning
Statements for Tobacco Products'' (Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0189).
The Committee notes that premium cigars are shown to be
distinct from other tobacco products in their effects on youth
initiation, the frequency of their use by youth and young
adults, and other such behavioral and economic factors. Lastly,
a large number of participants in this unique business are
small and very small operations that might not be able to
maintain jobs and a physical presence in the United States due
to the financial impact of this pending regulatory burden.
Given that there is very little mention of cigars throughout
the TCA, it is clear Congress did not intend to focus on the
unique subset of premium cigars.
Prescription Drug Labeling Inserts.--The Committee is aware
of FDA's previous proposal that would subvert repeatedly
expressed Congressional intent by permitting the distribution
of prescription drugs without printed prescribing information
on or within the packages from which such drugs are to be
dispensed. The FDA intends to replace such printed labeling
with an electronic labeling system for the majority of
prescription drugs. On several occasions Congress has expressly
declined to provide the FDA the necessary statutory authority
to implement this change. As recently as 2012, Congress
commissioned a GAO report (GAO-13-592) discussing this issue.
The GAO report concluded that such a change could adversely
impact public health. Thus, the Committee is very concerned
that the FDA is moving to promulgate a regulation that would
generally eliminate printed prescribing information inserts for
prescription drugs. Therefore, the Committee has included a
provision prohibiting the FDA from utilizing any funds to
propose or otherwise promulgate any rule that requires or
permits any prescription drug or biologic products to be
distributed without printed prescribing information on or
within the packaging from which such products are to be
dispensed, unless such actions are expressly provided by an
amendment to the FDCA.
Product Standards.--The Committee is concerned about the
feasibility of achieving a 1 parts per million level for N-
nitrosonornicotine levels as established in the proposed
product standard rule dated January 23, 2017 (82 Fed. Reg.
8004). The Committee encourages FDA to work with stakeholders
involved in the production and growth of these products to
determine reasonable level while fulfilling its statutory
mission to protect public health.
Radiation Safety.--The Committee urges the agency to review
and update its current regulations on fluoroscopy radiation
safety. The current regulations do not adequately address all
available options to protect surgical and interventional health
care personnel and patients from radiation exposure. The FDA
should issue new regulations that include the use of sterile,
disposable, lead-free shields to protect against radiation
exposure.
Spent Grains.--The Committee recognizes that the FDA took
into consideration public comments and revised some of its
proposed regulations on spent grains used for animal food.
Processors already complying with FDA human food safety
requirements would not need to implement additional preventive
controls when supplying a by-product like wet spent grains for
animal food. However, further processing a by-product for use
as animal food such as drying spent grains, would require
additional compliance under the proposed rule. The FDA has said
that potential hazards associated with spent grains are minimal
and steps to prevent contamination are likely already in place.
The Committee includes bill language to ensure dry and wet
spent grains used for animal food are regulated equally.
Staffing at Land Ports of Entry.--The Committee is
concerned that USDA, FDA, and Customs and Border Protection are
relying on historical data in determining their staffing models
at Land Ports of Entry. Recent reports on agricultural imports
show steep increases in the future, especially along the
Southwest border and South Texas in particular. It is the sense
of the Committee that these agencies should be utilizing
forward-looking data for their staffig models to ensure we have
the appropriate workforce available in the future to inspect
and certify this growth in agricultural imports as efficiently,
safely, and expeditiously as possible.
State Inspections.--The Committee is aware of the December
2011 OIG report that outlined vulnerabilities in the agency's
oversight of non-FDA food inspections and the agency's
intention to further rely on state inspections. The Committee
understands that both the federal government and states share
authority and responsibility for domestic food facilities and
that the FDA will continue to contract with the states to
conduct inspections on its behalf, which is critical to
performing its mission in an efficient and effective manner.
The agency must assure it has strong federal inspection
standards that are met by both federal investigators and state
inspectors. The FDA must continue its progress in improving
federal oversight and monitoring of state inspection programs,
reviewing and strengthening internal directives and processes,
and identifying new methods to improve oversight capabilities.
The Committee is aware of the FDA's continuing progress to
modernize existing IT systems and infrastructure, allowing for
the secure and efficient exchange of data between the FDA and
the states, in addition to efforts to add capabilities
supporting mobile inspection applications. The FDA should
continue work with state partners toward promoting data
standards and developing shared database schemas to facilitate
secure electronic information sharing.
Sunscreen Ingredients.--The Committee is significantly
concerned that despite the increase in incidence of skin cancer
in the United States, the Surgeon General's 2014 Call to Action
to Prevent Skin Cancer, unanimous passage of the Sunscreen
Innovation Act (SIA) in Congress and the support of the Cancer
Moonshot Initiative in the 21st Century Cures Act to prevent
and cure cancer, the FDA has still not approved a new OTC
sunscreen ingredient through the process created by the SIA.
While the FDA published the final guidance in November 2016
entitled ``Nonprescription Sunscreen Drug Products--Safety and
Effectiveness Data'', there is still confusion in how the
regulated industry can comply with FDA's current approach to
the toxicological risk assessment. The Committee directs the
FDA to work with stakeholders and help manufacturers understand
what they need to do to achieve approval for sunscreen products
in order to lower the risk of skin cancer to the 5 million
Americans that will be diagnosed with the condition this year.
The funding level for the FDA includes the $700,000 originally
provided in fiscal year 2016 to help address the critical
public health threat resulting from no new sunscreen
ingredients being available to the public.
Tobacco Product User Fees.--The Committee directs the FDA
to submit a report on the planned expenditure and obligation of
user fees for the current fiscal year within 60 days of
enactment of this Act. The report shall include the amount of
carryover and unobligated balances from the prior fiscal year
and planned obligations and expenditures for the current fiscal
year based upon the total of the new and existing amounts
available. The report shall identify the type and amount of
activities, contracts, and objectives to be implemented,
including but not limited to public education campaigns,
scientific research, communications, and product application
processing and review for the current and prior fiscal year.
The report shall also include a status of submitted, pending,
and approved tobacco product applications per each regulatory
pathway and class as defined by the Tobacco Control Act, and
subsequent regulations, for the past three fiscal years and
planned for the current fiscal year.
User Fee Collections/Obligations.--The Committee continues
to be concerned about the financial management of the FDA's
user fee programs. At the end of fiscal year 2016, FDA had a
carryover balance of $1,710,000,000. Of this amount, the PDUFA
account showed a balance of nearly $844 million and the GDUFA
account showed a balance of $342 million. Such balances
indicate that FDA has additional resources for hiring more
review staff and support for the review of innovator and
generic drugs--pharmaceuticals that have the potential to save
lives, enhance the quality of life for patients, and lower the
cost of healthcare. The Committee directs that not later than
30 days after enactment of this Act, and each month thereafter
through the months covered by this Act, the Commissioner submit
to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate a
report on user fees collected for each user fee program
included in the Act. The report shall also include monthly
obligations incurred against such fee collections. The report
shall include a distinct categorization of the user fee
balances that are being carried forward into fiscal year 2018
for each user fee account as well as a detailed explanation of
what accounts for the balance and what the balance will be used
for.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
2017 appropriation.................................... $11,788,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 8,771,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 8,771,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -3,017,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. - - -
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For Buildings and Facilities of the Food and Drug
Administration, the Committee provides $8,771,000.
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
2017 appropriation.................................... $250,000,000
2018 budget estimate.................................. 250,000,000
Provided in the bill.................................. 248,000,000
Comparison:
2017 appropriation................................ -2,000,000
2018 budget estimate.............................. -2,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Committee
provides an appropriation of $248,000,000, of which $49,000,000
is for the purchase of IT and $2,700,000 is for the Inspector
General. Overhead for the Inspector General shall not exceed
$350,000.
Agency Direction.--The Committee supports the Commission's
efforts to proactively engage in new areas of market activity,
including the financial technology sector. The Committee also
supports the use of resources for robust cost-benefit analysis
in the Office of the Chief Economist.
Budgetary Reduction.--The Committee's allocation is reduced
from FY 2017 in line with the reductions to nearly every agency
in the bill. The Commission is not exempt. In addition, the
Committee notes the growth in administrative management and
support functions under level funding. This includes an
eighteen percent increase in contractors and thirteen percent
growth in FTE, during an eight percent decrease in overall
staffing. The Commission is directed to examine overhead costs
and find efficiencies where feasible. The Committee directs
CFTC to prioritize resources in the Division of Enforcement,
Market Oversight, Swap Dealer and Intermediary oversight, and
other areas critical to market integrity.
Collective Bargaining Agreements.--The bill includes
language allowing the CFTC Chairman to adjust personnel
compensation and benefits upon a determination that a
collective bargaining agreement could result in the furlough or
reduction-in-force (RIF) of employees. This language is the
result of numerous attempts by the Commission to impose a
coercive deficiency upon Congress by threatening furloughs or
RIFs or by furloughing its own employees. The Chairman is
directed to provide regular updates to the Committee regarding
the status of union negotiations. The Commission is further
directed to avoid any negotiation or financial situation that
would impose such a deficiency upon Congress.
Internal Risk Management Transactions.--The Committee
supports efforts to provide regulatory relief on transactions
between inter-affiliated parties and counterparties. These
affiliated entities include majority interest of one party by a
counterparty or when both parties to a transaction have a
majority interest by a third party. This relief includes
requiring the use of variation margin and centralized risk
management practices. The Committee encourages the Commission
to engage on this issue with stakeholders.
Swap Dealer de Minimis.--Within 60 days of enactment of
this Act, the Committee directs the Commission to promulgate a
rulemaking setting the Swap Dealer de Minimis threshold at not
less than $8,000,000,000.
Farm Credit Administration
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
2017 limitation....................................... ($68,600,000)
2018 budget estimate.................................. (72,600,000)
Provided in the bill.................................. (68,600,000)
Comparison:
2017 limitation................................... - - -
2018 budget estimate.............................. -4,000,000
COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
For a limitation on the expenses of the Farm Credit
Administration (FCA), the Committee provides $68,600,000.
Farm Economy.--FCA is encouraged to explore and leverage
its existing partnership with USDA in providing access to
credit during the current downturn in the farm and rural
economy. FCA is directed to ensure that Farm Credit System
institutions and associations operate within existing
authorities. In addition, FCA is encouraged to review and
report back to the Committee within 60 days of enactment of
this Act on establishing new procedures for public-private
partnerships to support rural community facilities.
TITLE VII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
The General Provisions contained in the accompanying bill
for fiscal year 2018 are fundamentally the same as those
included in last year's appropriations bill.
The following general provisions are included in the bill:
Section 701: Limitation on the purchase of passenger motor
vehicles.
Section 702: Transfer authority regarding the Working
Capital Fund.
Section 703: Limitation on certain obligations.
Section 704: Indirect cost rates for cooperative agreements
with nonprofit institutions.
Section 705: Disbursement of rural development loans.
Section 706: Authority of the Chief Information Officer
relating to new IT systems.
Section 707: Availability of mandatory conservation program
funding.
Section 708: Rural Utility Service borrower eligibility.
Section 709: Rescission of certain unobligated balances.
Section 710: Prohibition on first-class airline travel.
Section 711: Use of funds authorized by the Commodity
Credit Corporation Charter Act.
Section 712: Funding for advisory committees.
Section 713: Indirect costs for competitive agricultural
research grants.
Section 714: Limitation on certain funds.
Section 715: Limitation on certain funds.
Section 716: Language on user fee proposals without
offsets.
Section 717: Language on reprogramming.
Section 718: Language on fees for the business and industry
guaranteed loan program.
Section 719: Language on questions for the record.
Section 720: Language regarding prepackaged news stories.
Section 721: Language on prohibition on paid details in
excess of 60 days.
Section 722: Language regarding grant notifications.
Section 723: Language regarding spending plans.
Section 724: Language on controls over humanitarian food
assistance.
Section 725: Language regarding Single Family Housing
Direct Loan Program.
Section 726: Language regarding USDA loan programs.
Section 727: Transfer authority regarding the Working
Capital Fund.
Section 728: Language regarding purchases made through
Child Nutrition Programs.
Section 729: Language regarding potable water supplies.
Section 730: Language regarding research programs.
Section 731: Language regarding nutrition research.
Section 732: Language regarding housing loan programs.
Section 733: Language regarding consumer information.
Section 734: Language regarding tissue regulation.
Section 735: Language regarding animal feed.
Section 736: Language regarding APHIS regulation.
Section 737: Language regarding animal research.
Section 738: Language regarding FDA regulation.
Section 739: Language regarding rural housing lender fees.
Section 740: Language regarding IT systems.
Section 741: Language regarding a rescission of funds.
Section 742: Language regarding domestic preference.
Section 743: Language regarding child nutrition programs.
Section 744: Language regarding persistent poverty.
Section 745: Language regarding community eligibility.
Section 746: Language regarding lobbying.
Section 747: Language regarding SNAP regulations.
Section 748: Language regarding FDA regulation.
Section 749: Language regarding housing programs.
Section 750: Language regarding a rescission of funds.
Section 751: Language regarding CFTC regulation.
Section 752: Language regarding FDA regulation.
Section 753: Language regarding FDA regulation.
Section 754: Language regarding FSIS regulation.
Section 755: Language regarding the Commodity Credit
Corporation.
Section 756: Language regarding the National Ocean Policy.
Section 757: Language regarding the 21st Century Cures Act.
Section 758: Language regarding citrus greening.
Section 759: Language regarding healthy food financing.
Section 760: Language regarding CFTC regulation.
Section 761: Language regarding the Spending Reduction
Account.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure
authorizes funding:
The Committee on Appropriations considers program
performance, including a program's success in developing and
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing
funding recommendations.
Rescissions
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following lists the rescissions
of unexpended balances included in the accompanying bill:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program or Activity Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA Cushion of Credit............................... $196,000,000
USDA AMS (prior year balances)....................... 263,000,000
USDA FNS (prior year balances)....................... 600,000,000
USDA Rural Energy Savings Program.................... 8,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers of Funds
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following list includes the
transfers of unexpended balances included in the accompanying
bill:
1. Departmental Administration.--The bill requires
reimbursement for expenses related to certain hearings.
2. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional
Relations.--The bill allows a portion of the funds appropriated
to the Office of the Assistant Secretary to be transferred to
agencies.
3. Hazardous Materials Management.--The bill allows the
funds appropriated to the Department for hazardous materials
management to be transferred to agencies of the Department as
required.
4. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.--Authority
is included to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer
from other appropriations or funds of the Department such sums
as may be necessary to combat emergency outbreaks of certain
diseases of animals, plants, and poultry.
5. Funds for Strengthening Markets, Income, and Supply.--
The bill limits the transfer of section 32 funds to purposes
specified in the bill.
6. Farm Service Agency Salaries and Expenses.--The bill
provides that funds provided to other accounts in the agency
may be merged with the salaries and expenses account of the
Farm Service Agency.
7. Dairy Indemnity Program.--The bill authorizes the
transfer of funds to the Commodity Credit Corporation, by
reference.
8. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account.--The
bill provides funds to be transferred to the Farm Service
Agency.
9. Commodity Credit Corporation.--The bill includes
language allowing certain funds to be transferred to the
Foreign Agricultural Service for information resource
management activities.
10. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.--The bill
provides that prior year balances from certain accounts shall
be transferred to and merged with this account.
11. Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account,
Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account, and Rural
Electrification and Telecommunications Program Account.--The
bill provides funds in this account shall be transferred to the
salaries and expenses of Rural Development.
12. Child Nutrition Programs.--The bill includes authority
to transfer section 32 funds to these programs.
13. Foreign Agricultural Service, Salaries and Expenses.--
The bill allows for the transfer of funds from the Commodity
Credit Corporation Export Loan Program Account.
14. Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for
Progress Program Account.--The bill allows funds to be
transferred to the Farm Service Agency, Salaries and Expenses
account. The bill also provides that funds made available for
the cost of title I agreements and for title I ocean freight
differential may be used interchangeably.
15. Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program.--The
bill provides for transfer of funds to the Foreign Agricultural
Service and to the Farm Service Agency for overhead expenses
associated with credit reform.
16. Food and Drug Administration, Salaries and Expenses.--
The bill allows funds to be transferred among activities.
17. General Provisions.--The bill allows unobligated
balances of discretionary funds to be transferred to the
Working Capital Fund.
Disclosure of Earmarks and Congressionally Directed Spending Items
Neither the bill nor this report contain any congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as
defined in clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
Compliance With Rule XIII, Cl. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule)
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman:
Compliance With Rule XIII, Cl. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule)
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
RICHARD B. RUSSELL NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT
* * * * * * *
NUTRITIONAL AND OTHER PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 9. (a)(1)(A) Lunches served by schools participating in
the school lunch program under this Act shall meet minimum
nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary on the
basis of tested nutritional research, except that the minimum
nutritional requirements--
(i) shall not be construed to prohibit the
substitution of foods to accommodate the medical or
other special dietary needs of individual students; and
(ii) shall, at a minimum, be based on the weekly
average of the nutrient content of school lunches.
(B) The Secretary shall provide technical assistance and
training, including technical assistance and training in the
preparation of lower-fat versions of foods commonly used in the
school lunch program under this Act, to schools participating
in the school lunch program to assist the schools in complying
with the nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary
pursuant to subparagraph (A) and in providing appropriate meals
to children with medically certified special dietary needs. The
Secretary shall provide additional technical assistance to
schools that are having difficulty maintaining compliance with
the requirements.
(2) Fluid milk.--
(A) In general.--Lunches served by schools
participating in the school lunch program under
this Act--
(i) shall offer students a variety of
fluid milk. Such milk shall be
consistent with the most recent Dietary
Guidelines for Americans published
under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related
Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341);
(ii) may offer students flavored and
unflavored fluid milk and lactose-free
fluid milk; and
(iii) shall provide a substitute for
fluid milk for students whose
disability restricts their diet, on
receipt of a written statement from a
licensed physician that identifies the
disability that restricts the student's
diet and that specifies the substitute
for fluid milk.
(B) Substitutes.--
(i) Standards for substitution.--A
school may substitute for the fluid
milk provided under subparagraph (A), a
nondairy beverage that is nutritionally
equivalent to fluid milk and meets
nutritional standards established by
the Secretary (which shall, among other
requirements to be determined by the
Secretary, include fortification of
calcium, protein, vitamin A, and
vitamin D to levels found in cow's
milk) for students who cannot consume
fluid milk because of a medical or
other special dietary need other than a
disability described in subparagraph
(A)(iii).
(ii) Notice.--The substitutions may
be made if the school notifies the
State agency that the school is
implementing a variation allowed under
this subparagraph, and if the
substitution is requested by written
statement of a medical authority or by
a student's parent or legal guardian
that identifies the medical or other
special dietary need that restricts the
student's diet, except that the school
shall not be required to provide
beverages other than beverages the
school has identified as acceptable
substitutes.
(iii) Excess expenses borne by school
food authority.--Expenses incurred in
providing substitutions under this
subparagraph that are in excess of
expenses covered by reimbursements
under this Act shall be paid by the
school food authority.
(C) Restrictions on sale of milk
prohibited.--A school that participates in the
school lunch program under this Act shall not
directly or indirectly restrict the sale or
marketing of fluid milk products by the school
(or by a person approved by the school) at any
time or any place--
(i) on the school premises; or
(ii) at any school-sponsored event.
(3) Students in senior high schools that participate in the
school lunch program under this Act (and, when approved by the
local school district or nonprofit private schools, students in
any other grade level) shall not be required to accept offered
foods they do not intend to consume, and any such failure to
accept offered foods shall not affect the full charge to the
student for a lunch meeting the requirements of this subsection
or the amount of payments made under this Act to any such
school for such lunch.
(4) Provision of information.--
(A) Guidance.--Prior to the beginning of the
school year beginning July 2004, the Secretary
shall issue guidance to States and school food
authorities to increase the consumption of
foods and food ingredients that are recommended
for increased serving consumption in the most
recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act
of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341).
(B) Rules.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this paragraph, the
Secretary shall promulgate rules, based on the
most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans,
that reflect specific recommendations,
expressed in serving recommendations, for
increased consumption of foods and food
ingredients offered in school nutrition
programs under this Act and the Child Nutrition
Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).
(C) Procurement and processing of food
service products and commodities.--The
Secretary shall--
(i) identify, develop, and
disseminate to State departments of
agriculture and education, school food
authorities, local educational
agencies, and local processing
entities, model product specifications
and practices for foods offered in
school nutrition programs under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) to ensure that
the foods reflect the most recent
Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the
National Nutrition Monitoring and
Related Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C.
5341);
(ii) not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this
subparagraph--
(I) carry out a study to
analyze the quantity and
quality of nutritional
information available to school
food authorities about food
service products and
commodities; and
(II) submit to Congress a
report on the results of the
study that contains such
legislative recommendations as
the Secretary considers
necessary to ensure that school
food authorities have access to
the nutritional information
needed for menu planning and
compliance assessments; and
(iii) to the maximum extent
practicable, in purchasing and
processing commodities for use in
school nutrition programs under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), purchase the
widest variety of healthful foods that
reflect the most recent Dietary
Guidelines for Americans.
(5) Water.--Schools participating in the school lunch
program under this Act shall make available to children
free of charge, as nutritionally appropriate, potable
water for consumption in the place where meals are
served during meal service.
(b)(1)(A) Not later than June 1 of each fiscal year, the
Secretary shall prescribe income guidelines for determining
eligibility for free and reduced price lunches during the 12-
month period beginning July 1 of such fiscal year and ending
June 30 of the following fiscal year. The income guidelines for
determining eligibility for free lunches shall be 130 percent
of the applicable family size income levels contained in the
nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed by the Office of
Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in accordance with
subparagraph (B). The income guidelines for determining
eligibility for reduced price lunches for any school year shall
be 185 percent of the applicable family size income levels
contained in the nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed
by the Office of Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in
accordance with subparagraph (B). The Office of Management and
Budget guidelines shall be revised at annual intervals, or at
any shorter interval deemed feasible and desirable.
(B) The revision required by subparagraph (A) of this
paragraph shall be made by multiplying--
(i) the official poverty line (as defined by the
Office of Management and Budget); by
(ii) the percentage change in the Consumer Price
Index during the annual or other interval immediately
preceding the time at which the adjustment is made.
Revisions under this subparagraph shall be made not more than
30 days after the date on which the consumer price index data
required to compute the adjustment becomes available.
(2)(A) Following the determination by the Secretary under
paragraph (1) of this subsection of the income eligibility
guidelines for each school year, each State educational agency
shall announce the income eligibility guidelines, by family
size, to be used by schools in the State in making
determinations of eligibility for free and reduced price
lunches. Local school authorities shall, each year, publicly
announce the income eligibility guidelines for free and reduced
price lunches on or before the opening of school.
(B) Applications and descriptive material.--
(i) In general.--Applications for free and
reduced price lunches, in such form as the
Secretary may prescribe or approve, and any
descriptive material, shall be distributed to
the parents or guardians of children in
attendance at the school, and shall contain
only the family size income levels for reduced
price meal eligibility with the explanation
that households with incomes less than or equal
to these values would be eligible for free or
reduced price lunches.
(ii) Income eligibility guidelines.--Forms
and descriptive material distributed in
accordance with clause (i) may not contain the
income eligibility guidelines for free lunches.
(iii) Contents of descriptive material.--
(I) In general.--Descriptive material
distributed in accordance with clause
(i) shall contain a notification that--
(aa) participants in the
programs listed in subclause
(II) may be eligible for free
or reduced price meals; and
(bb) documentation may be
requested for verification of
eligibility for free or reduced
price meals.
(II) Programs.--The programs referred
to in subclause (I)(aa) are--
(aa) the special supplemental
nutrition program for women,
infants, and children
established by section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1786);
(bb) the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.);
(cc) the food distribution
program on Indian reservations
established under section 4(b)
of the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)); and
(dd) a State program funded
under the program of block
grants to States for temporary
assistance for needy families
established under part A of
title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
(3) Household applications.--
(A) Definition of household application.--In
this paragraph, the term ``household
application'' means an application for a child
of a household to receive free or reduced price
school lunches under this Act, or free or
reduced price school breakfasts under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.),
for which an eligibility determination is made
other than under paragraph (4) or (5).
(B) Eligibility determination.--
(i) In general.--An eligibility
determination shall be made on the
basis of a complete household
application executed by an adult member
of the household or in accordance with
guidance issued by the Secretary.
(ii) Electronic signatures and
applications.--A household application
may be executed using an electronic
signature if--
(I) the application is
submitted electronically; and
(II) the electronic
application filing system meets
confidentiality standards
established by the Secretary.
(C) Children in household.--
(i) In general.--The household
application shall identify the names of
each child in the household for whom
meal benefits are requested.
(ii) Separate applications.--A State
educational agency or local educational
agency may not request a separate
application for each child in the
household that attends schools under
the same local educational agency.
(D) Verification of sample.--
(i) Definitions.--In this
subparagraph:
(I) Error prone
application.--The term ``error
prone application'' means an
approved household application
that--
(aa) indicates
monthly income that is
within $100, or an
annual income that is
within $1,200, of the
income eligibility
limitation for free or
reduced price meals; or
(bb) in lieu of the
criteria established
under item (aa), meets
criteria established by
the Secretary.
(II) Non-response rate.--The
term ``non-response rate''
means (in accordance with
guidelines established by the
Secretary) the percentage of
approved household applications
for which verification
information has not been
obtained by a local educational
agency after attempted
verification under
subparagraphs (F) and (G).
(ii) Verification of sample.--Each
school year, a local educational agency
shall verify eligibility of the
children in a sample of household
applications approved for the school
year by the local educational agency,
as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with this subsection.
(iii) Sample size.--Except as
otherwise provided in this paragraph,
the sample for a local educational
agency for a school year shall equal
the lesser of--
(I) 3 percent of all
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year, selected
from error prone applications;
or
(II) 3,000 error prone
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year.
(iv) Alternative sample size.--
(I) In general.--If the
conditions described in
subclause (IV) are met, the
verification sample size for a
local educational agency shall
be the sample size described in
subclause (II) or (III), as
determined by the local
educational agency.
(II) 3,000/3 percent
option.--The sample size
described in this subclause
shall be the lesser of 3,000,
or 3 percent of, applications
selected at random from
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year.
(III) 1,000/1 percent plus
option.--
(aa) In general.--The
sample size described
in this subclause shall
be the sum of--
(AA) the
lesser of
1,000, or 1
percent of, all
applications
approved by the
local
educational
agency for the
school year, as
of October 1 of
the school
year, selected
from error
prone
applications;
and
(BB) the
lesser of 500,
or \1/2\ of 1
percent of,
applications
approved by the
local
educational
agency for the
school year, as
of October 1 of
the school
year, that
provide a case
number (in lieu
of income
information)
showing
participation
in a program
described in
item (bb)
selected from
those approved
applications
that provide a
case number (in
lieu of income
information)
verifying the
participation.
(bb) Programs.--The
programs described in
this item are--
(AA) the
supplemental
nutrition
assistance
program
established
under the Food
and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2011 et
seq.);
(BB) the food
distribution
program on
Indian
reservations
established
under section
4(b) of the
Food and
Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7
U.S.C.
2013(b)); and
(CC) a State
program funded
under the
program of
block grants to
States for
temporary
assistance for
needy families
established
under part A of
title IV of the
Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.)
that the
Secretary
determines
complies with
standards
established by
the Secretary
that ensure
that the
standards under
the State
program are
comparable to
or more
restrictive
than those in
effect on June
1, 1995.
(IV) Conditions.--The
conditions referred to in
subclause (I) shall be met for
a local educational agency for
a school year if--
(aa) the nonresponse
rate for the local
educational agency for
the preceding school
year is less than 20
percent; or
(bb) the local
educational agency has
more than 20,000
children approved by
application by the
local educational
agency as eligible for
free or reduced price
meals for the school
year, as of October 1
of the school year,
and--
(AA) the
nonresponse
rate for the
preceding
school year is
at least 10
percent below
the nonresponse
rate for the
second
preceding
school year; or
(BB) in the
case of the
school year
beginning July
2005, the local
educational
agency attempts
to verify all
approved
household
applications
selected for
verification
through use of
public agency
records from at
least 2 of the
programs or
sources of
information
described in
subparagraph
(F)(i).
(v) Additional selected
applications.--A sample for a local
educational agency for a school year
under clauses (iii) and (iv)(III)(AA)
shall include the number of additional
randomly selected approved household
applications that are required to
comply with the sample size
requirements in those clauses.
(E) Preliminary review.--
(i) Review for accuracy.--
(I) In general.--Prior to
conducting any other
verification activity for
approved household applications
selected for verification, the
local educational agency shall
ensure that the initial
eligibility determination for
each approved household
application is reviewed for
accuracy by an individual other
than the individual making the
initial eligibility
determination, unless otherwise
determined by the Secretary.
(II) Waiver.--The
requirements of subclause (I)
shall be waived for a local
educational agency if the local
educational agency is using a
technology-based solution that
demonstrates a high level of
accuracy, to the satisfaction
of the Secretary, in processing
an initial eligibility
determination in accordance
with the income eligibility
guidelines of the school lunch
program.
(ii) Correct eligibility
determination.--If the review indicates
that the initial eligibility
determination is correct, the local
educational agency shall verify the
approved household application.
(iii) Incorrect eligibility
determination.--If the review indicates
that the initial eligibility
determination is incorrect, the local
educational agency shall (as determined
by the Secretary)--
(I) correct the eligibility
status of the household;
(II) notify the household of
the change;
(III) in any case in which
the review indicates that the
household is not eligible for
free or reduced-price meals,
notify the household of the
reason for the ineligibility
and that the household may
reapply with income
documentation for free or
reduced-price meals; and
(IV) in any case in which the
review indicates that the
household is eligible for free
or reduced-price meals, verify
the approved household
application.
(F) Direct verification.--
(i) In general.--Subject to clauses
(ii) and (iii), to verify eligibility
for free or reduced price meals for
approved household applications
selected for verification, the local
educational agency may (in accordance
with criteria established by the
Secretary) first obtain and use income
and program participation information
from a public agency administering--
(I) the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.);
(II) the food distribution
program on Indian reservations
established under section 4(b)
of the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b));
(III) the temporary
assistance for needy families
program funded under part A of
title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
(IV) the State medicaid
program under title XIX of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396 et seq.); or
(V) a similar income-tested
program or other source of
information, as determined by
the Secretary.
(ii) Free meals.--Public agency
records that may be obtained and used
under clause (i) to verify eligibility
for free meals for approved household
applications selected for verification
shall include the most recent available
information (other than information
reflecting program participation or
income before the 180-day period ending
on the date of application for free
meals) that is relied on to
administer--
(I) a program or source of
information described in clause
(i) (other than clause
(i)(IV)); or
(II) the State plan for
medical assistance under title
XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) in--
(aa) a State in which
the income eligibility
limit applied under
section 1902(l)(2)(C)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not
more than 133 percent
of the official poverty
line described in
section 1902(l)(2)(A)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)); or
(bb) a State that
otherwise identifies
households that have
income that is not more
than 133 percent of the
official poverty line
described in section
1902(l)(2)(A) of that
Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)).
(iii) Reduced price meals.--Public
agency records that may be obtained and
used under clause (i) to verify
eligibility for reduced price meals for
approved household applications
selected for verification shall include
the most recent available information
(other than information reflecting
program participation or income before
the 180-day period ending on the date
of application for reduced price meals)
that is relied on to administer--
(I) a program or source of
information described in clause
(i) (other than clause
(i)(IV)); or
(II) the State plan for
medical assistance under title
XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) in--
(aa) a State in which
the income eligibility
limit applied under
section 1902(l)(2)(C)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not
more than 185 percent
of the official poverty
line described in
section 1902(l)(2)(A)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)); or
(bb) a State that
otherwise identifies
households that have
income that is not more
than 185 percent of the
official poverty line
described in section
1902(l)(2)(A) of that
Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)).
(iv) Evaluation.--Not later than 3
years after the date of enactment of
this subparagraph, the Secretary shall
complete an evaluation of--
(I) the effectiveness of
direct verification carried out
under this subparagraph in
decreasing the portion of the
verification sample that must
be verified under subparagraph
(G) while ensuring that
adequate verification
information is obtained; and
(II) the feasibility of
direct verification by State
agencies and local educational
agencies.
(v) Expanded use of direct
verification.--If the Secretary
determines that direct verification
significantly decreases the portion of
the verification sample that must be
verified under subparagraph (G), while
ensuring that adequate verification
information is obtained, and can be
conducted by most State agencies and
local educational agencies, the
Secretary may require a State agency or
local educational agency to implement
direct verification through 1 or more
of the programs described in clause
(i), as determined by the Secretary,
unless the State agency or local
educational agency demonstrates (under
criteria established by the Secretary)
that the State agency or local
educational agency lacks the capacity
to conduct, or is unable to implement,
direct verification.
(G) Household verification.--
(i) In general.--If an approved
household application is not verified
through the use of public agency
records, a local educational agency
shall provide to the household written
notice that--
(I) the approved household
application has been selected
for verification; and
(II) the household is
required to submit verification
information to confirm
eligibility for free or reduced
price meals.
(ii) Phone number.--The written
notice in clause (i) shall include a
toll-free phone number that parents and
legal guardians in households selected
for verification can call for
assistance with the verification
process.
(iii) Followup activities.--If a
household does not respond to a
verification request, a local
educational agency shall make at least
1 attempt to obtain the necessary
verification from the household in
accordance with guidelines and
regulations promulgated by the
Secretary.
(iv) Contract authority for school
food authorities.--A local educational
agency may contract (under standards
established by the Secretary) with a
third party to assist the local
educational agency in carrying out
clause (iii).
(H) Verification deadline.--
(i) General deadline.--
(I) In general.--Subject to
subclause (II), not later than
November 15 of each school
year, a local educational
agency shall complete the
verification activities
required for the school year
(including followup
activities).
(II) Extension.--Under
criteria established by the
Secretary, a State may extend
the deadline established under
subclause (I) for a school year
for a local educational agency
to December 15 of the school
year.
(ii) Eligibility changes.--Based on
the verification activities, the local
educational agency shall make
appropriate modifications to the
eligibility determinations made for
household applications in accordance
with criteria established by the
Secretary.
(I) Local conditions.--In the case of a
natural disaster, civil disorder, strike, or
other local condition (as determined by the
Secretary), the Secretary may substitute
alternatives for--
(i) the sample size and sample
selection criteria established under
subparagraph (D); and
(ii) the verification deadline
established under subparagraph (H).
(J) Individual review.--In accordance with
criteria established by the Secretary, the
local educational agency may, on individual
review--
(i) decline to verify no more than 5
percent of approved household
applications selected under
subparagraph (D); and
(ii) replace the approved household
applications with other approved
household applications to be verified.
(K) Feasibility study.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study of the feasibility of
using computer technology (including
data mining) to reduce--
(I) overcertification errors
in the school lunch program
under this Act;
(II) waste, fraud, and abuse
in connection with this
paragraph; and
(III) errors, waste, fraud,
and abuse in other nutrition
programs, as determined to be
appropriate by the Secretary.
(ii) Report.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this
paragraph, the Secretary shall submit
to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate a report describing--
(I) the results of the
feasibility study conducted
under this subsection;
(II) how a computer system
using technology described in
clause (i) could be
implemented;
(III) a plan for
implementation; and
(IV) proposed legislation, if
necessary, to implement the
system.
(4) Direct certification for children in supplemental
nutrition assistance program households.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (D),
each State agency shall enter into an agreement
with the State agency conducting eligibility
determinations for the supplemental nutrition
assistance program established under the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et
seq.).
(B) Procedures.--Subject to paragraph (6),
the agreement shall establish procedures under
which a child who is a member of a household
receiving assistance under the supplemental
nutrition assistance program shall be certified
as eligible for free lunches under this Act and
free breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), without
further application.
(C) Certification.--Subject to paragraph (6),
under the agreement, the local educational
agency conducting eligibility determinations
for a school lunch program under this Act and a
school breakfast program under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
shall certify a child who is a member of a
household receiving assistance under the
supplemental nutrition assistance program as
eligible for free lunches under this Act and
free breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), without
further application.
(D) Applicability.--This paragraph applies
to--
(i) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2006, a school district
that had an enrollment of 25,000
students or more in the preceding
school year;
(ii) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2007, a school district
that had an enrollment of 10,000
students or more in the preceding
school year; and
(iii) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2008 and each subsequent
school year, each local educational
agency.
(E) Performance awards.--
(i) In general.--Effective for each
of the school years beginning July 1,
2011, July 1, 2012, and July 1, 2013,
the Secretary shall offer performance
awards to States to encourage the
States to ensure that all children
eligible for direct certification under
this paragraph are certified in
accordance with this paragraph.
(ii) Requirements.--For each school
year described in clause (i), the
Secretary shall--
(I) consider State data from
the prior school year,
including estimates contained
in the report required under
section 4301 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 (42 U.S.C. 1758a); and
(II) make performance awards
to not more than 15 States that
demonstrate, as determined by
the Secretary--
(aa) outstanding
performance; and
(bb) substantial
improvement.
(iii) Use of funds.--A State agency
that receives a performance award under
clause (i)--
(I) shall treat the funds as
program income; and
(II) may transfer the funds
to school food authorities for
use in carrying out the
program.
(iv) Funding.--
(I) In general.--On October
1, 2011, and each subsequent
October 1 through October 1,
2013, out of any funds in the
Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the Secretary of
the Treasury shall transfer to
the Secretary--
(aa) $2,000,000 to
carry out clause
(ii)(II)(aa); and
(bb) $2,000,000 to
carry out clause
(ii)(II)(bb).
(II) Receipt and
acceptance.--The Secretary
shall be entitled to receive,
shall accept, and shall use to
carry out this clause the funds
transferred under subclause
(I), without further
appropriation.
(v) Payments not subject to judicial
review.--A determination by the
Secretary whether, and in what amount,
to make a performance award under this
subparagraph shall not be subject to
administrative or judicial review.
(F) Continuous improvement plans.--
(i) Definition of required
percentage.--In this subparagraph, the
term ``required percentage'' means--
(I) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2011, 80
percent;
(II) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2012, 90
percent; and
(III) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2013, and
each school year thereafter, 95
percent.
(ii) Requirements.--Each school year,
the Secretary shall--
(I) identify, using data from
the prior year, including
estimates contained in the
report required under section
4301 of the Food, Conservation,
and Energy Act of 2008 (42
U.S.C. 1758a), States that
directly certify less than the
required percentage of the
total number of children in the
State who are eligible for
direct certification under this
paragraph;
(II) require the States
identified under subclause (I)
to implement a continuous
improvement plan to fully meet
the requirements of this
paragraph, which shall include
a plan to improve direct
certification for the following
school year; and
(III) assist the States
identified under subclause (I)
to develop and implement a
continuous improvement plan in
accordance with subclause (II).
(iii) Failure to meet performance
standard.--
(I) In general.--A State that
is required to develop and
implement a continuous
improvement plan under clause
(ii)(II) shall be required to
submit the continuous
improvement plan to the
Secretary, for the approval of
the Secretary.
(II) Requirements.--At a
minimum, a continuous
improvement plan under
subclause (I) shall include--
(aa) specific
measures that the State
will use to identify
more children who are
eligible for direct
certification,
including improvements
or modifications to
technology, information
systems, or databases;
(bb) a timeline for
the State to implement
those measures; and
(cc) goals for the
State to improve direct
certification results.
(G) Without further application.--
(i) In general.--In this paragraph,
the term ``without further
application'' means that no action is
required by the household of the child.
(ii) Clarification.--A requirement
that a household return a letter
notifying the household of eligibility
for direct certification or eligibility
for free school meals does not meet the
requirements of clause (i).
(5) Discretionary certification.--Subject to
paragraph (6), any local educational agency may certify
any child as eligible for free lunches or breakfasts,
without further application, by directly communicating
with the appropriate State or local agency to obtain
documentation of the status of the child as--
(A) a member of a family that is receiving
assistance under the temporary assistance for
needy families program funded under part A of
title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) that the Secretary determines
complies with standards established by the
Secretary that ensure that the standards under
the State program are comparable to or more
restrictive than those in effect on June 1,
1995;
(B) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1
of the individuals described in section 725(2)
of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11434a(2));
(C) served by the runaway and homeless youth
grant program established under the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.);
(D) a migratory child (as defined in section
1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399)); or
(E)(i) a foster child whose care and
placement is the responsibility of an agency
that administers a State plan under part B or E
of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(ii) a foster child who a court has placed
with a caretaker household.
(6) Use or disclosure of information.--
(A) In general.--The use or disclosure of any
information obtained from an application for
free or reduced price meals, or from a State or
local agency referred to in paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5), shall be limited to--
(i) a person directly connected with
the administration or enforcement of
this Act or the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
(including a regulation promulgated
under either Act);
(ii) a person directly connected with
the administration or enforcement of--
(I) a Federal education
program;
(II) a State health or
education program administered
by the State or local
educational agency (other than
a program carried out under
title XIX or XXI of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et
seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1397aa et
seq.)); or
(III) a Federal, State, or
local means-tested nutrition
program with eligibility
standards comparable to the
school lunch program under this
Act;
(iii)(I) the Comptroller General of
the United States for audit and
examination authorized by any other
provision of law; and
(II) notwithstanding any other
provision of law, a Federal, State, or
local law enforcement official for the
purpose of investigating an alleged
violation of any program covered by
this paragraph or paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5);
(iv) a person directly connected with
the administration of the State
medicaid program under title XIX of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et
seq.) or the State children's health
insurance program under title XXI of
that Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.)
solely for the purposes of--
(I) identifying children
eligible for benefits under,
and enrolling children in,
those programs, except that
this subclause shall apply only
to the extent that the State
and the local educational
agency or school food authority
so elect; and
(II) verifying the
eligibility of children for
programs under this Act or the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42
U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and
(v) a third party contractor
described in paragraph (3)(G)(iv).
(B) Limitation on information provided.--
Information provided under clause (ii) or (v)
of subparagraph (A) shall be limited to the
income eligibility status of the child for whom
application for free or reduced price meal
benefits is made or for whom eligibility
information is provided under paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5), unless the consent of the parent
or guardian of the child for whom application
for benefits was made is obtained.
(C) Criminal penalty.--A person described in
subparagraph (A) who publishes, divulges,
discloses, or makes known in any manner, or to
any extent not authorized by Federal law
(including a regulation), any information
obtained under this subsection shall be fined
not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more
than 1 year, or both.
(D) Requirements for waiver of
confidentiality.--A State that elects to
exercise the option described in subparagraph
(A)(iv)(I) shall ensure that any local
educational agency or school food authority
acting in accordance with that option--
(i) has a written agreement with 1 or
more State or local agencies
administering health programs for
children under titles XIX and XXI of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396
et seq. and 1397aa et seq.) that
requires the health agencies to use the
information obtained under subparagraph
(A) to seek to enroll children in those
health programs; and
(ii)(I) notifies each household, the
information of which shall be disclosed
under subparagraph (A), that the
information disclosed will be used only
to enroll children in health programs
referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv);
and
(II) provides each parent or guardian
of a child in the household with an
opportunity to elect not to have the
information disclosed.
(E) Use of disclosed information.--A person
to which information is disclosed under
subparagraph (A)(iv)(I) shall use or disclose
the information only as necessary for the
purpose of enrolling children in health
programs referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv).
(7) Free and reduced price policy statement.--
(A) In general.--After the initial
submission, a local educational agency shall
not be required to submit a free and reduced
price policy statement to a State educational
agency under this Act unless there is a
substantive change in the free and reduced
price policy of the local educational agency.
(B) Routine change.--A routine change in the
policy of a local educational agency (such as
an annual adjustment of the income eligibility
guidelines for free and reduced price meals)
shall not be sufficient cause for requiring the
local educational agency to submit a policy
statement.
(8) Communications.--
(A) In general.--Any communication with a
household under this subsection or subsection
(d) shall be in an understandable and uniform
format and, to the maximum extent practicable,
in a language that parents and legal guardians
can understand.
(B) Electronic availability.--In addition to
the distribution of applications and
descriptive material in paper form as provided
for in this paragraph, the applications and
material may be made available electronically
via the Internet.
(9) Eligibility for free and reduced price lunches.--
(A) Free lunches.--Any child who is a member
of a household whose income, at the time the
application is submitted, is at an annual rate
which does not exceed the applicable family
size income level of the income eligibility
guidelines for free lunches, as determined
under paragraph (1), shall be served a free
lunch.
(B) Reduced price lunches.--
(i) In general.--Any child who is a
member of a household whose income, at
the time the application is submitted,
is at an annual rate greater than the
applicable family size income level of
the income eligibility guidelines for
free lunches, as determined under
paragraph (1), but less than or equal
to the applicable family size income
level of the income eligibility
guidelines for reduced price lunches,
as determined under paragraph (1),
shall be served a reduced price lunch.
(ii) Maximum price.--The price
charged for a reduced price lunch shall
not exceed 40 cents.
(C) Duration.--Except as otherwise specified
in paragraph (3)(E), (3)(H)(ii), and section
11(a), eligibility for free or reduced price
meals for any school year shall remain in
effect--
(i) beginning on the date of
eligibility approval for the current
school year; and
(ii) ending on a date during the
subsequent school year determined by
the Secretary.
(10) No physical segregation of or other discrimination
against any child eligible for a free lunch or a reduced price
lunch under this subsection shall be made by the school nor
shall there be any overt identification of any child by special
tokens or tickets, announced or published list of names, or by
other means.
(11) Any child who has a parent or guardian who (A) is
responsible for the principal support of such child and (B) is
unemployed shall be served a free or reduced price lunch,
respectively, during any period (i) in which such child's
parent or guardian continues to be unemployed and (ii) the
income of the child's parents or guardians during such period
of unemployment falls within the income eligibility criteria
for free lunches or reduced price lunches, respectively, based
on the current rate of income of such parents or guardians.
Local educational agencies shall publicly announce that such
children are eligible for free or reduced price lunch, and
shall make determinations with respect to the status of any
parent or guardian of any child under clauses (A) and (B) of
the preceding sentence on the basis of a statement executed in
such form as the Secretary may prescribe by such parent or
guardian. No physical segregation of, or other discrimination
against, any child eligible for a free or reduced price lunch
under this paragraph shall be made by the school nor shall
there be any overt identification of any such child by special
tokens or tickets, announced or published lists of names, or by
any other means.
(12)(A) A child shall be considered automatically eligible
for a free lunch and breakfast under this Act and the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), respectively,
without further application or eligibility determination, if
the child is--
(i) a member of a household receiving assistance
under the supplemental nutrition assistance program
authorized under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2011 et seq.);
(ii) a member of a family (under the State program
funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)) that the Secretary
determines complies with standards established by the
Secretary that ensure that the standards under the
State program are comparable to or more restrictive
than those in effect on June 1, 1995;
(iii) enrolled as a participant in a Head Start
program authorized under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C.
9831 et seq.), on the basis of a determination that the
child meets the eligibility criteria prescribed under
section 645(a)(1)(B) of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C.
9840(a)(1)(B));
(iv) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1
of the individuals described in section 725(2)
of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)));
(v) served by the runaway and homeless youth
grant program established under the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.);
(vi) a migratory child (as defined in section
1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399)); or
(vii)(I) a foster child whose care and
placement is the responsibility of an agency
that administers a State plan under part B or E
of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(II) a foster child who a court has
placed with a caretaker household.
(B) Proof of receipt of supplemental nutrition assistance
program benefits or assistance under the State program funded
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) that the Secretary determines complies with
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the
standards under the State program are comparable to or more
restrictive than those in effect on June 1, 1995, or of
enrollment or participation in a Head Start program on the
basis described in subparagraph (A)(iii), shall be sufficient
to satisfy any verification requirement imposed under this
subsection.
(13) Exclusion of certain military housing
allowances.--The amount of a basic allowance provided
under section 403 of title 37, United States Code, on
behalf of a member of a uniformed service for housing
that is acquired or constructed under subchapter IV of
chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code, or any
related provision of law, shall not be considered to be
income for the purpose of determining the eligibility
of a child who is a member of the household of the
member of a uniformed service for free or reduced price
lunches under this Act.
(14) Combat pay.--
(A) Definition of combat pay.--In this
paragraph, the term ``combat pay'' means any
additional payment under chapter 5 of title 37,
United States Code, or otherwise designated by
the Secretary to be appropriate for exclusion
under this paragraph, that is received by or
from a member of the United States Armed Forces
deployed to a designated combat zone, if the
additional pay--
(i) is the result of deployment to or
service in a combat zone; and
(ii) was not received immediately
prior to serving in a combat zone.
(B) Exclusion.--Combat pay shall not be
considered to be income for the purpose of
determining the eligibility for free or reduced
price meals of a child who is a member of the
household of a member of the United States
Armed Forces.
(15) Direct certification for children receiving
medicaid benefits.--
(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
(i) Eligible child.--The term
``eligible child'' means a child--
(I)(aa) who is eligible for
and receiving medical
assistance under the Medicaid
program; and
(bb) who is a member of a
family with an income as
measured by the Medicaid
program before the application
of any expense, block, or other
income disregard, that does not
exceed 133 percent of the
poverty line (as defined in
section 673(2) of the Community
Services Block Grant Act (42
U.S.C. 9902(2), including any
revision required by such
section)) applicable to a
family of the size used for
purposes of determining
eligibility for the Medicaid
program; or
(II) who is a member of a
household (as that term is
defined in section 245.2 of
title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations (or successor
regulations) with a child
described in subclause (I).
(ii) Medicaid program.--The term
``Medicaid program'' means the program
of medical assistance established under
title XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).
(B) Demonstration project.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary,
acting through the Administrator of the
Food and Nutrition Service and in
cooperation with selected State
agencies, shall conduct a demonstration
project in selected local educational
agencies to determine whether direct
certification of eligible children is
an effective method of certifying
children for free lunches and
breakfasts under section 9(b)(1)(A) of
this Act and section 4(e)(1)(A) of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1773(e)(1)(A)).
(ii) Scope of project.--The Secretary
shall carry out the demonstration
project under this subparagraph--
(I) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2012, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 2.5 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data;
(II) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2013, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 5 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data; and
(III) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2014, and
each subsequent school year, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 10 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data.
(iii) Purposes of the project.--At a
minimum, the purposes of the
demonstration project shall be--
(I) to determine the
potential of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program to reach children who
are eligible for free meals but
not certified to receive the
meals;
(II) to determine the
potential of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program to directly certify
children who are enrolled for
free meals based on a household
application; and
(III) to provide an estimate
of the effect on Federal costs
and on participation in the
school lunch program under this
Act and the school breakfast
program established by section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program.
(iv) Cost estimate.--For each of 2
school years of the demonstration
project, the Secretary shall estimate
the cost of the direct certification of
eligible children for free school meals
through data derived from--
(I) the school meal programs
authorized under this Act and
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.);
(II) the Medicaid program;
and
(III) interviews with a
statistically representative
sample of households.
(C) Agreement.--
(i) In general.--Not later than July
1 of the first school year during which
a State agency will participate in the
demonstration project, the State agency
shall enter into an agreement with the
1 or more State agencies conducting
eligibility determinations for the
Medicaid program.
(ii) Without further application.--
Subject to paragraph (6), the agreement
described in subparagraph (D) shall
establish procedures under which an
eligible child shall be certified for
free lunches under this Act and free
breakfasts under section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773),
without further application (as defined
in paragraph (4)(G)).
(D) Certification.--For the school year
beginning on July 1, 2012, and each subsequent
school year, subject to paragraph (6), the
local educational agencies participating in the
demonstration project shall certify an eligible
child as eligible for free lunches under this
Act and free breakfasts under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.),
without further application (as defined in
paragraph (4)(G)).
(E) Site selection.--
(i) In general.--To be eligible to
participate in the demonstration
project under this subsection, a State
agency shall submit to the Secretary an
application at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information
as the Secretary may require.
(ii) Considerations.--In selecting
States and local educational agencies
for participation in the demonstration
project, the Secretary may take into
consideration such factors as the
Secretary considers to be appropriate,
which may include--
(I) the rate of direct
certification;
(II) the share of individuals
who are eligible for benefits
under the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.) who participate
in the program, as determined
by the Secretary;
(III) the income eligibility
limit for the Medicaid program;
(IV) the feasibility of
matching data between local
educational agencies and the
Medicaid program;
(V) the socioeconomic profile
of the State or local
educational agencies; and
(VI) the willingness of the
State and local educational
agencies to comply with the
requirements of the
demonstration project.
(F) Access to data.--For purposes of
conducting the demonstration project under this
paragraph, the Secretary shall have access to--
(i) educational and other records of
State and local educational and other
agencies and institutions receiving
funding or providing benefits for 1 or
more programs authorized under this Act
or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42
U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and
(ii) income and program participation
information from public agencies
administering the Medicaid program.
(G) Report to congress.--
(i) In general.--Not later than
October 1, 2014, the Secretary shall
submit to the Committee on Education
and Labor of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate, an interim report that
describes the results of the
demonstration project required under
this paragraph.
(ii) Final report.--Not later than
October 1, 2015, the Secretary shall
submit a final report to the committees
described in clause (i).
(H) Funding.--
(i) In general.--On October 1, 2010,
out of any funds in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, the Secretary
of the Treasury shall transfer to the
Secretary to carry out subparagraph (G)
$5,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
(ii) Receipt and acceptance.--The
Secretary shall be entitled to receive,
shall accept, and shall use to carry
out subparagraph (G) the funds
transferred under clause (i), without
further appropriation.
(c) School lunch programs under this Act shall be operated on
a nonprofit basis. Commodities purchased under the authority of
section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, may be donated by the
Secretary to schools, in accordance with the needs as
determined by local school authorities, for utilization in the
school lunch program under this Act as well as to other schools
carrying out nonprofit school lunch programs and institutions
authorized to receive such commodities. The requirements of
this section relating to the service of meals without cost or
at a reduced cost shall apply to the lunch program of any
school utilizing commodities donated under any provision of
law.
(d)(1) The Secretary shall require as a condition of
eligibility for receipt of free or reduced price lunches that
the member of the household who executes the application
furnish the last 4 digits of the social security account number
of the parent or guardian who is the primary wage earner
responsible for the care of the child for whom the application
is made, or that of another appropriate adult member of the
child's household, as determined by the Secretary.
(2) No member of a household may be provided a free or
reduced price lunch under this Act unless--
(A) appropriate documentation relating to the income
of such household (as prescribed by the Secretary) has
been provided to the appropriate local educational
agency so that the local educational agency may
calculate the total income of such household;
(B) documentation showing that the household is
participating in the supplemental nutrition assistance
program under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 has
been provided to the appropriate local educational
agency;
(C) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing that the
family is receiving assistance under the State program
funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security
Act that the Secretary determines complies with
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that
the standards under the State program are comparable to
or more restrictive than those in effect on June 1,
1995;
(D) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing that the
child meets the criteria specified in clauses (iv) or
(v) of subsection (b)(12)(A);
(E) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as a migratory child (as defined in
section 1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399));
(F)(i) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as a foster child whose care and placement
is the responsibility of an agency that administers a
State plan under part B or E of title IV of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(ii) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing
the status of the child as a foster child who a
court has placed with a caretaker household; or
(G) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as an eligible child (as defined in
subsection (b)(15)(A)).
(e) A school or school food authority participating in a
program under this Act may not contract with a food service
company to provide a la carte food service unless the company
agrees to offer free, reduced price, and full-price
reimbursable meals to all eligible children.
(f) Nutritional Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Schools that are participating in
the school lunch program or school breakfast program
shall serve lunches and breakfasts that--
(A) are consistent with the goals of the most
recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act
of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341); and
(B) consider the nutrient needs of children
who may be at risk for inadequate food intake
and food insecurity.
(2) To assist schools in meeting the requirements of this
subsection, the Secretary--
(A) shall--
(i) develop, and provide to schools,
standardized recipes, menu cycles, and food
product specification and preparation
techniques; and
(ii) provide to schools information regarding
nutrient standard menu planning, assisted
nutrient standard menu planning, and food-based
menu systems; and
(B) may provide to schools information regarding
other approaches, as determined by the Secretary.
(3) Use of any reasonable approach.--
(A) In general.--A school food service authority may
use any reasonable approach, within guidelines
established by the Secretary in a timely manner, to
meet the requirements of this subsection, including--
(i) using the school nutrition meal pattern
in effect for the 1994-1995 school year; and
(ii) using any of the approaches described in
paragraph (3).
(B) Nutrient analysis.--The Secretary may not require
a school to conduct or use a nutrient analysis to meet
the requirements of this subsection.
(4) Waiver of requirement for weighted averages for
nutrient analysis.--During the period ending on
September 30, 2010, the Secretary shall not require the
use of weighted averages for nutrient analysis of menu
items and foods offered or served as part of a meal
offered or served under the school lunch program under
this Act or the school breakfast program under section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
(g) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
subsection, the Secretary shall provide a notification to
Congress that justifies the need for production records
required under section 210.10(b) of title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations, and describes how the Secretary has reduced
paperwork relating to the school lunch and school breakfast
programs.
(h) Food Safety.--
(1) In general.--A school participating in the school
lunch program under this Act or the school breakfast
program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) shall--
(A) at least twice during each school year,
obtain a food safety inspection conducted by a
State or local governmental agency responsible
for food safety inspections;
(B) post in a publicly visible location a
report on the most recent inspection conducted
under subparagraph (A); and
(C) on request, provide a copy of the report
to a member of the public.
(2) State and local government inspections.--Nothing
in paragraph (1) prevents any State or local government
from adopting or enforcing any requirement for more
frequent food safety inspections of schools.
(3) Audits and reports by states.--For fiscal year
[2017] 2018, each State shall annually--
(A) audit food safety inspections of schools
conducted under paragraphs (1) and (2); and
(B) submit to the Secretary a report of the
results of the audit.
(4) Audit by the secretary.--For fiscal year [2017]
2018, the Secretary shall annually audit State reports
of food safety inspections of schools submitted under
paragraph (3).
(5) School food safety program.--
(A) In general.--Each school food authority
shall implement a school food safety program,
in the preparation and service of each meal
served to children, that complies with any
hazard analysis and critical control point
system established by the Secretary.
(B) Applicability.--Subparagraph (A) shall
apply to any facility or part of a facility in
which food is stored, prepared, or served for
the purposes of the school nutrition programs
under this Act or section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
(i) Single Permanent Agreement Between State Agency and
School Food Authority; Common Claims Form.--
(1) In general.--If a single State agency administers
any combination of the school lunch program under this
Act, the school breakfast program under section 4 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), the
summer food service program for children under section
13 of this Act, or the child and adult care food
program under section 17 of this Act, the agency
shall--
(A) require each school food authority to
submit to the State agency a single agreement
with respect to the operation by the authority
of the programs administered by the State
agency; and
(B) use a common claims form with respect to
meals and supplements served under the programs
administered by the State agency.
(2) Additional requirement.--The agreement described
in paragraph (1)(A) shall be a permanent agreement that
may be amended as necessary.
(j) Purchases of Locally Produced Foods.--The Secretary
shall--
(1) encourage institutions receiving funds under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771
et seq.) to purchase unprocessed agricultural products,
both locally grown and locally raised, to the maximum
extent practicable and appropriate;
(2) advise institutions participating in a program
described in paragraph (1) of the policy described in
that paragraph and paragraph (3) and post information
concerning the policy on the website maintained by the
Secretary; and
(3) allow institutions receiving funds under this Act
and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et
seq.), including the Department of Defense Fresh Fruit
and Vegetable Program, to use a geographic preference
for the procurement of unprocessed agricultural
products, both locally grown and locally raised.
(k) Information on the School Nutrition Environment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) establish requirements for local
educational agencies participating in the
school lunch program under this Act and the
school breakfast program established by section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1773) to report information about the school
nutrition environment, for all schools under
the jurisdiction of the local educational
agencies, to the Secretary and to the public in
the State on a periodic basis; and
(B) provide training and technical assistance
to States and local educational agencies on the
assessment and reporting of the school
nutrition environment, including the use of any
assessment materials developed by the
Secretary.
(2) Requirements.--In establishing the requirements
for reporting on the school nutrition environment under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall--
(A) include information pertaining to food
safety inspections, local wellness policies,
meal program participation, the nutritional
quality of program meals, and other information
as determined by the Secretary; and
(B) ensure that information is made available
to the public by local educational agencies in
an accessible, easily understood manner in
accordance with guidelines established by the
Secretary.
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
subsection such sums as are necessary for each of
fiscal years 2011 through 2015.
(l) Food Donation Program.--
(1) In general.--Each school and local educational
agency participating in the school lunch program under
this Act may donate any food not consumed under such
program to eligible local food banks or charitable
organizations.
(2) Guidance.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Secretary shall develop and
publish guidance to schools and local
educational agencies participating in the
school lunch program under this Act to assist
such schools and local educational agencies in
donating food under this subsection.
(B) Updates.--The Secretary shall update such
guidance as necessary.
(3) Liability.--Any school or local educational
agency making donations pursuant to this subsection
shall be exempt from civil and criminal liability to
the extent provided under the Bill Emerson Good
Samaritan Food Donation Act (42 U.S.C. 1791).
(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term
``eligible local food banks or charitable
organizations'' means any food bank or charitable
organization which is exempt from tax under section
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26
U.S.C. 501(c)(3)).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 26. INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into a contract
with a nongovernmental organization described in subsection (b)
to establish and maintain a clearinghouse to provide
information to nongovernmental groups located throughout the
United States that assist low-income individuals or communities
regarding food assistance, self-help activities to aid
individuals in becoming self-reliant, and other activities that
empower low-income individuals or communities to improve the
lives of low-income individuals and reduce reliance on Federal,
State, or local governmental agencies for food or other
assistance.
(b) Nongovernmental Organization.--The nongovernmental
organization referred to in subsection (a) shall be selected on
a competitive basis and shall--
(1) be experienced in the gathering of first-hand
information in all the States through onsite visits to
grassroots organizations in each State that fight
hunger and poverty or that assist individuals in
becoming self-reliant;
(2) be experienced in the establishment of a
clearinghouse similar to the clearinghouse described in
subsection (a);
(3) agree to contribute in-kind resources towards the
establishment and maintenance of the clearinghouse and
agree to provide clearinghouse information, free of
charge, to the Secretary, States, counties, cities,
antihunger groups, and grassroots organizations that
assist individuals in becoming self-sufficient and
self-reliant;
(4) be sponsored by an organization, or be an
organization, that--
(A) has helped combat hunger for at least 10
years;
(B) is committed to reinvesting in the United
States; and
(C) is knowledgeable regarding Federal
nutrition programs;
(5) be experienced in communicating the purpose of
the clearinghouse through the media, including the
radio and print media, and be able to provide access to
the clearinghouse information through computer or
telecommunications technology, as well as through the
mails; and
(6) be able to provide examples, advice, and guidance
to States, counties, cities, communities, antihunger
groups, and local organizations regarding means of
assisting individuals and communities to reduce
reliance on government programs, reduce hunger, improve
nutrition, and otherwise assist low-income individuals
and communities become more self-sufficient.
(c) Audits.--The Secretary shall establish fair and
reasonable auditing procedures regarding the expenditures of
funds to carry out this section.
(d) Funding.--Out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the
Secretary to provide to the organization selected under this
section, to establish and maintain the information
clearinghouse, $200,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996,
$150,000 for fiscal year 1997, $100,000 for fiscal year 1998,
$166,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2004, and
$250,000 for each of fiscal years [2010 through 2017] 2010
through 2018. The Secretary shall be entitled to receive the
funds and shall accept the funds, without further
appropriation.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 514 OF THE HOUSING ACT OF 1949
insurance of loans for the provision of housing and related facilities
for domestic farm labor
Sec. 514. (a) The Secretary is authorized to insure and make
commitments to insure loans made by lenders other than the
United States to the owner of any farm or any association of
farmers for the purpose of providing housing and related
facilities for domestic farm labor, or to any Indian tribe for
such purpose, or to any State (or political subdivision
thereof), or any broad-based public or private nonprofit
organization, or any limited partnership in which the general
partner is a nonprofit entity, or any nonprofit organization of
farm workers incorporated within the State for the purpose of
providing housing and related facilities for domestic farm
labor any place within the State where a need exists. All such
loans shall be made in accordance with terms and conditions
substantially identical with those specified in section 502,
except that--
(1) no such loan shall be insured in an amount in
excess of the value of the farm involved less any prior
liens in the case of a loan to an individual owner of a
farm, or the total estimated value of the structures
and facilities with respect to which the loan is made
in the case of any other loan;
(2) no such loan shall be insured if it bears
interest at a rate in excess of 1 per centum per annum;
(3) out of interest payments by the borrower the
Secretary shall retain a charge in an amount not less
than one-half of 1 per centum per annum of the unpaid
principal balance of the loan;
(4) the insurance contracts and agreements with
respect to any loan may contain provisions for
servicing the loan by the Secretary or by the lender,
and for the purchase by the Secretary of the loan if it
is not in default, on such terms and conditions as the
Secretary may prescribe; and
(5) the Secretary may take mortgages creating a lien
running to the United States for the benefit of the
insurance fund referred to in subsection (b)
notwithstanding the fact that the note may be held by
the lender or his assignee.
(b) The Secretary shall utilize the insurance fund created by
section 11 of the Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act (7 U.S.C.
1005a) and the provisions of section 13 (a), (b), and (c) of
such Act (7 U.S.C. 1005c (a), (b), and (c)) to discharge
obligations under insurance contracts made pursuant to this
section, and
(1) the Secretary may utilize the insurance fund to
pay taxes, insurance, prior liens, and other expenses
to protect the security for loans which have been
insured hereunder and to acquire such security property
at foreclosure sales or otherwise;
(2) the notes and security therefor acquired by the
Secretary under insurance contracts made pursuant to
this section shall become a part of the insurance fund.
Loans insured under this section may be held in the
fund and collected in accordance with their terms or
may be sold and reinsured. All proceeds from such
collections, including the liquidation of security and
the proceeds of sales, shall become a part of the
insurance fund; and
(3) of the charges retained by the Secretary out of
interest payments by the borrower, amounts not less
than one-half of 1 per centum per annum of the unpaid
principal balance of the loan shall be deposited in and
become a part of the insurance fund. The remainder of
such charges shall be deposited in the Treasury of the
United States and shall be available for administrative
expenses of the Farmers Home Administration, to be
transferred annually to and become merged with any
appropriation for such expenses.
(c) Any contract of insurance executed by the Secretary under
this section shall be an obligation of the United States and
incontestable except for fraud or misrepresentation of which
the holder of the contract has actual knowledge.
(e) Amounts made available pursuant to section 513 of this
Act shall be available for administrative expenses incurred
under this section.
(f) As used in this section--
(1) the term ``housing'' means (A) new structures
(including household furnishings) suitable for dwelling
use by domestic farm labor, and (B) existing structures
(including household furnishings) which can be made
suitable for dwelling use by domestic farm labor by
rehabilitation, alteration, conversion, or
improvements;
(2) the term ``related facilities'' means (A) new
stuctures (including household furnishings) suitable
for use as dining halls, community rooms or buildings,
or infirmaries, or for other essential services
facilities, (B) existing structures (including
household furnishings) which can be made suitable for
the above uses by rehabilitation, alteration,
conversion, or improvement and (C) necessary for an
adequate site; and
(3) the term ``domestic farm labor'' means any person
(and the family of such person) who receives a
substantial portion of his or her income from primary
production of agricultural or aquacultural commodities,
the handling of agricultural or aquacultural
commodities in the unprocessed stage, or the processing
of agricultural or aquacultural commodities, without
respect to the source of employment, except that--
(A) such person shall be a citizen of the
United States, or a person legally admitted for
permanent residence, or a person legally
admitted to the United States and authorized to
work in agriculture;
(B) such term includes any person (and the
family of such person) who is retired or
disabled, but who was domestic farm labor at
the time of retirement or becoming disabled;
and
(C) in applying this paragraph with respect
to vacant units in farm labor housing, the
Secretary shall make units available for
occupancy in the following order of priority:
(i) to active farm laborers (and
their families);
(ii) to retired or disabled farm
laborers (and their families) who were
active in the local farm labor market
at the time of retiring or becoming
disabled; and
(iii) to other retired or disabled
farm laborers (and their families).
(g) The Secretary may waive the interest rate limitation
contained in subsection (a)(2) and the requirement of section
501(c)(3) in any case in which the Secretary determines that
qualified public or private nonprofit sponsors are not
currently available and are not likely to become available
within a reasonable period of time and such waiver is necessary
to permit farmers to provide housing and related facilities for
migrant domestic farm laborers, except that the benefits
resulting from such waiver shall accrue to the tenants, and the
interest rate on a loan insured under this section and for
which the Secretary permits such waiver shall be no less than
one-eighth of 1 per centum above the average interest rate on
notes or other obligations which are issued under section 511
and have maturities comparable to such a loan.
(h) In making available assistance in any area under this
section or section 516, the Secretary shall--
(1) in determining the need for the assistance, take
into consideration the housing needs only of domestic
farm labor, including migrant farmworkers, in the area;
and
(2) in determining whether to provide such
assistance, make such determination without regard to
the extent or nature of other housing needs in the
area.
(i) Housing and related facilities constructed with loans
under this section may be used for tenants eligible for
occupancy under section 515 if the Secretary determines that--
(1) there is no longer a need in the area for farm
labor housing; or
(2) the need for such housing in the area has
diminished to the extent that the purpose of the loan,
providing housing for domestic farm labor, can no
longer be met.
----------
COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT
* * * * * * *
[Section 760 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2018 provides: ``[t]he provisions of sections 202 and 320 of
H.R. 238, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress (the `Commodity End-
User Relief Act'), as passed by the House of Representatives on
January 12, 2017, are hereby enacted into law''. The following
provisions reflect the proposed amendments from the version of
H.R. 238, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, as passed the House
of Representatives on January 12, 2017.]
SEC. 1A. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) Alternative trading system.--The term
``alternative trading system'' means an organization,
association, or group of persons that--
(A) is registered as a broker or dealer
pursuant to section 15(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (except paragraph (11)
thereof);
(B) performs the functions commonly performed
by an exchange (as defined in section 3(a)(1)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934);
(C) does not--
(i) set rules governing the conduct
of subscribers other than the conduct
of such subscribers' trading on the
alternative trading system; or
(ii) discipline subscribers other
than by exclusion from trading; and
(D) is exempt from the definition of the term
``exchange'' under such section 3(a)(1) by rule
or regulation of the Securities and Exchange
Commission on terms that require compliance
with regulations of its trading functions.
(2) Appropriate federal banking agency.--The term
``appropriate Federal banking agency''--
(A) has the meaning given the term in section
3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12
U.S.C. 1813);
(B) means the Board in the case of a
noninsured State bank; and
(C) is the Farm Credit Administration for
farm credit system institutions.
(3) Associated person of a security-based swap dealer
or major security-based swap participant.--The term
``associated person of a security-based swap dealer or
major security-based swap participant'' has the meaning
given the term in section 3(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)).
(4) Associated person of a swap dealer or major swap
participant.--
(A) In general.--The term ``associated person
of a swap dealer or major swap participant''
means a person who is associated with a swap
dealer or major swap participant as a partner,
officer, employee, or agent (or any person
occupying a similar status or performing
similar functions), in any capacity that
involves--
(i) the solicitation or acceptance of
swaps; or
(ii) the supervision of any person or
persons so engaged.
(B) Exclusion.--Other than for purposes of
section 4s(b)(6), the term ``associated person
of a swap dealer or major swap participant''
does not include any person associated with a
swap dealer or major swap participant the
functions of which are solely clerical or
ministerial.
(5) Board.--The term ``Board'' means the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
(6) Board of trade.--The term ``board of trade''
means any organized exchange or other trading facility.
(7) Cleared swap.--The term ``cleared swap'' means
any swap that is, directly or indirectly, submitted to
and cleared by a derivatives clearing organization
registered with the Commission.
(8) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission established under
section 2(a)(2).
(9) Commodity.--The term ``commodity'' means wheat,
cotton, rice, corn, oats, barley, rye, flaxseed, grain
sorghums, mill feeds, butter, eggs, Solanum tuberosum
(Irish potatoes), wool, wool tops, fats and oils
(including lard, tallow, cottonseed oil, peanut oil,
soybean oil, and all other fats and oils), cottonseed
meal, cottonseed, peanuts, soybeans, soybean meal,
livestock, livestock products, and frozen concentrated
orange juice, and all other goods and articles, except
onions (as provided by the first section of Public Law
85-839 (7 U.S.C. 13-1)) and motion picture box office
receipts (or any index, measure, value, or data related
to such receipts), and all services, rights, and
interests (except motion picture box office receipts,
or any index, measure, value or data related to such
receipts) in which contracts for future delivery are
presently or in the future dealt in.
(10) Commodity pool.--
(A) In general.--The term ``commodity pool''
means any investment trust, syndicate, or
similar form of enterprise operated for the
purpose of trading in commodity interests,
including any--
(i) commodity for future delivery,
security futures product, or swap;
(ii) agreement, contract, or
transaction described in section
2(c)(2)(C)(i) or section 2(c)(2)(D)(i);
(iii) commodity option authorized
under section 4c; or
(iv) leverage transaction authorized
under section 19.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``commodity pool'' any
investment trust, syndicate, or similar form of
enterprise if the Commission determines that
the rule or regulation will effectuate the
purposes of this Act.
(11) Commodity pool operator.--
(A) In general.--The term ``commodity pool
operator'' means any person--
(i) engaged in a business that is of
the nature of a commodity pool,
investment trust, syndicate, or similar
form of enterprise, and who, in
connection therewith, solicits,
accepts, or receives from others,
funds, securities, or property, either
directly or through capital
contributions, the sale of stock or
other forms of securities, or
otherwise, for the purpose of trading
in commodity interests, including any--
(I) commodity for future
delivery, security futures
product, or swap;
(II) agreement, contract, or
transaction described in
section 2(c)(2)(C)(i) or
section 2(c)(2)(D)(i);
(III) commodity option
authorized under section 4c; or
(IV) leverage transaction
authorized under section 19; or
(ii) who is registered with the
Commission as a commodity pool
operator.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``commodity pool
operator'' any person engaged in a business
that is of the nature of a commodity pool,
investment trust, syndicate, or similar form of
enterprise if the Commission determines that
the rule or regulation will effectuate the
purposes of this Act.
(12) Commodity trading advisor.--
(A) In general.--Except as otherwise provided
in this paragraph, the term ``commodity trading
advisor'' means any person who--
(i) for compensation or profit,
engages in the business of advising
others, either directly or through
publications, writings, or electronic
media, as to the value of or the
advisability of trading in--
(I) any contract of sale of a
commodity for future delivery,
security futures product, or
swap;
(II) any agreement, contract,
or transaction described in
section 2(c)(2)(C)(i) or
section 2(c)(2)(D)(i)
(III) any commodity option
authorized under section 4c; or
(IV) any leverage transaction
authorized under section 19;
(ii) for compensation or profit, and
as part of a regular business, issues
or promulgates analyses or reports
concerning any of the activities
referred to in clause (i);
(iii) is registered with the
Commission as a commodity trading
advisor; or
(iv) the Commission, by rule or
regulation, may include if the
Commission determines that the rule or
regulation will effectuate the purposes
of this Act.
(B) Exclusions.--Subject to subparagraph (C),
the term ``commodity trading advisor'' does not
include--
(i) any bank or trust company or any
person acting as an employee thereof;
(ii) any news reporter, news
columnist, or news editor of the print
or electronic media, or any lawyer,
accountant, or teacher;
(iii) any floor broker or futures
commission merchant;
(iv) the publisher or producer of any
print or electronic data of general and
regular dissemination, including its
employees;
(v) the fiduciary of any defined
benefit plan that is subject to the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.);
(vi) any contract market or
derivatives transaction execution
facility; and
(vii) such other persons not within
the intent of this paragraph as the
Commission may specify by rule,
regulation, or order.
(C) Incidental services.--Subparagraph (B)
shall apply only if the furnishing of such
services by persons referred to in subparagraph
(B) is solely incidental to the conduct of
their business or profession.
(D) Advisors.--The Commission, by rule or
regulation, may include within the term
``commodity trading advisor'', any person
advising as to the value of commodities or
issuing reports or analyses concerning
commodities if the Commission determines that
the rule or regulation will effectuate the
purposes of this paragraph.
(13) Contract of sale.--The term ``contract of sale''
includes sales, agreements of sale, and agreements to
sell.
(14) Cooperative association of producers.--The term
``cooperative association of producers'' means any
cooperative association, corporate, or otherwise, not
less than 75 percent in good faith owned or controlled,
directly or indirectly, by producers of agricultural
products and otherwise complying with the Act of
February 18, 1922 (42 Stat. 388, chapter 57; 7 U.S.C.
291 and 292), including any organization acting for a
group of such associations and owned or controlled by
such associations, except that business done for or
with the United States, or any agency thereof, shall
not be considered either member or nonmember business
in determining the compliance of any such association
with this Act.
(15) Derivatives clearing organization.--
(A) In general.--The term ``derivatives
clearing organization'' means a clearinghouse,
clearing association, clearing corporation, or
similar entity, facility, system, or
organization that, with respect to an
agreement, contract, or transaction--
(i) enables each party to the
agreement, contract, or transaction to
substitute, through novation or
otherwise, the credit of the
derivatives clearing organization for
the credit of the parties;
(ii) arranges or provides, on a
multilateral basis, for the settlement
or netting of obligations resulting
from such agreements, contracts, or
transactions executed by participants
in the derivatives clearing
organization; or
(iii) otherwise provides clearing
services or arrangements that mutualize
or transfer among participants in the
derivatives clearing organization the
credit risk arising from such
agreements, contracts, or transactions
executed by the participants.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``derivatives
clearing organization'' does not include an
entity, facility, system, or organization
solely because it arranges or provides for--
(i) settlement, netting, or novation
of obligations resulting from
agreements, contracts, or transactions,
on a bilateral basis and without a
central counterparty;
(ii) settlement or netting of cash
payments through an interbank payment
system; or
(iii) settlement, netting, or
novation of obligations resulting from
a sale of a commodity in a transaction
in the spot market for the commodity.
(16) Electronic trading facility.--The term
``electronic trading facility'' means a trading
facility that--
(A) operates by means of an electronic or
telecommunications network; and
(B) maintains an automated audit trail of
bids, offers, and the matching of orders or the
execution of transactions on the facility.
(17) Eligible commercial entity.--The term ``eligible
commercial entity'' means, with respect to an
agreement, contract or transaction in a commodity--
(A) an eligible contract participant
described in clause (i), (ii), (v), (vii),
(viii), or (ix) of paragraph (18)(A) that, in
connection with its business--
(i) has a demonstrable ability,
directly or through separate
contractual arrangements, to make or
take delivery of the underlying
commodity;
(ii) incurs risks, in addition to
price risk, related to the commodity;
or
(iii) is a dealer that regularly
provides risk management or hedging
services to, or engages in market-
making activities with, the foregoing
entities involving transactions to
purchase or sell the commodity or
derivative agreements, contracts, or
transactions in the commodity;
(B) an eligible contract participant, other
than a natural person or an instrumentality,
department, or agency of a State or local
governmental entity, that--
(i) regularly enters into
transactions to purchase or sell the
commodity or derivative agreements,
contracts, or transactions in the
commodity; and
(ii) either--
(I) in the case of a
collective investment vehicle
whose participants include
persons other than--
(aa) qualified
eligible persons, as
defined in Commission
rule 4.7(a) (17 CFR
4.7(a));
(bb) accredited
investors, as defined
in Regulation D of the
Securities and Exchange
Commission under the
Securities Act of 1933
(17 CFR 230.501(a)),
with total assets of
$2,000,000; or
(cc) qualified
purchasers, as defined
in section 2(a)(51)(A)
of the Investment
Company Act of 1940;
in each case as in effect on
the date of the enactment of
the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000, has,
or is one of a group of
vehicles under common control
or management having in the
aggregate, $1,000,000,000 in
total assets; or
(II) in the case of other
persons, has, or is one of a
group of persons under common
control or management having in
the aggregate, $100,000,000 in
total assets; or
(C) such other persons as the Commission
shall determine appropriate and shall designate
by rule, regulation, or order.
(18) Eligible contract participant.--The term
``eligible contract participant'' means--
(A) acting for its own account--
(i) a financial institution;
(ii) an insurance company that is
regulated by a State, or that is
regulated by a foreign government and
is subject to comparable regulation as
determined by the Commission, including
a regulated subsidiary or affiliate of
such an insurance company;
(iii) an investment company subject
to regulation under the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et
seq.) or a foreign person performing a
similar role or function subject as
such to foreign regulation (regardless
of whether each investor in the
investment company or the foreign
person is itself an eligible contract
participant);
(iv) a commodity pool that--
(I) has total assets
exceeding $5,000,000; and
(II) is formed and operated
by a person subject to
regulation under this Act or a
foreign person performing a
similar role or function
subject as such to foreign
regulation (regardless of
whether each investor in the
commodity pool or the foreign
person is itself an eligible
contract participant) provided,
however, that for purposes of
section 2(c)(2)(B)(vi) and
section 2(c)(2)(C)(vii), the
term ``eligible contract
participant'' shall not include
a commodity pool in which any
participant is not otherwise an
eligible contract participant;
(v) a corporation, partnership,
proprietorship, organization, trust, or
other entity--
(I) that has total assets
exceeding $10,000,000;
(II) the obligations of which
under an agreement, contract,
or transaction are guaranteed
or otherwise supported by a
letter of credit or keepwell,
support, or other agreement by
an entity described in
subclause (I), in clause (i),
(ii), (iii), (iv), or (vii), or
in subparagraph (C); or
(III) that--
(aa) has a net worth
exceeding $1,000,000;
and
(bb) enters into an
agreement, contract, or
transaction in
connection with the
conduct of the entity's
business or to manage
the risk associated
with an asset or
liability owned or
incurred or reasonably
likely to be owned or
incurred by the entity
in the conduct of the
entity's business;
(vi) an employee benefit plan subject
to the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1001 et
seq.), a governmental employee benefit
plan, or a foreign person performing a
similar role or function subject as
such to foreign regulation--
(I) that has total assets
exceeding $5,000,000; or
(II) the investment decisions
of which are made by--
(aa) an investment
adviser or commodity
trading advisor subject
to regulation under the
Investment Advisers Act
of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-
1 et seq.) or this Act;
(bb) a foreign person
performing a similar
role or function
subject as such to
foreign regulation;
(cc) a financial
institution; or
(dd) an insurance
company described in
clause (ii), or a
regulated subsidiary or
affiliate of such an
insurance company;
(vii)(I) a governmental entity
(including the United States, a State,
or a foreign government) or political
subdivision of a governmental entity;
(II) a multinational or supranational
government entity; or
(III) an instrumentality, agency, or
department of an entity described in
subclause (I) or (II);
except that such term does not include
an entity, instrumentality, agency, or
department referred to in subclause (I)
or (III) of this clause unless (aa) the
entity, instrumentality, agency, or
department is a person described in
clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph
(17)(A); (bb) the entity,
instrumentality, agency, or department
owns and invests on a discretionary
basis $50,000,000 or more in
investments; or (cc) the agreement,
contract, or transaction is offered by,
and entered into with, an entity that
is listed in any of subclauses (I)
through (VI) of section 2(c)(2)(B)(ii);
(viii)(I) a broker or dealer subject
to regulation under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.) or a foreign person performing a
similar role or function subject as
such to foreign regulation, except
that, if the broker or dealer or
foreign person is a natural person or
proprietorship, the broker or dealer or
foreign person shall not be considered
to be an eligible contract participant
unless the broker or dealer or foreign
person also meets the requirements of
clause (v) or (xi);
(II) an associated person of a
registered broker or dealer concerning
the financial or securities activities
of which the registered person makes
and keeps records under section 15C(b)
or 17(h) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78o-5(b), 78q(h));
(III) an investment bank holding
company (as defined in section 17(i) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78q(i));
(ix) a futures commission merchant
subject to regulation under this Act or
a foreign person performing a similar
role or function subject as such to
foreign regulation, except that, if the
futures commission merchant or foreign
person is a natural person or
proprietorship, the futures commission
merchant or foreign person shall not be
considered to be an eligible contract
participant unless the futures
commission merchant or foreign person
also meets the requirements of clause
(v) or (xi);
(x) a floor broker or floor trader
subject to regulation under this Act in
connection with any transaction that
takes place on or through the
facilities of a registered entity
(other than an electronic trading
facility with respect to a significant
price discovery contract) or an exempt
board of trade, or any affiliate
thereof, on which such person regularly
trades; or
(xi) an individual who has amounts
invested on a discretionary basis, the
aggregate of which is in excess of--
(I) $10,000,000; or
(II) $5,000,000 and who
enters into the agreement,
contract, or transaction in
order to manage the risk
associated with an asset owned
or liability incurred, or
reasonably likely to be owned
or incurred, by the individual;
(B)(i) a person described in clause (i),
(ii), (iv), (v), (viii), (ix), or (x) of
subparagraph (A) or in subparagraph (C), acting
as broker or performing an equivalent agency
function on behalf of another person described
in subparagraph (A) or (C); or
(ii) an investment adviser subject to
regulation under the Investment Advisers Act of
1940, a commodity trading advisor subject to
regulation under this Act, a foreign person
performing a similar role or function subject
as such to foreign regulation, or a person
described in clause (i), (ii), (iv), (v),
(viii), (ix), or (x) of subparagraph (A) or in
subparagraph (C), in any such case acting as
investment manager or fiduciary (but excluding
a person acting as broker or performing an
equivalent agency function) for another person
described in subparagraph (A) or (C) and who is
authorized by such person to commit such person
to the transaction; or
(C) any other person that the Commission
determines to be eligible in light of the
financial or other qualifications of the
person.
(19) Excluded commodity.--The term ``excluded
commodity'' means--
(i) an interest rate, exchange rate,
currency, security, security index,
credit risk or measure, debt or equity
instrument, index or measure of
inflation, or other macroeconomic index
or measure;
(ii) any other rate, differential,
index, or measure of economic or
commercial risk, return, or value that
is--
(I) not based in substantial
part on the value of a narrow
group of commodities not
described in clause (i); or
(II) based solely on one or
more commodities that have no
cash market;
(iii) any economic or commercial
index based on prices, rates, values,
or levels that are not within the
control of any party to the relevant
contract, agreement, or transaction; or
(iv) an occurrence, extent of an
occurrence, or contingency (other than
a change in the price, rate, value, or
level of a commodity not described in
clause (i)) that is--
(I) beyond the control of the
parties to the relevant
contract, agreement, or
transaction; and
(II) associated with a
financial, commercial, or
economic consequence.
(20) Exempt commodity.--The term ``exempt commodity''
means a commodity that is not an excluded commodity or
an agricultural commodity.
(21) Financial institution.--The term ``financial
institution'' means--
(A) a corporation operating under the fifth
undesignated paragraph of section 25 of the
Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 603), commonly
known as ``an agreement corporation'';
(B) a corporation organized under section 25A
of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 611 et
seq.), commonly known as an ``Edge Act
corporation'';
(C) an institution that is regulated by the
Farm Credit Administration;
(D) a Federal credit union or State credit
union (as defined in section 101 of the Federal
Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C. 1752));
(E) a depository institution (as defined in
section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
(12 U.S.C. 1813));
(F) a foreign bank or a branch or agency of a
foreign bank (each as defined in section 1(b)
of the International Banking Act of 1978 (12
U.S.C. 3101(b)));
(G) any financial holding company (as defined
in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of
1956);
(H) a trust company; or
(I) a similarly regulated subsidiary or
affiliate of an entity described in any of
subparagraphs (A) through (H).
(22) Floor broker.--
(A) In general.--The term ``floor broker''
means any person--
(i) who, in or surrounding any pit,
ring, post, or other place provided by
a contract market for the meeting of
persons similarly engaged, shall
purchase or sell for any other person--
(I) any commodity for future
delivery, security futures
product, or swap; or
(II) any commodity option
authorized under section 4c; or
(ii) who is registered with the
Commission as a floor broker.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``floor broker'' any
person in or surrounding any pit, ring, post,
or other place provided by a contract market
for the meeting of persons similarly engaged
who trades for any other person if the
Commission determines that the rule or
regulation will effectuate the purposes of this
Act.
(23) Floor trader.--
(A) In general.--The term ``floor trader''
means any person--
(i) who, in or surrounding any pit,
ring, post, or other place provided by
a contract market for the meeting of
persons similarly engaged, purchases,
or sells solely for such person's own
account--
(I) any commodity for future
delivery, security futures
product, or swap; or
(II) any commodity option
authorized under section 4c; or
(ii) who is registered with the
Commission as a floor trader.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``floor trader'' any
person in or surrounding any pit, ring, post,
or other place provided by a contract market
for the meeting of persons similarly engaged
who trades solely for such person's own account
if the Commission determines that the rule or
regulation will effectuate the purposes of this
Act.
(24) Foreign exchange forward.--The term ``foreign
exchange forward'' means a transaction that solely
involves the exchange of 2 different currencies on a
specific future date at a fixed rate agreed upon on the
inception of the contract covering the exchange.
(25) Foreign exchange swap.--The term ``foreign
exchange swap'' means a transaction that solely
involves--
(A) an exchange of 2 different currencies on
a specific date at a fixed rate that is agreed
upon on the inception of the contract covering
the exchange; and
(B) a reverse exchange of the 2 currencies
described in subparagraph (A) at a later date
and at a fixed rate that is agreed upon on the
inception of the contract covering the
exchange.
(26) Foreign futures authority.--The term ``foreign
futures authority'' means any foreign government, or
any department, agency, governmental body, or
regulatory organization empowered by a foreign
government to administer or enforce a law, rule, or
regulation as it relates to a futures or options
matter, or any department or agency of a political
subdivision of a foreign government empowered to
administer or enforce a law, rule, or regulation as it
relates to a futures or options matter.
(27) Future delivery.--The term ``future delivery''
does not include any sale of any cash commodity for
deferred shipment or delivery.
(28) Futures commission merchant.--
(A) In general.--The term ``futures
commission merchant'' means an individual,
association, partnership, corporation, or
trust--
(i) that--
(I) is--
(aa) engaged in
soliciting or in
accepting orders for--
(AA) the
purchase or
sale of a
commodity for
future
delivery;
(BB) a
security
futures
product;
(CC) a swap;
(DD) any
agreement,
contract, or
transaction
described in
section
2(c)(2)(C)(i)
or section
2(c)(2)(D)(i);
(EE) any
commodity
option
authorized
under section
4c; or
(FF) any
leverage
transaction
authorized
under section
19; or
(bb) acting as a
counterparty in any
agreement, contract, or
transaction described
in section
2(c)(2)(C)(i) or
section 2(c)(2)(D)(i);
and
(II) in or in connection with
the activities described in
items (aa) or (bb) of subclause
(I), accepts any money,
securities, or property (or
extends credit in lieu thereof)
to margin, guarantee, or secure
any trades or contracts that
result or may result therefrom;
or
(ii) that is registered with the
Commission as a futures commission
merchant.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``futures commission
merchant'' any person who engages in soliciting
or accepting orders for, or acting as a
counterparty in, any agreement, contract, or
transaction subject to this Act, and who
accepts any money, securities, or property (or
extends credit in lieu thereof) to margin,
guarantee, or secure any trades or contracts
that result or may result therefrom, if the
Commission determines that the rule or
regulation will effectuate the purposes of this
Act.
(29) Hybrid instrument.--The term ``hybrid
instrument'' means a security having one or more
payments indexed to the value, level, or rate of, or
providing for the delivery of, one or more commodities.
(30) Interstate commerce.--The term ``interstate
commerce'' means commerce--
(A) between any State, territory, or
possession, or the District of Columbia, and
any place outside thereof; or
(B) between points within the same State,
territory, or possession, or the District of
Columbia, but through any place outside
thereof, or within any territory or possession,
or the District of Columbia.
(31) Introducing broker.--
(A) In general.--The term ``introducing
broker'' means any person (except an individual
who elects to be and is registered as an
associated person of a futures commission
merchant)--
(i) who--
(I) is engaged in soliciting
or in accepting orders for--
(aa) the purchase or
sale of any commodity
for future delivery,
security futures
product, or swap;
(bb) any agreement,
contract, or
transaction described
in section
2(c)(2)(C)(i) or
section 2(c)(2)(D)(i);
(cc) any commodity
option authorized under
section 4c; or
(dd) any leverage
transaction authorized
under section 19; and
(II) does not accept any
money, securities, or property
(or extend credit in lieu
thereof) to margin, guarantee,
or secure any trades or
contracts that result or may
result therefrom; or
(ii) who is registered with the
Commission as an introducing broker.
(B) Further definition.--The Commission, by
rule or regulation, may include within, or
exclude from, the term ``introducing broker''
any person who engages in soliciting or
accepting orders for any agreement, contract,
or transaction subject to this Act, and who
does not accept any money, securities, or
property (or extend credit in lieu thereof) to
margin, guarantee, or secure any trades or
contracts that result or may result therefrom,
if the Commission determines that the rule or
regulation will effectuate the purposes of this
Act.
(32) Major security-based swap participant.--The term
``major security-based swap participant'' has the
meaning given the term in section 3(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)).
(33) Major swap participant.--
(A) In general.--The term ``major swap
participant'' means any person who is not a
swap dealer, and--
(i) maintains a substantial position
in swaps for any of the major swap
categories as determined by the
Commission, excluding--
(I) positions held for
hedging or mitigating
commercial risk; and
(II) positions maintained by
any employee benefit plan (or
any contract held by such a
plan) as defined in paragraphs
(3) and (32) of section 3 of
the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.
1002) for the primary purpose
of hedging or mitigating any
risk directly associated with
the operation of the plan;
(ii) whose outstanding swaps create
substantial counterparty exposure that
could have serious adverse effects on
the financial stability of the United
States banking system or financial
markets; or
(iii)(I) is a financial entity that
is highly leveraged relative to the
amount of capital it holds and that is
not subject to capital requirements
established by an appropriate Federal
banking agency; and
(II) maintains a substantial position
in outstanding swaps in any major swap
category as determined by the
Commission.
(B) Definition of substantial position.--For
purposes of subparagraph (A), the Commission
shall define by rule or regulation the term
``substantial position'' at the threshold that
the Commission determines to be prudent for the
effective monitoring, management, and oversight
of entities that are systemically important or
can significantly impact the financial system
of the United States. In setting the definition
under this subparagraph, the Commission shall
consider the person's relative position in
uncleared as opposed to cleared swaps and may
take into consideration the value and quality
of collateral held against counterparty
exposures.
(C) Scope of designation.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), a person may be designated as
a major swap participant for 1 or more
categories of swaps without being classified as
a major swap participant for all classes of
swaps.
(D) Exclusions.--The definition under this
paragraph shall not include an entity whose
primary business is providing financing, and
uses derivatives for the purpose of hedging
underlying commercial risks related to interest
rate and foreign currency exposures, 90 percent
or more of which arise from financing that
facilitates the purchase or lease of products,
90 percent or more of which are manufactured by
the parent company or another subsidiary of the
parent company.
(34) Member of a registered entity; member of a
derivatives transaction execution facility.--The term
``member'' means, with respect to a registered entity
or derivatives transaction execution facility, an
individual, association, partnership, corporation, or
trust--
(A) owning or holding membership in, or
admitted to membership representation on, the
registered entity or derivatives transaction
execution facility; or
(B) having trading privileges on the
registered entity or derivatives transaction
execution facility.
A participant in an alternative trading system that is
designated as a contract market pursuant to section 5f
is deemed a member of the contract market for purposes
of transactions in security futures products through
the contract market.
(35) Narrow-based security index.--
(A) The term ``narrow-based security index''
means an index--
(i) that has 9 or fewer component
securities;
(ii) in which a component security
comprises more than 30 percent of the
index's weighting;
(iii) in which the five highest
weighted component securities in the
aggregate comprise more than 60 percent
of the index's weighting; or
(iv) in which the lowest weighted
component securities comprising, in the
aggregate, 25 percent of the index's
weighting have an aggregate dollar
value of average daily trading volume
of less than $50,000,000 (or in the
case of an index with 15 or more
component securities, $30,000,000),
except that if there are two or more
securities with equal weighting that
could be included in the calculation of
the lowest weighted component
securities comprising, in the
aggregate, 25 percent of the index's
weighting, such securities shall be
ranked from lowest to highest dollar
value of average daily trading volume
and shall be included in the
calculation based on their ranking
starting with the lowest ranked
security.
(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), an
index is not a narrow-based security index if--
(i)(I) it has at least 9 component
securities;
(II) no component security comprises
more than 30 percent of the index's
weighting; and
(III) each component security is--
(aa) registered pursuant to
section 12 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934;
(bb) one of 750 securities
with the largest market
capitalization; and
(cc) one of 675 securities
with the largest dollar value
of average daily trading
volume;
(ii) a board of trade was designated
as a contract market by the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission with respect
to a contract of sale for future
delivery on the index, before the date
of the enactment of the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act of 2000;
(iii)(I) a contract of sale for
future delivery on the index traded on
a designated contract market or
registered derivatives transaction
execution facility for at least 30 days
as a contract of sale for future
delivery on an index that was not a
narrow-based security index; and
(II) it has been a narrow-based
security index for no more than 45
business days over 3 consecutive
calendar months;
(iv) a contract of sale for future
delivery on the index is traded on or
subject to the rules of a foreign board
of trade and meets such requirements as
are jointly established by rule or
regulation by the Commission and the
Securities and Exchange Commission;
(v) no more than 18 months have
passed since the date of the enactment
of the Commodity Futures Modernization
Act of 2000 and--
(I) it is traded on or
subject to the rules of a
foreign board of trade;
(II) the offer and sale in
the United States of a contract
of sale for future delivery on
the index was authorized before
the date of the enactment of
the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000; and
(III) the conditions of such
authorization continue to be
met; or
(vi) a contract of sale for future
delivery on the index is traded on or
subject to the rules of a board of
trade and meets such requirements as
are jointly established by rule,
regulation, or order by the Commission
and the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
(C) Within 1 year after the date of the
enactment of the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000, the Commission and
the Securities and Exchange Commission jointly
shall adopt rules or regulations that set forth
the requirements under subparagraph (B)(iv).
(D) An index that is a narrow-based security
index solely because it was a narrow-based
security index for more than 45 business days
over 3 consecutive calendar months pursuant to
clause (iii) of subparagraph (B) shall not be a
narrow-based security index for the 3 following
calendar months.
(E) For purposes of subparagraphs (A) and
(B)--
(i) the dollar value of average daily
trading volume and the market
capitalization shall be calculated as
of the preceding 6 full calendar
months; and
(ii) the Commission and the
Securities and Exchange Commission
shall, by rule or regulation, jointly
specify the method to be used to
determine market capitalization and
dollar value of average daily trading
volume.
(36) Option.--The term ``option'' means an agreement,
contract, or transaction that is of the character of,
or is commonly known to the trade as, an ``option'',
``privilege'', ``indemnity'', ``bid'', ``offer'',
``put'', ``call'', ``advance guaranty'', or ``decline
guaranty''.
(37) Organized exchange.--The term ``organized
exchange'' means a trading facility that--
(A) permits trading--
(i) by or on behalf of a person that
is not an eligible contract
participant; or
(ii) by persons other than on a
principal-to-principal basis; or
(B) has adopted (directly or through another
nongovernmental entity) rules that--
(i) govern the conduct of
participants, other than rules that
govern the submission of orders or
execution of transactions on the
trading facility; and
(ii) include disciplinary sanctions
other than the exclusion of
participants from trading.
(38) Person.--The term ``person'' imports the plural
or singular, and includes individuals, associations,
partnerships, corporations, and trusts.
(39) Prudential regulator.--The term ``prudential
regulator'' means--
(A) the Board in the case of a swap dealer,
major swap participant, security-based swap
dealer, or major security-based swap
participant that is--
(i) a State-chartered bank that is a
member of the Federal Reserve System;
(ii) a State-chartered branch or
agency of a foreign bank;
(iii) any foreign bank which does not
operate an insured branch;
(iv) any organization operating under
section 25A of the Federal Reserve Act
or having an agreement with the Board
under section 225 of the Federal
Reserve Act;
(v) any bank holding company (as
defined in section 2 of the Bank
Holding Company Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C.
1841)), any foreign bank (as defined in
section 1(b)(7) of the International
Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C.
3101(b)(7)) that is treated as a bank
holding company under section 8(a) of
the International Banking Act of 1978
(12 U.S.C. 3106(a)), and any subsidiary
of such a company or foreign bank
(other than a subsidiary that is
described in subparagraph (A) or (B) or
that is required to be registered with
the Commission as a swap dealer or
major swap participant under this Act
or with the Securities and Exchange
Commission as a security-based swap
dealer or major security-based swap
participant);
(vi) after the transfer date (as
defined in section 311 of the Dodd-
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act), any savings and loan
holding company (as defined in section
10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12
U.S.C. 1467a)) and any subsidiary of
such company (other than a subsidiary
that is described in subparagraph (A)
or (B) or that is required to be
registered as a swap dealer or major
swap participant with the Commission
under this Act or with the Securities
and Exchange Commission as a security-
based swap dealer or major security-
based swap participant); or
(vii) any organization operating
under section 25A of the Federal
Reserve Act (12U.S.C. 611 et seq.) or
having an agreement with the Board
under section 25 of the Federal Reserve
Act (12 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
(B) the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency in the case of a swap dealer, major
swap participant, security-based swap dealer,
or major security-based swap participant that
is--
(i) a national bank;
(ii) a federally chartered branch or
agency of a foreign bank; or
(iii) any Federal savings
association;
(C) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
in the case of a swap dealer, major swap
participant, security-based swap dealer, or
major security-based swap participant that is--
(i) a State-chartered bank that is
not a member of the Federal Reserve
System; or
(ii) any State savings association;
(D) the Farm Credit Administration, in the
case of a swap dealer, major swap participant,
security-based swap dealer, or major security-
based swap participant that is an institution
chartered under the Farm Credit Act of 1971 (12
U.S.C. 2001 et seq.); and
(E) the Federal Housing Finance Agency in the
case of a swap dealer, major swap participant,
security-based swap dealer, or major security-
based swap participant that is a regulated
entity (as such term is defined in section 1303
of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial
Safety and Soundness Act of 1992).
(40) Registered entity.--The term ``registered
entity'' means--
(A) a board of trade designated as a contract
market under section 5;
(B) a derivatives clearing organization
registered under section 5b;
(C) a board of trade designated as a contract
market under section 5f;
(D) a swap execution facility registered
under section 5h;
(E) a swap data repository registered under
section 21; and
(F) with respect to a contract that the
Commission determines is a significant price
discovery contract, any electronic trading
facility on which the contract is executed or
traded.
(41) Security.--The term ``security'' means a
security as defined in section 2(a)(1) of the
Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(1)) or section
3(a)(10) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78c(a)(10)).
(42) Security-based swap.--The term ``security-based
swap'' has the meaning given the term in section 3(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78c(a)).
(43) Security-based swap dealer.--The term
``security-based swap dealer'' has the meaning given
the term in section 3(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)).
(44) Security future.--The term ``security future''
means a contract of sale for future delivery of a
single security or of a narrow-based security index,
including any interest therein or based on the value
thereof, except an exempted security under section
3(a)(12) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as in
effect on the date of the enactment of the Futures
Trading Act of 1982 (other than any municipal security
as defined in section 3(a)(29) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 as in effect on the date of the
enactment of the Futures Trading Act of 1982). The term
``security future'' does not include any agreement,
contract, or transaction excluded from this Act under
section 2(c), 2(d), 2(f), or 2(g) of this Act (as in
effect on the date of the enactment of the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act of 2000) or title IV of the
Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.
(45) Security futures product.--The term ``security
futures product'' means a security future or any put,
call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security
future.
(46) Significant price discovery contract.--The term
``significant price discovery contract'' means an
agreement, contract, or transaction subject to section
2(h)(5).
(47) Swap.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (B), the term ``swap'' means any
agreement, contract, or transaction--
(i) that is a put, call, cap, floor,
collar, or similar option of any kind
that is for the purchase or sale, or
based on the value, of 1 or more
interest or other rates, currencies,
commodities, securities, instruments of
indebtedness, indices, quantitative
measures, or other financial or
economic interests or property of any
kind;
(ii) that provides for any purchase,
sale, payment, or delivery (other than
a dividend on an equity security) that
is dependent on the occurrence,
nonoccurrence, or the extent of the
occurrence of an event or contingency
associated with a potential financial,
economic, or commercial consequence;
(iii) that provides on an executory
basis for the exchange, on a fixed or
contingent basis, of 1 or more payments
based on the value or level of 1 or
more interest or other rates,
currencies, commodities, securities,
instruments of indebtedness, indices,
quantitative measures, or other
financial or economic interests or
property of any kind, or any interest
therein or based on the value thereof,
and that transfers, as between the
parties to the transaction, in whole or
in part, the financial risk associated
with a future change in any such value
or level without also conveying a
current or future direct or indirect
ownership interest in an asset
(including any enterprise or investment
pool) or liability that incorporates
the financial risk so transferred,
including any agreement, contract, or
transaction commonly known as--
(I) an interest rate swap;
(II) a rate floor;
(III) a rate cap;
(IV) a rate collar;
(V) a cross-currency rate
swap;
(VI) a basis swap;
(VII) a currency swap;
(VIII) a foreign exchange
swap;
(IX) a total return swap;
(X) an equity index swap;
(XI) an equity swap;
(XII) a debt index swap;
(XIII) a debt swap;
(XIV) a credit spread;
(XV) a credit default swap;
(XVI) a credit swap;
(XVII) a weather swap;
(XVIII) an energy swap;
(XIX) a metal swap;
(XX) an agricultural swap;
(XXI) an emissions swap; and
(XXII) a commodity swap;
(iv) that is an agreement, contract,
or transaction that is, or in the
future becomes, commonly known to the
trade as a swap;
(v) including any security-based swap
agreement which meets the definition of
``swap agreement'' as defined in
section 206A of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley
Act (15 U.S.C. 78c note) of which a
material term is based on the price,
yield, value, or volatility of any
security or any group or index of
securities, or any interest therein; or
(vi) that is any combination or
permutation of, or option on, any
agreement, contract, or transaction
described in any of clauses (i) through
(v).
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``swap'' does not
include--
(i) any contract of sale of a
commodity for future delivery (or
option on such a contract), leverage
contract authorized under section 19,
security futures product, or agreement,
contract, or transaction described in
section 2(c)(2)(C)(i) or section
2(c)(2)(D)(i);
(ii) any sale of a nonfinancial
commodity or security for deferred
shipment or delivery, so long as the
transaction is intended to be
physically settled;
(iii) any put, call, straddle,
option, or privilege on any security,
certificate of deposit, or group or
index of securities, including any
interest therein or based on the value
thereof, that is subject to--
(I) the Securities Act of
1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.);
and
(II) the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.);
(iv) any put, call, straddle, option,
or privilege relating to a foreign
currency entered into on a national
securities exchange registered pursuant
to section 6(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78f(a));
(v) any agreement, contract, or
transaction providing for the purchase
or sale of 1 or more securities on a
fixed basis that is subject to--
(I) the Securities Act of
1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.);
and
(II) the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.);
(vi) any agreement, contract, or
transaction providing for the purchase
or sale of 1 or more securities on a
contingent basis that is subject to the
Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a
et seq.) and the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.),
unless the agreement, contract, or
transaction predicates the purchase or
sale on the occurrence of a bona fide
contingency that might reasonably be
expected to affect or be affected by
the creditworthiness of a party other
than a party to the agreement,
contract, or transaction;
(vii) any note, bond, or evidence of
indebtedness that is a security, as
defined in section 2(a)(1) of the
Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C.
77b(a)(1));
(viii) any agreement, contract, or
transaction that is--
(I) based on a security; and
(II) entered into directly or
through an underwriter (as
defined in section 2(a)(11) of
the Securities Act of 1933 (15
U.S.C. 77b(a)(11)) by the
issuer of such security for the
purposes of raising capital,
unless the agreement, contract,
or transaction is entered into
to manage a risk associated
with capital raising;
(ix) any agreement, contract, or
transaction a counterparty of which is
a Federal Reserve bank, the Federal
Government, or a Federal agency that is
expressly backed by the full faith and
credit of the United States; and
(x) any security-based swap, other
than a security-based swap as described
in subparagraph (D).
(C) Rule of construction regarding master
agreements.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided
in clause (ii), the term ``swap''
includes a master agreement that
provides for an agreement, contract, or
transaction that is a swap under
subparagraph (A), together with each
supplement to any master agreement,
without regard to whether the master
agreement contains an agreement,
contract, or transaction that is not a
swap pursuant to subparagraph (A).
(ii) Exception.--For purposes of
clause (i), the master agreement shall
be considered to be a swap only with
respect to each agreement, contract, or
transaction covered by the master
agreement that is a swap pursuant to
subparagraph (A).
(D) Mixed swap.--The term ``security-based
swap'' includes any agreement, contract, or
transaction that is as described in section
3(a)(68)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(68)(A)) and also is
based on the value of 1 or more interest or
other rates, currencies, commodities,
instruments of indebtedness, indices,
quantitative measures, other financial or
economic interest or property of any kind
(other than a single security or a narrow-based
security index), or the occurrence, non-
occurrence, or the extent of the occurrence of
an event or contingency associated with a
potential financial, economic, or commercial
consequence (other than an event described in
subparagraph (A)(iii)).
(E) Treatment of foreign exchange swaps and
forwards.--
(i) In general.--Foreign exchange
swaps and foreign exchange forwards
shall be considered swaps under this
paragraph unless the Secretary makes a
written determination under section 1b
that either foreign exchange swaps or
foreign exchange forwards or both--
(I) should be not be
regulated as swaps under this
Act; and
(II) are not structured to
evade the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act in violation of
any rule promulgated by the
Commission pursuant to section
721(c) of that Act.
(ii) Congressional notice;
effectiveness.--The Secretary shall
submit any written determination under
clause (i) to the appropriate
committees of Congress, including the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry of the Senate and the
Committee on Agriculture of the House
of Representatives. Any such written
determination by the Secretary shall
not be effective until it is submitted
to the appropriate committees of
Congress.
(iii) Reporting.--Notwithstanding a
written determination by the Secretary
under clause (i), all foreign exchange
swaps and foreign exchange forwards
shall be reported to either a swap data
repository, or, if there is no swap
data repository that would accept such
swaps or forwards, to the Commission
pursuant to section 4r within such time
period as the Commission may by rule or
regulation prescribe.
(iv) Business standards.--
Notwithstanding a written determination
by the Secretary pursuant to clause
(i), any party to a foreign exchange
swap or forward that is a swap dealer
or major swap participant shall conform
to the business conduct standards
contained in section 4s(h).
(v) Secretary.--For purposes of this
subparagraph, the term ``Secretary''
means the Secretary of the Treasury.
(F) Exception for certain foreign exchange
swaps and forwards.--
(i) Registered entities.--Any foreign
exchange swap and any foreign exchange
forward that is listed and traded on or
subject to the rules of a designated
contract market or a swap execution
facility, or that is cleared by a
derivatives clearing organization,
shall not be exempt from any provision
of this Act or amendments made by the
Wall Street Transparency and
Accountability Act of 2010 prohibiting
fraud or manipulation.
(ii) Retail transactions.--Nothing in
subparagraph (E) shall affect, or be
construed to affect, the applicability
of this Act or the jurisdiction of the
Commission with respect to agreements,
contracts, or transactions in foreign
currency pursuant to section 2(c)(2).
(G) Treatment of transactions between
affiliates.--
(i) Exemption from swap rules.--An
agreement, contract, or transaction
described in subparagraphs (A) through
(F) shall not be regulated as a swap
under this Act if all of the following
apply with respect to the agreement,
contract, or transaction:
(I) Affiliation.--One
counterparty, directly or
indirectly, holds a majority
ownership interest in the other
counterparty, or a third party,
directly or indirectly, holds a
majority ownership interest in
both counterparties.
(II) Financial statements.--
The affiliated counterparty
that holds the majority
interest in the other
counterparty or the third party
that, directly or indirectly,
holds the majority interests in
both affiliated counterparties,
reports its financial
statements on a consolidated
basis under generally accepted
accounting principles or
International Financial
Reporting Standards, or other
similar standards, and the
financial statements include
the financial results of the
majority-owned affiliated
counterparty or counterparties.
(ii) Reporting requirement.--If at
least one counterparty to an agreement,
contract, or transaction that meets the
requirements of clause (i) is a swap
dealer or major swap participant, that
counterparty shall report the
agreement, contract, or transaction
pursuant to section 4r, within such
time period as the Commission may by
rule or regulation prescribe--
(I) to a swap data
repository; or
(II) if there is no swap data
repository that would accept
the agreement, contract or
transaction, to the Commission.
(iii) Risk management requirement.--
If at least one counterparty to an
agreement, contract, or transaction
that meets the requirements of clause
(i) is a swap dealer or major swap
participant, the agreement, contract,
or transaction shall be subject to a
centralized risk management program
pursuant to section 4s(j) that is
reasonably designed to monitor and to
manage the risks associated with the
agreement, contract, or transaction.
(iv) Variation margin requirement.--
Affiliated counterparties to an
agreement, contract, or transaction
that meets the requirements of clause
(i) shall exchange variation margin to
the extent prescribed under any rule
promulgated by the Commission or any
prudential regulator pursuant to
section 4s(e).
(v) Anti-evasion requirement.--An
agreement, contract, or transaction
that meets the requirements of clause
(i) shall not be structured to evade
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act in violation of
any rule promulgated by the Commission
pursuant to section 721(c) of such Act.
(48) Swap data repository.--The term ``swap data
repository'' means any person that collects and
maintains information or records with respect to
transactions or positions in, or the terms and
conditions of, swaps entered into by third parties for
the purpose of providing a centralized recordkeeping
facility for swaps.
(49) Swap dealer.--
(A) In general.--The term ``swap dealer''
means any person who--
(i) holds itself out as a dealer in
swaps;
(ii) makes a market in swaps;
(iii) regularly enters into swaps
with counterparties as an ordinary
course of business for its own account;
or
(iv) engages in any activity causing
the person to be commonly known in the
trade as a dealer or market maker in
swaps,
provided however, in no event shall an insured
depository institution be considered to be a
swap dealer to the extent it offers to enter
into a swap with a customer in connection with
originating a loan with that customer.
(B) Inclusion.--A person may be designated as
a swap dealer for a single type or single class
or category of swap or activities and
considered not to be a swap dealer for other
types, classes, or categories of swaps or
activities.
(C) Exception.--The term ``swap dealer'' does
not include a person that enters into swaps for
such person's own account, either individually
or in a fiduciary capacity, but not as a part
of a regular business.
(D) De minimis exception.--The Commission
shall exempt from designation as a swap dealer
an entity that engages in a de minimis quantity
of swap dealing in connection with transactions
with or on behalf of its customers. The
Commission shall promulgate regulations to
establish factors with respect to the making of
this determination to exempt.
(50) Swap execution facility.--The term ``swap
execution facility'' means a trading system or platform
in which multiple participants have the ability to
execute or trade swaps by accepting bids and offers
made by multiple participants in the facility or
system, through any means of interstate commerce,
including any trading facility, that--
(A) facilitates the execution of swaps
between persons; and
(B) is not a designated contract market.
(51) Trading facility.--
(A) In general.--The term ``trading
facility'' means a person or group of persons
that constitutes, maintains, or provides a
physical or electronic facility or system in
which multiple participants have the ability to
execute or trade agreements, contracts, or
transactions--
(i) by accepting bids or offers made
by other participants that are open to
multiple partipants in the facility or
system; or
(ii) through the interaction of
multiple bids or multiple offers within
a system with a pre-determined non-
discretionary automated trade matching
and execution algorithm.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``trading
facility'' does not include--
(i) a person or group of persons
solely because the person or group of
persons constitutes, maintains, or
provides an electronic facility or
system that enables participants to
negotiate the terms of and enter into
bilateral transactions as a result of
communications exchanged by the parties
and not from interaction of multiple
bids and multiple offers within a
predetermined, nondiscretionary
automated trade matching and execution
algorithm;
(ii) a government securities dealer
or government securities broker, to the
extent that the dealer or broker
executes or trades agreements,
contracts, or transactions in
government securities, or assists
persons in communicating about,
negotiating, entering into, executing,
or trading an agreement, contract, or
transaction in government securities
(as the terms ``government securities
dealer'', ``government securities
broker'', and ``government securities''
are defined in section 3(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78c(a))); or
(iii) facilities on which bids and
offers, and acceptances of bids and
offers effected on the facility, are
not binding.
Any person, group of persons, dealer, broker,
or facility described in clause (i) or (ii) is
excluded from the meaning of the term ``trading
facility'' for the purposes of this Act without
any prior specific approval, certification, or
other action by the Commission.
(C) Special rule.--A person or group of
persons that would not otherwise constitute a
trading facility shall not be considered to be
a trading facility solely as a result of the
submission to a derivatives clearing
organization of transactions executed on or
through the person or group of persons.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 15. CONSIDERATION OF COSTS AND BENEFITS AND ANTITRUST LAWS.
(a) Costs and Benefits.--
[(1) In general.--Before promulgating a regulation
under this Act or issuing an order (except as provided
in paragraph (3)), the Commission shall consider the
costs and benefits of the action of the Commission.
[(2) Considerations.--The costs and benefits of the
proposed Commission action shall be evaluated in light
of--
[(A) considerations of protection of market
participants and the public;
[(B) considerations of the efficiency,
competitiveness, and financial integrity of
futures markets;
[(C) considerations of price discovery;
[(D) considerations of sound risk management
practices; and
[(E) other public interest considerations.]
(1) In general.--Before promulgating a regulation
under this Act or issuing an order (except as provided
in paragraph (3)), the Commission, through the Office
of the Chief Economist, shall assess and publish in the
regulation or order the costs and benefits, both
qualitative and quantitative, of the proposed
regulation or order, and the proposed regulation or
order shall state its statutory justification.
(2) Considerations.--In making a reasoned
determination of the costs and the benefits, the
Commission shall evaluate--
(A) considerations of protection of market
participants and the public;
(B) considerations of the efficiency,
competitiveness, and financial integrity of
futures and swaps markets;
(C) considerations of the impact on market
liquidity in the futures and swaps markets;
(D) considerations of price discovery;
(E) considerations of sound risk management
practices;
(F) available alternatives to direct
regulation;
(G) the degree and nature of the risks posed
by various activities within the scope of its
jurisdiction;
(H) the costs of complying with the proposed
regulation or order by all regulated entities,
including a methodology for quantifying the
costs (recognizing that some costs are
difficult to quantify);
(I) whether the proposed regulation or order
is inconsistent, incompatible, or duplicative
of other Federal regulations or orders;
(J) the cost to the Commission of
implementing the proposed regulation or order
by the Commission staff, including a
methodology for quantifying the costs;
(K) whether, in choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, those approaches
maximize net benefits (including potential
economic and other benefits, distributive
impacts, and equity); and
(L) other public interest considerations.
(3) Applicability.--This subsection does not apply to
the following actions of the Commission:
(A) An order that initiates, is part of, or
is the result of an adjudicatory or
investigative process of the Commission.
(B) An emergency action.
(C) A finding of fact regarding compliance
with a requirement of the Commission.
(4) Judicial review.--Notwithstanding section 24(d),
a court shall affirm a Commission assessment of costs
and benefits under this subsection, unless the court
finds the assessment to be an abuse of discretion.
(b) Antitrust Laws.--The Commission shall take into
consideration the public interest to be protected by the
antitrust laws and endeavor to take the least anticompetitive
means of achieving the objectives of this Act, as well as the
policies and purposes of this Act, in issuing any order or
adopting any Commission rule or regulation (including any
exemption under section 4(c) or 4c(b)), or in requiring or
approving any bylaw, rule, or regulation of a contract market
or registered futures association established pursuant to
section 17 of this Act.
* * * * * * *
Changes in the Application of Existing Law
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the following statements are
submitted describing the effect of provisions in the
accompanying bill that directly or indirectly change the
application of existing law.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be
construed as changing the application of existing law:
1. Office of the Secretary.--Language is included to limit
the amount of funds for official reception and representation
expenses, as determined by the Secretary.
2. Departmental Administration.--Language is included to
reimburse the agency for travel expenses incident to the
holding of hearings.
3. Agricultural Research Service.--Language is included
that allows the Agricultural Research Service to grant
easements at the Beltsville, MD, agricultural research center
and to grant easements at any facility for the construction of
a research facility for use by the agency.
4. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.--A provision
carried in the bill since fiscal year 1973 regarding state
matching funds has been continued to assure more effective
operation of the brucellosis control program through state cost
sharing, with resulting savings to the Federal budget.
Language is included to allow APHIS to recoup expenses
incurred from providing technical assistance goods, or services
to non-APHIS personnel, and to allow transfers of funds for
agricultural emergencies.
Language is included to limit the amount of funds for
representational allowances.
5. Agricultural Marketing Service, Limitation on
Administrative Expenses.--The bill includes language to allow
AMS to exceed the limitation on administrative expenses by 10
percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees.
This allows flexibility in case crop size is understated and/or
other uncontrollable events occur.
6. Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration,
Inspection and Weighing Services.--The bill includes authority
to exceed the limitation on inspection and weighing services by
10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees.
This allows for flexibility if export activities require
additional supervision and oversight, or other uncontrollable
factors occur.
7. Dairy Indemnity Program.--Language is included by
reference that allows the Secretary to utilize the services of
the Commodity Credit Corporation for the purpose of making
dairy indemnity payments.
8. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account.--
Language is included that deems the pink bollworm a boll weevil
for the purposes of administering the boll weevil loan program.
9. Risk Management Agency.--Language is included to limit
the amount of funds for official reception and representation
expenses.
10. Commodity Credit Corporation Fund.--Language is
included to provide for the reimbursement appropriation.
Language is also included to allow certain funds transferred
from the Commodity Credit Corporation to be used for
information resource management. In addition, language is
included which limits the amount of funds that can be spent on
operation and maintenance costs of CCC hazardous waste sites.
11. Natural Resources Conservation Service.--Conservation
Operations.--Language which has been included in the bill since
1938 prohibits construction of buildings on land not owned by
the government, although construction on land owned by states
and counties is permitted as authorized by law.
12. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.--Language is
included to allow funds to be used for advertising and
promotional activities and to limit the amount of funds to
provide modest nonmonetary awards to non-USDA employees.
13. Rental Assistance Program.--Language is included which
provides that agreements entered into during the current fiscal
year be funded for a one-year period. Language also is included
to renew contracts once during any 12-month period.
14. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC).--Language is included to purchase
infant formula except in accordance with law and pay for
activities that are not fully reimbursed by other departments
or agencies unless authorized by law.
15. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.--Language is
included to enter into contracts and employ staff to conduct
studies, evaluations, or to conduct activities related to
program integrity.
16. Foreign Agricultural Service.--Language carried since
1979 enables this agency to use funds received by an advance or
by reimbursement to carry out its activities involving
international development and technical cooperation. Language
is included to limit the amount of funds for official reception
and representation expenses.
17. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.--Language is
included to limit the amount of funds for official reception
and representation expenses. Language is also included to allow
the Chairman of the Commission to adjust compensation and
benefits if furloughs may result from collective bargaining
agreements and language that allows the Commission to record
prior year lease obligations to correct a violation of the
Anti-Deficiency Act.
18. Farm Credit Administration.--The bill includes
authority to exceed the limitation on assessments by 10 percent
with notification to the Appropriations Committees.
19. General Provisions.--Section 704: This provision
provides that none of the funds in this Act may be made
available to pay indirect costs charged against competitive
agricultural research, education, or extension grants awarded
by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture in excess of
10 percent of total direct costs.
Section 705: This provision allows funds made available in
the current fiscal year for the Rural Development Loan Fund
program account; the Rural Electrification and
Telecommunications Loans program account; and the Rural Housing
Insurance Fund program account to remain available until
expended to disburse obligations.
Section 706: Language is included that requires approval of
the Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the
Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board for
acquisition of new information technology systems or
significant upgrades, and that prohibits the transfer of funds
to the Office of the Chief Information Officer without the
notification of the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress.
Section 707: Language is included regarding the
availability of funds for certain conservation programs.
Section 708: Language is included regarding certain Rural
Utilities Service Programs.
Section 709: Language is included that allows unobligated
balances of the Farm Service Agency and Rural Development
mission areas to be used for information technology purposes.
Section 710: Language is included regarding the prohibition
of first-class travel by the employees of agencies funded in
this Act.
Section 711: Language is included regarding the funds of
the Commodity Credit Corporation.
Section 712 Language is included that limits the amount of
spending for USDA Advisory Committees.
Section 713: Language is included regarding indirect costs
for grants.
Section 714: Language regarding certain limitations of
mandatory programs.
Section 715: Language regarding certain limitations of
mandatory programs.
Section 716: Language is included that prohibits funds from
being used to prepare a budget submission to Congress that
assumes reductions from the previous year's budget due to user
fee proposals unless the submission also identifies spending
reductions which should occur if the user fees are not enacted.
Section 717: Language is included that requires certain
reprogramming procedures of funds provided in Appropriations
Acts.
Section 718: Language is included regarding fees for the
business and industry guaranteed loan program.
Section 719: This provision prohibits the Department of
Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration from
transmitting or making available to any non-Department of
Agriculture or non-Department of Health and Human Services
employee questions or responses to questions that are a result
of information requested for the appropriations hearing
process.
Section 720: Language regarding prepackaged news stories.
Section 721: This provision prohibits any employee of the
Department of Agriculture from being detailed or assigned to
any other agency or office of the Department for more than 60
days unless the individual's employing agency or office is
fully reimbursed by the receiving agency or office for the
salary and expenses of the employee for the period of
assignment.
Section 722: Language is included Congressional
notification of grant awards.
Section 723: Language is included requiring spending plans
for each agency funded by the Act.
Section 724: Language is included regarding the use funds
for humanitarian food assistance programs.
Section 725: Language is included regarding the Single
Family Housing Direct Loan Program.
Section 726: Language is included on certain USDA loan
programs.
Section 727: Language is included regarding the Working
Capital Fund.
Section 728: Language is included regarding purchases made
through child nutrition programs.
Section 729: Language is included regarding an emergency
rural development program.
Section 730: Language is included regarding the Agriculture
and Food Research Institute.
Section 731: Language is included regarding interagency
coordination of nutrition research.
Section 732: Language is included regarding rural loan
programs.
Section 733: Language is included regarding disclosure of
information for pharmaceuticals.
Section 734: Language is included regarding FDA biologics
review.
Section 735: Language is included regarding spent grains
for animal feed.
Section 736: Language is included regarding APHIS
regulations.
Section 737: Language is included regarding APHIS
regulations.
Section 738: Language is included regarding partially
hydrogenated oils.
Section 739: Language is included regarding the Rural
Housing Service.
Section 740: Language is included regarding federal IT
regulations.
Section 741: Language is included regarding a rescission of
funds.
Section 742: Language is included regarding domestic
preference.
Section 743: Language is included regarding child nutrition
programs.
Section 744: Language is included regarding rural poverty
programs.
Section 745: Language is included regarding eligibility for
Rural Development Programs.
Section 746: Language is included regarding lobbying by
federal employees.
Section 747: Language is included regarding SNAP
regulations.
Section 748: Language is included regarding FDA regulation.
Section 749: Language is included regarding housing
programs.
Section 750: Language is included regarding a rescission of
funds.
Section 751: Language is included regarding CFTC
regulation.
Section 752: Language is included regarding FDA regulation.
Section 753: Language is included regarding FDA regulation.
Section 754: Language is included regarding FSIS
regulation.
Section 755: Language is included regarding the Commodity
Credit Corporation.
Section 756: Language is included regarding the National
Ocean Policy.
Section 757: Language is included regarding the 21st
Century Cures Act.
Section 758: Language is included regarding citrus
greening.
Section 759: Language is included regarding the Healthy
Food Financing Initiative.
Section 760: Language is included regarding CFTC
regulation.
Section 761: Spending Reduction Account.
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the following table lists the
appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not
authorized by law for the period concerned:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Year of Appropriation in Last
Agency/Program Authorization Authorization Level Year of Authorization Appropriations in This
Bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFTC................................................. 2013 Such sums 205,000,000 248,000,000
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.................... 2015 Such sums 16,548,000 18,548,000
State Administrative Expenses........................ 2015 Such sums 263,686,000 299,139,000
Summer Food Service Program.......................... 2015 Such sums 495,521,000 639,789,000
WIC.................................................. 2015 Such sums 6,623,000,000 6,150,000,000
Multi-Family Revitalization Program.................. 2016 Such sums 41,400,000 35,000,000
Broadband Telecommunications Grants.................. 2016 Such sums 34,500,000 \1\- - -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Funding is included in the Rural Economic Infrastructure Grant account.
Comparison With the Budget Resolution
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares
the levels of new budget authority provided in the bill with
the appropriate allocation under section 302(b) of the Budget
Act:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) Allocation This Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
Authority Outlays Authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee
allocations to its subcommittees: Subcommittee
on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies:
Mandatory................................... 110,691 99,326 110,691 \1\99,326
Discretionary............................... 20,001 21,750 20,001 21,464
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
Five Year Outlay Projections
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII and section
308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
following table contains five-year projections associated with
the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill as
provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) Allocation This Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
Authority Outlays Authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projection of outlays associated with the
recommendation:
2018........................................ n.a n.a n.a 1\2\104,664
2019........................................ n.a n.a n.a 5,229
2020........................................ n.a n.a n.a 469
2021........................................ n.a n.a n.a 453
2022 and future years....................... n.a n.a n.a 263
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from amounts provided pursuant to sections 1001-1004 of the 21st Century Cures Act (P.L. 114-
255).
Assistance to State and Local Governments
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII and section
308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Congressional Budget Office has provided the following
estimates of the amounts of financial assistance to State and
local governments is as follows:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) Allocation This Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
Authority Outlays Authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial assistance to State and local n.a n.a 40,149 \1\32,405
governments for 2018...........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
Program Duplication
No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the GAO to Congress pursuant to section 21 of
Public Law 111 139, or a program related to a program
identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance.
Directed Rule Making
Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5 (115th Congress), the
bill includes the following directed rule makings:
(1) Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,
retailer standards (in section 747 of Title VII)
(2) Food and Drug Administration, product labeling
(in section 753 of Title VII)
(3) Food Safety Inspection Service, poultry products
(in section 754 of Title VII).
VIEWS OF THE HON. NITA LOWEY AND THE HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.
The FY2018 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill is 5%
($1.13 billion) below the 2017 enacted level. The low
allocation makes it difficult to fully meet the needs of our
nation.
First, we are appreciative of the collaborative
relationship with the Chairman that allowed us to address many
of our priorities in markup, such as restoring funding for the
McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program to the 2017 level,
providing funding for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative,
providing a $200 million increase for farm operating guaranteed
loans, increasing diversity in agriculture career fields,
addressing healthcare access issues in rural America, and
making important improvements to language in the bill related
to the importation of poultry products from China.
We are disappointed the bill does not maintain the 2017
level of $1.6 billion for Food for Peace, especially now when
the need around the world is so great.
We deeply regret the Committee's failure to adopt Rep.
Roybal-Allard's amendment to prohibit the inspection of horses
for slaughter for human food. There are far better and more
humane ways to deal with unwanted horses, and the past
experience in this country of slaughtering horses for human
food was, frankly, a disaster.
The Committee's unprecedented and ill-advised bill
language, allowing the chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC) alone to determine if furloughs or
reductions in force might result from a collective bargaining
agreement and then adjust the schedule of pay and benefits any
way he chooses, was also disappointing. Specifically, we are
concerned this language could be expanded beyond the CFTC to
employees at other financial regulatory agencies, as well as
other agencies whose collective bargaining rights could be put
at risk, including federal air traffic controllers.
The report states the ``language is the result of numerous
attempts by the Commission to impose a coercive deficiency upon
Congress by threatening furloughs or RIFs.'' The suggestion
that the Commission or its staff threatened or misled the
Committee is deeply offensive.
It should not go unnoticed that the Commission's budget has
been held at a mere $250 million since fiscal year 2015, and
this bill recommends an even lower funding level. With the
implementation of new enforcement tools, coupled with the
expanded oversight jurisdiction, it is evident that the CFTC is
severely underfunded. In order to keep pace with the
technological advancements in commodity trading, we strongly
urge the majority to fund this agency at the higher level it
needs to achieve its mission in protecting U.S. customers.
We are disappointed that the bill included bill language
locking in the swap dealer de minimis level at $8 billion. An
appropriations bill is not the appropriate place to deal with
this issue, and this is the fifth consecutive year in which the
Committee has interjected itself into this matter.
As the legislative process continues, we will do our best
to address the concerns described here. But without a larger
discussion of the Federal budget it will be nearly impossible
to pass an Agriculture appropriations bill for FY 2018 into
law. The inadequacy of this bill's allocation can only be fixed
if Democrats and Republicans negotiate new caps for spending
that do not slash the investments needed in this bill and
others to grow the economy. Unfortunately, to date, Republicans
are choosing to close ranks around a partisan effort to cut
programs depended on by millions of Americans even though they
know it will lead to another forced crisis to keep the
government open. Democrats stand ready to work with Republicans
on appropriations bills that invest in the American people.
Nita M. Lowey.
Sanford D. Bishop, Jr.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HON. NITA M. LOWEY
I am very concerned with the inclusion of Section 752 and
Section 753 in the FY 2018 Agriculture Appropriations bill. The
Tobacco Control Act (TCA), which passed Congress with broad
bipartisan support, provided FDA with the tools to review new
tobacco products. Since enactment, tobacco products including
e-cigarettes and flavored cigars have made significant gains in
popularity, particularly among youth.
According to the CDC, e-cigarette use among teens has risen
tenfold in the past decade, rising to 16% of teens in 2015, an
estimated three million American teens. E-Cigarettes are now
more popular among teens than traditional cigarettes.
And yet, the FY 2018 Agriculture Appropriations bill would
put the tobacco companies in the driver's seat, exempting so-
called premium cigars from the regulatory structure of the TCA
and allowing thousands of e-cigarette products to remain on the
market without scientific review.
I am particularly concerned by inclusion of Section 753 and
offered an amendment to strike it from the underlying bill.
Under Section 753, the predicate date for review for new
tobacco products would be delayed, allowing future tobacco
products which are substantially similar to those on the market
since 2009 to be sold to the public without FDA premarket
review. As a result, FDA would not be able to put the genie
back in the bottle, unable to regulate, or even know what is
in, e-cigarette products, forever.
In addition, new language would allow for an alternative
review process, outside of the one passed by Congress in the
TCA, which would create unnecessary delays and open the door
for even more tobacco products to come on the market without
FDA review. Under this weakened alternative, it would be harder
for FDA to address tobacco companies' use of kid-friendly
flavors, such as Gummy Bears, Swedish Fish, and approximately
7,000 other flavors. The FDA is already preparing to address
flavors and could do so much faster if this rider was not
included.
Proponents of Section 753 on the Appropriations Committee
maintain that e-cigarettes can help smokers quit based on
anecdotal evidence. However, the American Medical Association
and 12 other medical societies have determined that ``currently
available data do not support the use of e-cigarette products
as a smoking cessation strategy.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\``Joint Letter to Congress Opposing Tobacco Riders.'' American
Academy of Family Physicians, et al. 17 November 2016. http://
www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/advocacy/prevention/tobacco/LT-
Congress-Tobacco-111716.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the date following the markup, the American Thoracic
Society (ATS) wrote to the Chairman and Ranking Members of the
House and Senate Appropriations Committee, stating concern that
proponents of Section 753 cite the sole--and questionable--
report, by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP), that suggests
vaping products support smoking cessation. The letter stated:
The ATS is also concerned that Congress and the
Administration will use the absence of definitive data
on e-cigarettes and the questionable findings of the
RCP report as justification for relaxing regulations on
e-cigarettes and other novel tobacco products. Any such
relaxation would be a significant policy mistake and
will put the health and well-being of our nation,
particularly our youth, at needless risk.
Section 752 and 753 are a Trojan horse, allowing the
tobacco industry to gain an advantage so it can continue to
sell deadly products that lead to almost half a million deaths
each year.
The American people trust FDA to evaluate the data and make
unbiased decisions about product safety. Congress certainly
lacks the expertise to make such an assessment. The Fiscal Year
2018 Agriculture Appropriations bill should not politicize the
science and take aim at the FDA's ability to regulate tobacco
products under the Tobacco Control Act.
Nita M. Lowey.