[Senate Report 115-131]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 177
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 115-131
======================================================================
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2018
_______
July 20, 2017--Ordered to be printed
Mr. Hoeven, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 1603]
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1603)
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2018, and for other purposes,
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
New obligational authority
Total of bill as reported to the Senate.................$145,922,507,000
Amount of 2017 appropriations........................... 153,907,888,000
Amount of 2018 budget estimate.......................... 141,054,866,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2017 appropriations................................. -7,985,381,000
2018 budget estimate................................ +4,867,641,000
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Breakdown by Title............................................... 4
Overview and Summary of the Bill................................. 5
Reports to Congress.............................................. 6
Title I:
Agricultural Programs:
Production, Processing, and Marketing:
Office of the Secretary.............................. 7
Executive Operations................................. 10
Office of Hearings and Appeals....................... 11
Office of the Chief Information Officer.............. 12
Office of the Chief Financial Officer................ 12
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights... 13
Office of Civil Rights............................... 13
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities................. 14
Hazardous Materials Management....................... 14
Office of Inspector General.......................... 14
Office of the General Counsel........................ 15
Office of Ethics..................................... 15
Office of the Under Secretary for Research,
Education, and Economics........................... 16
Economic Research Service............................ 16
National Agricultural Statistics Service............. 17
Agricultural Research Service........................ 25
National Institute of Food and Agriculture........... 26
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs................................ 34
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service........... 34
Agricultural Marketing Service....................... 41
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards
Administration..................................... 44
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety........ 45
Food Safety and Inspection Service................... 45
Title II:
Farm Production and Conservation:
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and
Conser-
vation................................................. 48
Farm Service Agency...................................... 49
Risk Management Agency................................... 53
Natural Resources Conservation Service................... 53
Corporations:
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund.................. 56
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund........................ 56
Title III:
Rural Development Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development...... 59
Rural Housing Service.................................... 60
Rural Community Facilities Program Account............... 65
Rural Business--Cooperative Service...................... 66
Rural Utilities Service.................................. 70
Title IV:
Domestic Food Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and
Consumer Services...................................... 74
Food and Nutrition Service............................... 75
Title V:
Foreign Assistance and Related Programs:
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign
Agricultural Affairs................................... 83
Foreign Agricultural Service............................. 83
Title VI:
Related Agency and Food and Drug Administration:
Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug
Administration......................................... 87
Independent Agency: Farm Credit Administration........... 99
Title VII: General Provisions.................................... 101
Program, Project, and Activity................................... 104
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 104
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 105
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 106
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 118
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................ 119
BREAKDOWN BY TITLE
The amounts of obligational authority for each of the seven
titles are shown in the following table. A detailed tabulation,
showing comparisons, appears at the end of this report.
Recommendations for individual appropriation items, projects
and activities are carried in this report under the appropriate
item headings.
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 Committee
enacted recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs.... 6,730,384 6,707,123
Title II: Farm Production and 32,684,861 28,454,876
Conservation programs............
Title III: Rural economic and 2,937,153 2,753,752
community development programs...
Title IV: Domestic food programs.. 108,111,345 104,730,801
Title V: Foreign assistance and 1,872,883 2,013,693
related programs.................
Title VI: Related agencies and 2,771,166 2,772,166
Food and Drug Administration.....
Title VII: General provisions..... -1,199,904 -1,509,904
-------------------------------------
Total, new budget 153,907,888 145,922,507
(obligational) authority...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL
The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill
provides funding for a wide array of Federal programs, mostly
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]. These programs
include agricultural research, education, and extension
activities; natural resources conservation programs; farm
income and support programs; marketing and inspection
activities; domestic food assistance programs; rural housing,
economic and community development, and telecommunication and
electrification assistance; and various export and
international activities of the USDA.
The bill also provides funding for the Food and Drug
Administration [FDA] and allows the use of collected fees for
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration
[FCA].
The discretionary programs and activities of USDA and FDA
that are supported by this bill include high priority
responsibilities entrusted to the Federal Government and its
partners to protect human health and safety, contribute to
economic recovery, and achieve policy objectives strongly
supported by the American people. The ability to provide for
these measures is made difficult by growing pressure on
available levels of discretionary spending as a consequence of
the overall public debate on Federal spending, revenues, and
size of the Federal debt.
Too often, the USDA programs funded by this bill are
confused with farm subsidies and other mandatory spending more
properly associated with multi-year farm bills. In contrast,
this bill provides annual funding for programs familiar to all
Americans such as protecting food safety through the Food
Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and Drug
Administration, which also plays a vital role in maintaining
the safety of the Nation's blood supply and availability of
safe and effective medical products and other components of our
health system. This bill also provides funding to fight against
the introduction and spread of noxious or infectious and often
invasive pests and disease that threaten our plant and animal
health environments, as well as funding for many other missions
of dire importance to the American people.
In the context of overall pressures on spending and the
competing priorities that the Committee faces, this bill as
reported provides the proper amount of emphasis on
agricultural, rural development, and other programs and
activities funded by the bill. It is consistent with the
subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2018.
All accounts in the bill have been closely examined to
ensure that an appropriate level of funding is provided to
carry out the programs of USDA, FDA, and FCA. Details on each
of the accounts, the funding level, and the Committee's
justifications for the funding levels are included in the
report.
REPORTS TO CONGRESS
The Committee has, throughout this report, requested
agencies to provide studies and reports on various issues. The
Committee utilizes these reports to evaluate program
performance and make decisions on future appropriations. The
Committee directs that all studies and reports be provided to
the Committee as electronic documents in an agreed upon format
within 120 days after the date of enactment, unless an
alternative submission schedule is specifically stated in the
report request.
TITLE I
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Production, Processing, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $44,555,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 42,064,000
Committee recommendation................................ 48,355,000
The Secretary of Agriculture, assisted by the Deputy
Secretary, Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, Chief
Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of
their immediate staffs, directs and coordinates the work of the
Department. This includes developing policy, maintaining
relationships with agricultural organizations and others in the
development of farm programs, and maintaining liaison with the
Executive Office of the President and Members of Congress on
all matters pertaining to agricultural policy.
The general authority of the Secretary to supervise and
control the work of the Department is contained in the Organic
Act (7 U.S.C. 2201-2202). The delegation of regulatory
functions to Department employees and authorization of
appropriations to carry out these functions is contained in 7
U.S.C. 450c-450g.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,355,000
for the Office of the Secretary. The Committee recommendation
includes the following accounts under the Office of the
Secretary: Office of the Secretary; Office of Tribal Relations;
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination; Office
of Advocacy and Outreach; Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Administration; Departmental Administration; Office of
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations; and Office of
Communications. The following table reflects the amount
provided by the Committee for each office and activity:
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 Fiscal year 2018 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary................................... 5,051 4,859 5,051
Office of Tribal Relations................................ 502 501 502
Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development.......... ................ ................ 800
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination.... 1,496 1,448 1,496
Office of Advocacy and Outreach........................... 1,209 1,171 4,209
Office of Assistant Secretary for Administration.......... 804 802 804
Departmental Administration............................... 24,124 22,501 24,124
Office of Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. 3,869 3,521 3,869
Office of Communications.................................. 7,500 7,261 7,500
-----------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 44,555 42,064 48,355
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2050 Global Food Production.--The Committee understands
that, in order to meet the world's forecasted population of
over 9 billion in 2050, global food production must be 60
percent higher than in 2014. While several Federal agencies and
departments are involved in addressing food and nutrition
security and challenges of today and the future, the Committee
is concerned that the integrated approach required to achieve
the necessary levels of domestic and global food production and
food and nutrition security does not currently exist.
Therefore, the Committee encourages the Secretary to take a
leadership role in working with other relevant departments and
agencies in establishing a Federal interagency task force to
meet the food and nutrition challenges of 2050, and to align
domestic and global programs related to food production and
food and nutrition security to meet these challenges.
Century Farms.--The Committee encourages the Secretary to
create a program to recognize farms that have been in operation
for 100 years and encourages the establishment of a National
Century Farms Designation.
Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] Obligations and
Commitments.--The Secretary is directed to notify the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in writing
15 days prior to the obligation or commitment of any emergency
funds from the CCC.
Drought Relief.--The Committee directs USDA to provide
quarterly reports to the Senate and House Committees on
Appropriations detailing USDA's efforts to provide drought
relief to States where all or the majority of counties are
declared to be in a drought disaster, as well as any unmet
needs or backlogs for USDA drought relief programs. The
Committee encourages USDA to consider providing drought relief
by opening CP ineligible acres to emergency grazing and haying,
at the discretion of the Secretary, after the conclusion of the
primary nesting season for D2 and higher intensity drought
areas. The Committee further encourages USDA to allocate
additional staff and other appropriate resources to drought
stricken areas to provide support to local staff to address the
backlog and expedite relief for producers.
Imported Beef.--The Committee is encouraged by the
Secretary of Agriculture's recent decision to protect American
consumers and ranchers by halting imports of all raw intact
beef products from Brazil. The Committee, however, remains
concerned about the long-term safety of imported meat products
from Brazil following the recent bribery scandal and the
reports on the unacceptable level of physical examination
failures of raw intact beef. Therefore, the Committee directs
the Secretary to report to the Committee within 60 days of
enactment on the status of the Department's actions regarding
meat imports from Brazil from the period March 18, 2017 to the
present. Specifically, the Secretary shall identify 1) the
results of any onsite trips taken by USDA personnel to Brazil
since March 18, 2017 2) when the next comprehensive audit of
the Brazilian meat inspection system will be conducted 3) the
results of the intensified re-inspection regime at our ports-
of-entry on Brazilian meat products still accepted, including
failure rates broken down by meat product 4) a detailed
explanation of benchmarks that Brazil will be required to meet
to resume exporting raw intact beef to the United States.
Livestock Crossing.--The Committee is concerned with the
ongoing problem of the crossing of livestock from Mexico into
the U.S. without proper inspection, which creates risk of
disease and loss of forage for U.S. ranchers in the Southwest
border region. The Committee directs the agency, in
consultation with other Federal and State agencies, to develop
a plan of action to better prevent and reduce unauthorized
international crossing of livestock on the Southwest border.
Multi-Agency Transparency.--The Committee expresses support
for increasing transparency within all agencies of the
Department of Agriculture. The agencies are encouraged to
disclose costs associated with analyses required by the
National Environmental Policy Act.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility [NBAF].--Upon its
completion, NBAF will serve as the Nation's primary research
facility to counter foreign animal diseases and will enable the
phase out of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center [PIADC]. As
such, it is critical to develop a robust plan that ensures a
qualified workforce, assesses the transition of existing
research and development [R&D] efforts, and considers any new
capabilities that may be necessary for future operations at
NBAF. While the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] is
responsible for the PIADC facilities, the R&D, diagnostics, and
educational activities continue to be managed by USDA.
Similarly, while there is consensus that DHS should retain
responsibility for completing construction of NBAF, the
Committee understands, based on current mission requirements,
virtually all of the R&D activities will be under USDA
auspices. Therefore, the Committee encourages DHS and USDA to
work together on a plan for the future operation of NBAF,
including consideration of the appropriate agency to manage the
facility.
Outreach to Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and
Ranchers.--The Committee supports the efforts of the Office of
Advocacy and Outreach to increase the accessibility of USDA
programs to underserved constituents, and notes that
$10,000,000 in mandatory funds is available to assist socially
disadvantaged and veteran farmers and ranchers in owning and
operating farms and ranches to meet the growing need for
financial, production, management, and other assistance to
those communities and address workforce shortages.
Additionally, the Committee recommendation includes an increase
of $3,000,000 in discretionary funding for these activities.
Resource Conservation and Development Councils.--Since
1964, the Resource Conservation and Development [RC&D] Councils
have worked at the grassroots level with local leaders to plan,
develop, and carry out programs for land and water conservation
and management. The Committee encourages the Secretary to
consider the maximum practical use of RC&D Councils, where such
RC&D Councils meet agency performance requirements, in the
delivery of USDA programs and services.
State Rural Development Councils.--The Committee recognizes
the successful work of State Rural Development Councils [SRDCs)
and their role in advancing rural America and promoting
strength and prosperity across the country, and urges the
Secretary to provide resources to help improve and expand the
impact of SRDCs.
Wheat Grading.--The Committee is concerned about unfair
wheat grading practices that negatively affects American wheat
growers that export to Canada. Current Canadian wheat grading
law automatically downgrades America wheat to the lowest
quality designation regardless of the type or quality of the
wheat. In the United States, however, our grading system
provides a fair examination for wheat imported from Canada.
This discrepancy needs to be addressed to ensure our wheat
growers are being treated fairly. Therefore, the Committee
urges the Secretary of Agriculture to work with the Department
of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative to
prioritize initiating conversations with the Canadian
Government to address trade inequities resulting from Canada's
current wheat grading practices.
Zoonotic Disease Collaboration.--The Committee believes
that complex problems affecting the health of humans, animals,
and the environment are best solved through important
communication, cooperation, and collaboration across
disciplines, sectors, between agencies, and between other
appropriate domestic and international actors. The Committee
requests a report detailing existing collaborative efforts
between FDA, USDA, and other agencies to prevent and respond to
zoonotic disease outbreaks in animals and humans; a proposed
framework to improve these efforts; and specific activities
requested to achieve the proposed framework.
Executive Operations
Executive operations were established as a result of the
reorganization of the Department to provide a support team for
USDA policy officials and selected department-wide services.
Activities under the executive operations include the Office of
the Chief Economist, the National Appeals Division, and the
Office of Budget and Program Analysis.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $18,917,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 17,211,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,917,000
The Office of the Chief Economist advises the Secretary of
Agriculture on the economic implications of Department policies
and programs. The Office serves as the single focal point for
the Nation's economic intelligence and analysis, risk
assessment, and cost-benefit analysis related to domestic and
international food and agriculture issues, provides policy
direction for renewable energy development, conducts analyses
of climate change impacts on agriculture and forestry, and is
responsible for coordination and review of all commodity and
aggregate agricultural and food-related data used to develop
outlook and situation material within the Department.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,917,000
for the Office of the Chief Economist.
Policy Research.--The Committee recommendation includes
$4,000,000 for policy research under 7 U.S.C. 3155 for entities
with existing institutional capacity to conduct complex
economic and policy analysis and a lengthy and well-documented
record of conducting policy analysis for the benefit of the
Department of Agriculture, the Congressional Budget Office, or
the Congress. To maximize resources, the Committee expects the
Department to focus efforts on entities that have developed
models, databases, and staff necessary to conduct in-depth
analysis of impacts of agriculture or rural development policy
proposals on rural communities, farmers, agribusiness,
taxpayers, and consumers.
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $13,399,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 14,716,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,399,000
The Office of Hearings and Appeals conducts administrative
hearings and reviews of adverse program decisions made by the
Rural Development mission area, the Farm Service Agency, the
Risk Management Agency, and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,399,000
for the Office of Hearings and Appeals.
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $9,525,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 9,093,000
Committee recommendation................................ 9,525,000
The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides
direction and administration of the Department's budgetary
functions including development, presentation, and execution of
the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for
program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program and
resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries of
pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental policy
officials and agency program managers in the decisionmaking
process; and provides departmentwide coordination for and
participation in the presentation of budget-related matters to
the committees of the Congress, the media, and interested
public. The Office also provides department-wide coordination
of the preparation and processing of regulations and
legislative programs and reports.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,525,000 for
the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.
Office of the Chief Information Officer
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $49,538,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 58,950,000
Committee recommendation................................ 58,950,000
The Office of the Chief Information Officer was established
in August 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), pursuant to the
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which required the establishment of
a Chief Information Officer for major Federal agencies. This
Office provides policy guidance, leadership, coordination, and
direction to the Department's information management and
information technology investment activities in support of USDA
program delivery, and is the lead office in USDA e-gov efforts.
The Office provides long-range planning guidance, implements
measures to ensure that technology investments are economical
and effective, coordinates interagency information resources
management projects, and implements standards to promote
information exchange and technical interoperability. In
addition, the Office of the Chief Information Officer is
responsible for certain activities financed under the
Department's Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235). The Office
also provides telecommunication and automated data processing
[ADP] services to USDA agencies through the National
Information Technology Center with locations in Fort Collins,
Colorado, Kansas City, Missouri and Washington, DC. Direct ADP
operational services are also provided to the Office of the
Secretary, the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of
Communications, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and
Departmental Management.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,950,000
for the Office of the Chief Information Officer.
Software Licenses.--The Committee encourages the
Department's Chief Information Officer to perform periodic
automated inventories of software licenses in use across the
Department. The Department should compare those usage numbers
to its purchased licenses and seek to increase efficiency
wherever it identifies discrepancies. The Department is to
consider using this information to obtain department-wide
acquisitions as opposed to component-specific purchases of
licenses.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $8,028,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 5,836,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,028,000
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer is responsible
for the dual roles of Chief Financial Management Policy Officer
and Chief Financial Management Advisor to the Secretary and
mission area heads. The Office provides leadership for all
financial management, accounting, travel, Federal assistance,
and strategic planning performance measurement activities
within the Department. The Office is also responsible for the
management and operation of the National Finance Center and the
Departmental Working Capital Fund.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,028,000 for
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.
National Finance Center.--The Committee supports the
replacement and acquisition of capital equipment, including
equipment for the resumption, improvement and implementation of
financial management systems, information technology, and other
systems of the National Finance Center as a result of the
recent tornado and related weather damage to Center operations
and equipment.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $901,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 896,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
provides oversight of civil rights and related functions. This
includes coordination of the administration of civil rights
laws and regulations for employees of the Department of
Agriculture and participants in programs of the Department, and
ensuring compliance with civil rights laws.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $901,000 for
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.
Office of Civil Rights
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $24,206,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 23,304,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,206,000
The Office of Civil Rights provides overall leadership
responsibility for all department-wide civil rights activities.
These activities include employment opportunity as well as
program nondiscrimination policy development, analysis,
coordination, and compliance. The Office is responsible for
providing leadership in facilitating the fair and equitable
treatment of USDA employees, and for monitoring program
activities to ensure that all USDA programs are delivered in a
nondiscriminatory manner. The Office's outreach functions
provide leadership, coordination, facilitation, and expertise
to internal and external partners to ensure equal and timely
access to USDA programs for all constituents, with emphasis on
the underserved, through information sharing, technical
assistance, and training.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,206,000
for the Office of Civil Rights.
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $84,189,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 62,145,000
Committee recommendation................................ 67,293,000
Department headquarters presently operates in a two-
building, Government-owned complex in downtown Washington, DC,
the George Washington Carver Center in Beltsville, Maryland,
and in leased buildings in the metropolitan Washington, DC,
area. Under an arrangement with the General Services
Administration, USDA operates, maintains, and repairs these
facilities, in lieu of rental payments. For the last several
years the Department has implemented a strategic space plan to
locate staff more efficiently, renovate its buildings, and
eliminate safety hazards, particularly in the Agriculture South
Building.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $67,293,000
for Agriculture Buildings and Facilities.
Hazardous Materials Management
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $3,633,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 3,503,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,633,000
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to meet
the same standards regarding the storage and disposition of
hazardous materials as private businesses. The Department is
required to contain, cleanup, monitor, and inspect for
hazardous materials in areas under the Department's
jurisdiction.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,633,000 for
Hazardous Materials Management.
Office of Inspector General
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $98,208,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 92,689,000
Committee recommendation................................ 98,208,000
The Office of Inspector General [OIG] was established
October 12, 1978, by the Inspector General Act of 1978 (Public
Law 95-452). This act expanded and provided specific
authorities for the activities of OIG which had previously been
carried out under the general authorities of the Secretary of
Agriculture.
The Office is administered by an inspector general who
reports directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. Functions and
responsibilities of this Office include direction and control
of audit and investigative activities within the Department,
formulation of audit and investigative policies and procedures
regarding Department programs and operations, and analysis and
coordination of program-related audit and investigation
activities performed by other Department agencies.
The activities of this Office are designed to assure
compliance with existing laws, policies, regulations, and
programs of the Department's agencies, and to provide
appropriate officials with the means for prompt corrective
action where deviations have occurred. The scope of audit and
investigative activities is large and includes administrative,
program, and criminal matters. These activities are
coordinated, when appropriate, with various audit and
investigative agencies of the executive and legislative
branches of the Government.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $98,208,000
for the Office of Inspector General. The recommendation also
includes funding for OIG to address violations of section 26 of
the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) and to coordinate with
State and local law enforcement personnel in this effort.
Office of the General Counsel
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $44,697,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 42,970,000
Committee recommendation................................ 44,697,000
The Office of the General Counsel provides all legal
advice, counsel, and services to the Secretary and to all
agencies, offices, and corporations of the Department. The
Office represents the Department in administrative proceedings;
nonlitigation debt collection proceedings; State water rights
adjudications; proceedings before the Environmental Protection
Agency, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Maritime
Administration, and International Trade Commission; and, in
conjunction with the Department of Justice, in judicial
proceedings and litigation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,697,000
for the Office of the General Counsel.
Office of Ethics
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $4,136,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 3,538,000
Committee recommendation................................ 4,136,000
The Office of Ethics is the centralized and consolidated
office implementing USDA's ethics program throughout the
Department. The Office provides ethics services to all
employees at the Department concerning advice, training, and
guidance about compliance with conflict of interest and
impartiality rules. This includes complying with the
requirements of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge
Act, Public Law 112-105 (the STOCK Act), and the Office of
Government Ethics regulatory requirements (5 CFR parts 2634
through 2641).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,136,000 for
the Office of Ethics.
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $893,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 891,000
Committee recommendation................................ 893,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education,
and Economics provides direction and coordination in carrying
out the laws enacted by the Congress for food and agricultural
research, education, extension, and economic and statistical
information. The Office has oversight and management
responsibilities for the Agricultural Research Service;
National Institute of Food and Agriculture; Economic Research
Service; and National Agricultural Statistics Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $893,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and
Economics.
Industrial Hemp.--The Committee is aware of statements made
by the Department acknowledging the eligibility of researchers
participating in industrial hemp pilot programs as defined by
Section 7606 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 to compete for
Federal funds awarded by the Department. The Committee directs
the Department to work with and inform stakeholders of this
eligibility and to support industrial hemp research as
authorized by Section 7606 of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
Economic Research Service
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $86,757,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 76,690,000
Committee recommendation................................ 86,757,000
The Economic Research Service [ERS] provides economic and
other social science research and analysis for public and
private decisions on agriculture, food, the environment, and
rural America. The information that ERS produces is for use by
the general public and to help the executive and legislative
branches develop, administer, and evaluate agricultural and
rural policies and programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $86,757,000
for the Economic Research Service.
Breastfeeding Study.--The Committee recognizes the
important role of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC] in encouraging
breastfeeding. Breastfeeding can be an important preventive
measure in infant and maternal health, and WIC offers multiple
services and supports to mothers to help achieve optimal
breastfeeding. As Congress looks for ways to reduce Federal
healthcare spending, it is important to understand the
preventive impact of breastfeeding and WIC's initiatives within
broader healthcare spending. The Committee requests within 12
months an updated study from the ERS on the economic benefits
of breastfeeding, including its potential cost-savings for
Medicaid and the WIC program.
Feed Costs.--The Committee maintains funding provided in
fiscal year 2017 for ERS to expand its current feed cost
components surveys nationally.
Low Density Polyethylene.--The use of Low Density
Polyethylene [LDPE] as an agricultural aid on farms is common
practice but as a single use material represents a negative
impact on the environment. The Committee encourages ERS to
conduct research into the viability of creating collection
networks and potential markets for agricultural LDPE.
Organic Data Analysis.--The organic industry has grown at a
tremendous rate over the past several years, and accurate data
for the production, pricing and marketing of organic products
is essential. Therefore, the Committee encourages ERS to
continue and expand the efforts relating to organic data
analysis.
National Agricultural Statistics Service
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $171,239,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 185,677,000
Committee recommendation................................ 191,717,000
The National Agricultural Statistics Service [NASS]
administers the Department's program of collecting and
publishing current national, State, and county agricultural
statistics. These statistics provide accurate and timely
projections of current agricultural production and measures of
the economic and environmental welfare of the agricultural
sector which are essential for making effective policy,
production, and marketing decisions. NASS also furnishes
statistical services to other USDA and Federal agencies in
support of their missions, and provides consulting, technical
assistance, and training to developing countries.
NASS is also responsible for administration of the Census
of Agriculture, which is taken every 5 years and provides
comprehensive data on the agricultural economy including: data
on the number of farms, land use, production expenses, farm
product values, value of land and buildings, farm size and
characteristics of farm operators, market value of agricultural
production sold, acreage of major crops, inventory of livestock
and poultry, and farm irrigation practices.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $191,717,000
for the National Agricultural Statistics Service.
Alfalfa Prices.--The Committee is concerned that the
National Agricultural Statistics Service monthly Agricultural
Prices Report only lists the average price received by
agricultural producers for alfalfa sold, with no further
breakdown of alfalfa hay that meets the higher quality
standards required for dairy feed (graded as premium or better,
or the equivalent). The Committee directs the National
Agricultural Statistics Service to calculate and report in the
monthly Agricultural Prices Report on the average price of
premium or better alfalfa sold in the United States.
Barley Estimates.--Barley acreage and production estimates
provide critical data to maltster, brewer, distiller, food, and
feed end-users in domestic and export markets to make
procurement decisions and investment plans; and by policy
makers in developing and implementing agricultural programs.
The Committee directs NASS to reinstate acreage and production
estimates for barley in States that were discontinued in 2016.
Chemical Use Data Series.--The Committee believes that the
Chemical Use Data Series provides timely, valuable information
on fertilizer and chemical use data on major field crops and
selected specialty crops. The Committee encourages the National
Agricultural Statistics Service to continue funding the
collection and analysis of chemical use data as well as
practices such as integrated pest management. The Committee
supports the National Agricultural Statistics Service's effort
to resume collecting Fruit Chemical Use data and Vegetable
Chemical Use data in alternating years and also directs the
continuation of this practice to ensure equal access to Federal
statistics.
Organic Data Collection.--The Committee believes the
Organic Production Survey is essential to the growth of the
organic industry, and should be conducted on a regular basis to
properly assess the characteristics, trends, and changes in the
sector. The Committee expects NASS to incorporate funding for
an annual organic production survey into its internal budgeting
process, and report to the Committee on the cost estimate for
such survey.
Agricultural Research Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $1,170,235,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 993,144,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,182,435,000
The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for
conducting basic, applied, and developmental research through
its major program areas of New Products/Product Quality/Value
Added; Livestock/Crop Production; Food Safety; Livestock/Crop
Protection; Human Nutrition; and Environmental Stewardship. The
research applies to a wide range of goals; commodities; natural
resources; fields of science; and geographic, climatic, and
environmental conditions.
ARS is also responsible for the Abraham Lincoln National
Agricultural Library which provides agricultural information
and library services through traditional library functions and
modern electronic dissemination to agencies of the USDA, public
and private organizations, and individuals.
As the USDA's in-house agricultural research unit, ARS has
major responsibilities for conducting and leading the national
agricultural research effort. It provides initiative and
leadership in five areas: research on broad regional and
national problems, research to support Federal action and
regulatory agencies, expertise to meet national emergencies,
research support for international programs, and scientific
resources to the executive branch and Congress.
The mission of ARS research is to develop and transfer
solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority
and provide information access and dissemination to ensure
high-quality, safe food and other agricultural products; assess
the nutritional needs of Americans; sustain a competitive
agricultural economy; enhance the natural resource base and the
environment; and provide economic opportunities for rural
citizens, communities, and society as a whole.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,182,435,000
for salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research Service.
The Committee does not concur with the President's budget
request regarding the termination of research programs and
laboratory closures. The Committee expects extramural research
to be funded at no less than the fiscal year 2017 levels.
Aerial Application Research.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the ARS Aerial Application Technology Program.
The program conducts innovative research making aerial
applications more efficient, effective and precise. Research
for aerial application serves the public good as a vital tool
for the future, as agriculture strives to meet the food, fiber,
and bio-energy demands of a growing population.
Agricultural Genomics.--The Committee provides no less than
the fiscal year 2017 level for agricultural genomic research to
expand the knowledge of public and private sector entities and
persons concerning genomes for species of importance to the
food and agriculture sectors in order to maximize the return on
the investment in genomics of agriculturally important species.
Agroforestry.--Agroforestry can provide on-farm financial
and environmental benefits while also addressing the regional
and national-scale issues of clean water, wildlife habitat, and
hypoxia. Agroforesters manage trees with crops, livestock, and
pasture to combine the best of both agriculture and forestry.
Recognizing the importance of agroforestry to farm practices
and the environment, the Committee recommendation includes no
less than the fiscal year 2017 level to develop integrated
strategies to manage multifunctional agricultural landscapes
that combine trees with agricultural and horticultural crops,
forages and grazing livestock for optimal economic,
environmental, and natural resources benefits.
Alfalfa Research.--The Committee notes that research into
alfalfa seed and alfalfa forage systems holds the potential to
increase yields, increase milk production, and improve
genetics, and the Committee recommendation includes an increase
of $1,000,000 to support research focused on alfalfa
improvement. Research should focus on using tools to accelerate
and enhance existing breeding programs focused on improving
yield and quality parameters; developing innovative harvesting
and utilization systems; developing new markets for co-
products; and quantifying environmental benefits from alfalfa-
based systems.
Antimicrobial Research and Development.--The Committee
strongly supports enhanced research efforts to advance the
development of alternatives to antibiotics used in animal
production. The Committee encourages ARS to examine the role of
nutritional alternatives/feed additives containing bioactives
and prebiotics that may lead to reduced antibiotic use and
boost immune responses in livestock. The Committee requests
that ARS provide an update on this effort in its fiscal year
2019 budget request.
Aquaculture Seedstock.--The Committee is concerned that
vital seedstock to support the development of aquaculture in
Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico will be sourced from
foreign aquaculture producers. Domestic on-land recirculating
aquaculture systems and offshore aquaculture are highly capable
of producing seedstock to support new industries including
broodstock acquisition and care, spawning, and larval culture
techniques. Therefore, 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.
Atlantic Salmon Breeding Program.--The Committee directs
ARS to continue its Atlantic salmon breeding and domestication
work. The Committee notes that domestic salmon farms are
required to only use strains of salmon that are of North
American origin and that these strains need substantial
breeding improvement in order to be competitive with strains
currently used by foreign producers. The Committee notes that
the current ARS Atlantic salmon breeding program lacks a
geneticist and supports efforts by the Department to address
this need.
Citrus Greening Disease Research.--The Committee commends
ARS on its research efforts on citrus greening disease and
encourages the agency to continue working to develop methods to
reduce transmission, enhance immunity in citrus trees, and work
with industry, universities, growers, and other partners to
develop effective control mechanisms. The Committee also
encourages ARS to coordinate its efforts with the
HuanglongbiAng Multi-Agency Coordination [HLB-MAC] group.
Coffee Germplasm.--The Committee directs ARS to issue a
report and recommendations on the feasibility of including
coffee in the National Clonal Germplasm Repository within 90
days of enactment of this Act.
Cotton Ginning.--The Committee recognizes the importance of
pollution abatement, improving fiber quality, ginning
efficiency, cotton seed and other byproducts, and provides an
additional $500,000 to expand research in cotton ginning and
innovation by existing laboratories.
Cover Crops Research and Outreach.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of developing profitable and
practicable cover crop options for use in dairy, grain, and
vegetable production systems, including for use in no-till
organic systems and as forages. Therefore, the Committee
recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level
for ARS to support research with the purposes of improving
measures of soil health and resiliency, varietal development,
optimizing dairy forage species combinations, timing and
strategies for cover crop seeding and termination, forage
integration into organic dairy systems, and mitigation of
environmental and extreme rainfall impacts on water quality and
soil security for diverse cover crop systems.
Cranberry Research.--The Committee recognizes the need for
advancements in water conservation, pest control, disease
reduction, and fruit quality improvements in cranberry
production. The Committee recommendation includes no less than
the fiscal year 2017 level for the improvement of cranberry
yields, pest management, disease management, and water resource
management by developing fields devoted to cranberry research
and collection and storage of samples for analysis in
appropriate existing laboratory facilities. The Committee
acknowledges that the sale or encumbrance of real property by a
non-Federal entity may be necessary to advance the
aforementioned purposes and may be considered an originally
authorized purpose under the current governing regulations at
the awarding agency's discretion.
Emerging Cereal Rust Diseases.--The Committee is aware that
emerging cereal rust diseases are a threat to domestic and
world food supplies. Therefore, the Department should continue
to dedicate funding to speed efforts to combat cereal rust
disease, including development of Ug99-resistant wheat
varieties.
Floriculture and Nursery Research.--The Committee
recognizes the economic importance of the floriculture and
nursery sector of agriculture and the industry's need for
continued innovation. The Committee encourages ARS to support
academic and Federal researchers to pursue efforts in crop
protection, breeding, mechanization and other areas through
USDA's Floriculture and Nursery Research Initiative to secure a
more efficient and productive floriculture and nursery
industry.
Food Systems.--The Committee directs ARS to work with a
land-grant institution to establish a Food Systems Center that
will address how local, regional and global food systems can
provide nutritious and culturally appropriate food, regardless
of individual life circumstances.
Forage Production Systems.--The Committee recommendation
includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level to develop
management practices that improve the production efficiency of
grazing operations in temperate pastures.
Forest Products.--The Committee recognizes the important
role of the forests products sector to the U.S. economy. The
need to create new and improved value-added products and
renewable energy from our Nation's wood supply is critical to
the sustainability of the national economy. The Committee
recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level
to support research on wood quality improvement and improvement
in forest products evaluation standards and valuation
techniques. ARS shall conduct this research in consultation
with the Forest Products Laboratory.
Fruit Fly and Exotic Pest Control.--Within 90 days of
enactment of this Act, the Committee directs ARS to study and
make recommendations on the feasibility of additional support
to prevent the spread of fruit flies and other exotic pests to
the U.S. mainland from the tropical Pacific.
Genetic Oat Research.--The Committee recognizes the
potential genetic oat research has to improve disease
resistance (especially rusts and viruses), genetics, increase
yields, and develop crop rotation systems that include oat,
which will enhance the value of oats and provide benefits to
producers and consumers. The Committee encourages ARS to expand
existing research focused on oat improvement.
Genomes to Fields.--The Committee recommendation includes
no less than the fiscal year 2017 level to expand the Germplasm
Enhancement of Maize [GEM] project to complement the existing
USDA maize germplasm programs and support the emerging large-
scale public sector effort to investigate the interaction of
maize genome variation and environments, known as the Genomes
to Fields project.
High Performance Computing Support.--The Committee provides
$1,000,000 to expand high performance computing capability to
address scientific needs and directs ARS to collaborate with
appropriate partners with the technical capacity and scientific
synergy to provide cost-effective high performance computing
support.
Human Nutrition Research.--The Committee remains concerned
about the high rates of obesity in this country, and believes
that research into human nutrition is important to help prevent
childhood obesity and the medical issues obesity brings. The
Committee recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year
2017 level to expand research regarding the growth, health
promotion, diet, immune function, and disease prevention of the
developing child.
National Agricultural Library.--The Committee strongly
encourages the Agricultural Research Service to maintain its
focus on agriculture-related legal issues within the National
Agricultural Library. The Committee notes that as the
agriculture sector faces increasing financial stress, there is
a necessity that agriculture-related legal issues be addressed
on an increasingly frequent basis. Further, agricultural-
related legal issues are increasingly complex and the impact of
these legal issues continues to broaden in scope. Therefore,
the Committee recommendation includes an increase of $2,000,000
above the fiscal year 2017 enacted level for the National
Agricultural Library to expand the Agricultural Law Information
Partnership.
National Apple Rootstock Breeding Program.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of the National Apple Rootstock
Breeding Program, which provides virus-free rootstock to apple
growers throughout the Nation. Therefore, the Committee
recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level
to support the ARS National Apple Rootstock Breeding Program.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility Workforce
Development.--The Committee notes that significant resources
have been invested in the new National Bio and Agro-Defense
Facility [NBAF] and is concerned about the potential shortage
of qualified scientists, including DVM-PhDs, when the facility
opens in 2022. The Committee recommendation includes no less
than the fiscal year 2017 level for ARS to develop the
necessary mechanisms to ensure a viable and qualified
scientific workforce is available, and to implement a program
to recruit and train scientists, and other technical positions,
focused on pathology, virology, immunology, entomology,
epidemiology, microbiology, and computational biology for
productive USDA careers at NBAF.
Nutrient Density Profile.--The ARS is directed to update
the nutrient profile and nutrient density characterization of
pure maple syrup.
Nutrition Research and Aging.--Food and nutrition play a
central role in U.S. health, environment, and economic
development. In fact, diet-related disease has become America's
largest single cause of premature death and disability. More
research is needed to address the needs of all Americans, with
a particular focus on the elderly, the fastest growing segment
of the population. Therefore, the Agricultural Research Service
is encouraged to prioritize human nutrition research to explore
the relationship between nutrition, physical activity, and
healthy and active aging.
Office of Pest Management Policy.--The Committee recognizes
the critical role that the Office of Pest Management Policy
[OPMP] plays in fulfilling USDA's statutory role in the
interagency consultative process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The importance of OPMP's
mission has increased commensurately with the increased actions
undertaken by EPA, and the Committee provides no less than the
fiscal year 2017 level for OPMP to fulfill its obligations on
behalf of USDA.
Pear Genetics and Genomics.--The Committee recognizes that
research into pear genetics and genomics is needed to identify
genetic sources of pest resistance and to contribute to
improved, size-controlling rootstocks to enhance orchard
efficiency, and to otherwise improve cultivated pear research.
The Committee recommendation includes an increase of $500,000
to support research into pear genetics and genomics.
Poultry Research.--The Committee recognizes the important
role of the poultry sector to the U.S. economy. The Committee
provides no less than the fiscal year 2017 funding level to
expand the research capacity for poultry production and health.
Rangeland Research.--The Committee recognizes the
demonstrated potential for cooperative partnerships to address
complex sagebrush steppe ecosystem challenges in the Great
Basin region. The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000
for ARS to support a regional, multi-institutional cooperative
partnership to advance collaborative science-based conservation
research, extension, and education to address time-sensitive
and shared rangeland challenges affecting sustainable
agricultural productivity, rural communities, and wildlife
habitats.
Research Assistance.--The Committee encourages the
Agricultural Research Service to provide direct, place-based
assistance to 1862 Institutions in States that do not have
Agricultural Research Service facilities to address the
research priorities of such States, such as invasive plant
species and insects that cause significant impacts to
agriculture, aquaculture, and communities in such States and to
assist in the development of specialty and horticultural crops
to increase food security and expand marketing opportunities
for small farmers.
Research Facilities.--The Committee directs ARS to work
cooperatively with land-grant universities to better utilize
available state-of-the-art laboratory space to effectively
address important agricultural research issues, including
obstacles to increasing food production. These challenges
include diseases which affect the blueberry, potato, apple, and
marine finfish aquaculture production. The Committee again
directs ARS to study ways in which the Federal labs could be
better utilized, in cooperation with land-grant universities,
to explore new scientific opportunities that benefit the
Nation's food and agriculture system, and to submit a report
with recommendations to the Committee by January 30, 2018. The
report should include information on the current utilization of
ARS facilities by universities and other cooperators, as well
as the extent in which ARS is housed in cooperator facilities.
Roseau Cane.--The Committee is concerned with the invasive
species scale insect pest that is destroying Roseau cane in the
Mississippi River's Delta region along the Gulf of Mexico. An
estimated 225,000 acres of wetlands in the Delta have been
affected with the die-off, and Roseau cane is important in
maintaining a healthy marsh and preventing erosion. The
Committee directs ARS to work with the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service [APHIS] and stakeholders to develop an
integrated management program for control of the Roseau cane
scale insect pest infestation.
Sage Steppe Restoration Science.--The Committee includes no
less than the fiscal year 2017 level for ARS to advance
sagebrush habitat restoration science in the Northern Great
Basin including cooperative research, testing and deploying
precision restoration methods to restore habitat impacted by
significant disturbance such as wildfire and invasive species.
Sclerotinia.--The Committee is aware of the economic
importance of controlling sclerotinia, which affects
sunflowers, soybeans, canola, edible beans, peas, and lentils
and encourages ARS to continue both core research and
cooperative projects of the National Sclerotinia Initiative.
Shellfish Research.--The Committee encourages the
Agricultural Research Service to increase its investment in
partnerships with research institutions on research to improve
shellfish survival and growth rates and to classify and
preserve natural genetic variation.
Soft White Wheat Falling Numbers Test.--The Committee
recognizes the emerging crisis surrounding wheat starch
degradation, as detected by the Hagberg-Perten Falling Numbers
[FN] Test. The Committee recommendation includes an increase of
$1,000,000 to research the accuracy of the FN test, and better
understand environmental, storage, and genetic conditions
leading to this quality loss.
Small Grains Genomic Initiative.--The Committee supports
research on barley and wheat high throughput genomics and
phenotyping and recognizes its importance in improving crop
traits and developing new cultivars. The Committee
recommendation includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level
to support the Small Grains Genomic Initiative.
Sorghum Genetic Database.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of phenotyping and genotyping that allows breeders
to understand which genes are responsible for improvements in
pest resistance, drought tolerance, and yield. The Committee
recommends an increase of no less than the fiscal year 2017
level to further facilitate the partnership between ARS and the
Department of Energy on sorghum genome mapping--particularly
the creation of an easily-accessed database to house the
information generated from the ongoing genetic sequencing
research which will facilitate further crop development
efforts, especially in combating the sugarcane aphid, a new and
devastating invasive pest.
Sustainable Water Use Research.--The alluvial plain within
the Lower Mississippi River Basin is one of most productive
agricultural regions in the United States. The Committee
remains concerned with the unsustainable use of water in the
Alluvial Aquifer as a result of increasing water withdrawals
and stagnant recharging. The Committee provides an increase of
$1,000,000 for research to improve the recharge capabilities of
the Alluvial Aquifer and to develop new conservation and
irrigation techniques to reduce water usage in agriculture
production.
Tropical and Subtropical Research.--Research on Tropical
and Subtropical crops is critical as the presence of and
destruction by invasive pests such as fruit flies, coffee berry
borer, felted macadamia nut coccid, and plant viruses and
funguses increase and threaten crop security in the Pacific and
Insular Areas, and the Committee encourages ARS to support this
research.
UAS Precision Agriculture Applications.--The Committee
provides an additional $3,000,000 to expand efforts utilizing
unmanned aerial systems [UAS] in crop production operations and
to address the challenges associated with data capture,
transfer and analysis.
U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative [USWBSI].--The
Committee recognizes that fusarium head blight is a major
threat to agriculture, inflicting substantial yield and quality
losses throughout the U.S. The Committee supports research
carried out through the USWBSI. The Committee recommendation
includes no less than the fiscal year 2017 level to conduct
further research on reducing the impact of fusarium head blight
on wheat and barley.
Warmwater Aquaculture.--The Committee provides and
additional $1,200,000 to facilitate the advancement of
technologies that improve the efficiency, profitability and
sustainability of warmwater aquaculture production.
Wheat and Sorghum Research.--The Committee recognizes the
potential impact heat and drought can have on the yield and
quality of wheat and sorghum and the need for new cultivars to
adapt to changing climatic conditions. In addition, sorghum
crops have been particularly hit hard by the invasive sugarcane
aphid and new resistant cultivars are needed. The Committee
provides no less than the fiscal year 2017 level for research
to improve the productivity and quality of wheat and sorghum
during uncertain growing seasons resulting from extended
droughts and increased temperatures. Within this increase,
funding is included to initiate gene flow research to advance
the durability and sustainability of fitness traits in sorghum.
Agricultural Research Service
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $99,600,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for
Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and Facilities.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Section 7511(f)(2) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy
Act of 2008 amends the Department of Agriculture Reorganization
Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6971) by establishing an agency to be
known as the National Institute of Food and Agriculture [NIFA].
The Secretary transferred to the Director of NIFA, effective
October 1, 2009, all authorities administered by the
Administrator of the Cooperative State, Research, Education and
Extension Service. The mission is to work with university
partners and customers to advance research, extension, and
higher education in the food and agricultural sciences and
related environmental and human sciences to benefit people,
communities, and the Nation.
RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $849,518,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 769,613,000
Committee recommendation................................ 854,871,000
Research and Education programs administered by NIFA are
USDA's principal entree to the university system of the United
States for the purpose of conducting agricultural research and
education programs as authorized by the Hatch Act of 1887, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative
Forestry Act of 1962, as amended (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.); the
Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 450i); the National Agricultural, Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7
U.S.C. 3101 et seq.); the Equity in Educational Land-Grant
Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note); the Agricultural
Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (Public
Law 105-185), as amended; the Food, Agriculture, Conservation
and Trade Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-624); the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171); and the
Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246).
Through these authorities, USDA participates with State and
other cooperators to encourage and assist the State
institutions in the conduct of agricultural research and
education through the State Agricultural Experiment Stations of
the 50 States and the territories; by approved Schools of
Forestry; the 1890 Land-Grant Institutions and Tuskegee
University and West Virginia State University; 1994 Land-Grant
Institutions; by Colleges of Veterinary Medicine; and other
eligible institutions. The appropriated funds provide Federal
support for research and education programs at these
institutions.
The research and education programs participate in a
nationwide system of agricultural research program planning and
coordination among the State institutions, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and the agricultural industry of America.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $854,871,000
for research and education activities of the National Institute
of Food and Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for research and education activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hatch Act..................................... 7 U.S.C. 361a-i................................ 243,701
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act..... 16 U.S.C. 582a through a-7..................... 33,961
Research at 1890 Institutions (Evans-Allen 7 U.S.C. 3222.................................. 54,185
Program).
Payments to the 1994 Institutions............. 534(a)(1) of Public Law 103-382................ 3,439
Education Grants for 1890 Institutions........ 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)............................... 19,336
Education Grants for Hispanic-Serving 7 U.S.C. 3241.................................. 9,219
Institutions.
Education Grants for Alaska Native and Native 7 U.S.C. 3156.................................. 3,194
Hawaiian-Serving Institutions.
Research Grants for 1994 Institutions......... 536 of Public Law 103-382...................... 3,801
Capacity Building for Non Land-Grant Colleges 7 U.S.C. 3319i................................. 5,000
of Agriculture.
Resident Instruction and Distance Education 7 U.S.C. 3362 and 3363......................... 2,000
Grants for Insular Areas.
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative...... 7 U.S.C. 450i(b)............................... 375,000
Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment............ 7 U.S.C. 3151a................................. 6,500
Veterinary Services Grant Program............. 7 U.S.C. 3151b................................. 2,500
Continuing Animal Health and Disease Research 7 U.S.C. 3195.................................. 4,000
Program.
Supplemental and Alternative Crops............ 7 U.S.C. 3319d................................. 825
Multicultural Scholars, Graduate Fellowship 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)............................... 9,000
and Institutions Challenge Grants.
Secondary and 2-year Post-Secondary Education. 7 U.S.C. 3152(j)............................... 900
Aquaculture Centers........................... 7 U.S.C. 3322.................................. 5,000
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education 7 U.S.C. 5811, 5812, 5831, and 5832............ 30,000
Farm Business Management...................... 7 U.S.C. 5925f................................. 1,450
Sun Grant Program............................. 7 U.S.C. 8114.................................. 3,000
Improved Pest Control:
Minor Crop Pest Management (IR-4)......... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)............................... 11,913
Alfalfa Forage and Research Program....... 7 U.S.C. 5925.................................. 2,250
Special Research Grants:7 U.S.C. 450i(c):
Global Change/UV Monitoring............... ............................................... 1,405
Potato Research........................... ............................................... 2,250
Aquaculture Research...................... ............................................... 1,350
----------------
Total, Special Research Grants........ ............................................... 5,005
================
Necessary Expenses of Research and Education
Activities:
Grants Management System.................. ............................................... 7,830
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ............................................... 11,862
Expenses for Research and Education
Activities.
----------------
Total, Necessary Expenses............. ............................................... 19,692
================
Total, Research and Education ............................................... 854,871
Activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.--The Committee
recommendation includes $375,000,000 for the Agriculture and
Food Research Initiative [AFRI].
Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 specifies priority areas with the Agriculture and Food
Research Initiative [AFRI], including an emphasis on
conventional (classical) plant and animal breeding. The
Committee notes the importance of this requirement to provide
farmers nationwide with greater access to cultivars that are
locally and regionally adapted to their soils, climates and
farming systems. Because of the agency's lack of progress in
prioritizing this effort, the Committee urges the agency to
make regionally adapted, publicly held cultivar development a
distinct funding priority within AFRI for fiscal year 2018, and
directs the agency to report its progress in meeting this goal.
Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.--The Committee
remains determined to see that quality research and enhanced
human resources development in the agricultural and related
sciences be a nationwide commitment. Therefore, the Committee
continues its direction that not less than 15 percent of the
competitive research grant funds be used for USDA's
agricultural research enhancement awards program, including
USDA-EPSCoR.
Agriculture Technology.--The Committee encourages USDA to
support research and development of agricultural robotics,
particularly to increase yields in vertically stacked farming
production.
Agroecosystems Research.--Section 7406 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 specifies priority areas
for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative [AFRI],
including an emphasis on the fundamental structures and
functions of ecosystems, the biological and physical bases of
sustainable production systems, minimizing soil and water
losses, and biological diversity. The intended goal of this
section is ecologically-based management of production systems
that generates ecosystem services with benefits to farmers,
rural and urban communities, and the environment. Therefore,
the Committee strongly urges making agroecosystems research,
including explicit integration of social, economic and
environmental dimensions, with direct routes to implementation,
as an increased priority for funding within the AFRI program.
Alfalfa and Forage Research.--The Committee notes that
research into alfalfa seed and alfalfa forage systems holds the
potential to increase yields, increase milk production, and
improve genetics. The Committee recommendation includes
$2,250,000 to support research into the improvement of yields,
water conservation, creation of new uses, and the development
of new storage and harvest systems.
Aquaculture Disease Research.--The Committee encourages
USDA to support aquaculture disease and vaccine research,
including research on coldwater aquaculture vaccines. There is
currently no national facility for pathogen testing. Research
into finfish vaccines and pathogens has the potential to
accelerate the growth of sustainable U.S. aquaculture, reduce
the trade deficit attributable to imported seafood, and reduce
the pressure on overfished species.
Aquaculture Research.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the domestic aquaculture industry to the U.S.
economy. The Committee recommendation includes $1,350,000 for
aquaculture research to address issues related to genetics,
disease, systems, and economics.
Aquaponics Workforce Development.--As aquaculture,
aquaponics and related industries continue to grow as
significant economic drivers and food producers, the need for
training to develop an informed and competent workforce becomes
critical. The Committee encourages USDA to consider developing
a program to create national standards for these disciplines
across the Nation, and to provide workforce training for jobs
in the aquaculture and aquaculture related industries.
Brucellosis Research.--Federal and State animal health
officials have made eradicating livestock disease with
significant reservoirs a national animal health priority. This
need was reflected in the Agricultural Act of 2014, which made
the research and development of surveillance methods, vaccines,
vaccination delivery systems or diagnostics tests a priority
research area under the Competitive, Special, and Facilities
Research Grant Act particularly for bovine brucellosis and
bovine tuberculosis. The Committee recognizes the need for this
research and encourages the agency to make competitive grants
available to study improved management tools for zoonotic
livestock diseases with significant wildlife reservoirs.
Cereal Crop Research.--Research on cereal crops has
historically been conducted by USDA and public universities,
and the Committee recognizes the importance of continuing
investment in cereal crop research. The Committee strongly
encourages USDA to provide funding for cereal crop research in
the areas of genetic and genomic research, plant pest research,
and improved production systems.
Childhood Obesity.--The Committee encourages USDA to
support innovative efforts to address the unique challenges
faced in addressing obesity among children and youth in urban,
minority low-income populations through a combination of family
education and clinical studies.
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.
Community College Centers of Excellence in Agribusiness
Workforce Training.--The Committee encourages NIFA to designate
Community College Centers of Excellence in Agribusiness
Workforce Training, to include a limited number of 2-year
community and technical colleges with a demonstrated capability
to provide training and education for Agribusiness. The Centers
of Excellence will seek to develop model programs in
Agribusiness and promote economic development.
Countering Seafood Fraud.--The Committee remains concerned
about countering economic fraud and improving food safety of
the U.S. food supply. The Committee is concerned that adequate
technology is not yet available to provide for appropriate
sampling of the food supply. The Committee believes NIFA should
conduct research to develop technologies that will provide
rapid, portable and facile screening of fish species at port
sites, wholesale, and retail centers.
Diversification in Agriculture.--The Committee recognizes
the rapid evolution of U.S. agriculture, including the
diversification of practices, markets, and technologies as
farms transition to one generation from another, and encourages
NIFA to prioritize investments that deliver hands-on technical
education in diversified agriculture and food systems.
Food Safety.--The Committee recommends that NIFA prioritize
research on funding for new food safety technologies relating
to the Nation's meat supply that helps researchers, producers,
and manufacturers.
Food Safety and Defense Technology.--The Committee is
concerned that insufficient progress is being made in the
development of detection technology in the food safety sector.
The ability to rapidly, accurately, and cost effectively detect
pathogens or contaminants throughout the food supply chain is
critical to protecting the United States from food-borne
illnesses and malicious acts. As such, the Committee encourages
NIFA to increase research of novel biodetection technologies
and the implementation of mobile biodetection platforms in
real-world conditions. 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 either high volume
food production or mobile food defense monitoring.
Lowbush Blueberries.--The Committee directs NIFA to work
with research institutions to develop and refine predictive
models and monitoring technologies for native and invasive
pests for incorporation into integrated pest management
programs for naturally seeded, native berry crops to increase
the margin of food safety and product quality.
Oak Mites.--The Committee directs NIFA to study the recent
infestation of oak mites and focus on suppression and
eradication possibilities.
Organic Research.--USDA's National Organic Standards Board
[NOSB] has identified key organic research priorities, many of
which would help to address challenges that have limited the
growth in organic production in this country. The Committee
encourages NIFA to give strong consideration to the NOSB
organic research priorities when crafting the fiscal year 2018
RFAs for AFRI and the Organic Transition Program.
Protein Functionality.--The Committee encourages USDA to
support research projects that characterize protein from crop
plants such as chickpeas, sorghum, lentils, fava beans, lupin,
rice, oats, mushrooms, and water lentils to assess their
suitability for use in food products. The Committee is
particularly interested in research projects involving plants
that can be easily cultivated in the U.S. and that are
sustainably grown and produced (in terms of factors such as
water usage or fertilizer and pesticide requirements).
Regional Research Priorities.--The Committee encourages
NIFA to consider providing funding within AFRI to assist with
State and regional research priorities, with USDA oversight and
review.
Seafood.--The Committee encourages USDA, in partnership
with universities with established domestic shrimp farming
programs, to support the development of a domestic industry
that will help ensure the safety and quality of the Nation's
seafood supply, promote environmentally sustainable
aquaculture, create new opportunities for U.S. agriculture, and
forge new markets for U.S. grain and oilseed products and
technology services.
Soil Remediation Research.--Lead contamination of soil is
an urgent problem in both rural and urban areas of the country.
The Committee notes that phytotechnology, using plants to
remove contaminants from soil, has been used to remediate soils
contaminated with heavy metals such as zinc, cadmium, selenium,
nickel and lead, but that technical barriers to more widespread
adoption of this technology exist. Therefore, the Committee
encourages USDA to support innovative efforts to improve
phytoremediation technologies.
Specialty Crop Research Initiative.--The Committee
emphasizes the important role of the Specialty Crop Research
Initiative in addressing the critical needs of the specialty
crop industry through research and extension activities, and
encourages NIFA to prioritize proposals for and enhance its
overall commitment to identifying and addressing threats to
pollinators from pests and diseases.
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education.--The
Committee is strongly supportive of the SARE program and
directs USDA to ensure that research, education and extension
activities carried out within SARE remain intact.
Unmanned Aerial Systems in Agriculture.--The Committee
encourages USDA to support regional institutes focused on the
development of Unmanned Aerial Systems [UAS] and fostering new
innovations in agriculture and cybersecurity. UAS is a tool to
obtain data in a wide variety of application areas including
energy, agriculture, power infrastructure, and transportation,
all critical to rural States. The Committee encourages NIFA to
support the research, development, and expansion of the use of
UAS and high performance computing.
Veterinary Corps.--Veterinarians fulfilling the terms of a
contract under USDA's Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment
Program, authorized by the National Veterinary Medical Services
Act, shall be members of the National Veterinary Medical
Services Corps and members who have fulfilled the terms of
their contract shall be alumni of the Corps.
Zoonotic Disease Research.--Federal and State animal health
officials have made eradicating livestock diseases with
significant wildlife reservoirs a national animal health
priority. This need is reflected in the Agricultural Act of
2014 which made the research and development of surveillance
methods, vaccines, vaccination delivery systems or diagnostic
tests a priority research area under the Competitive, Special,
and Facilities Research Grant Act particularly for bovine
brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis. The Committee recognizes
the need for this research and encourages the agency to make
competitive grants available to study improved management tools
for zoonotic livestock diseases with significant wildlife
reservoirs.
NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $11,880,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 11,880,000
The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized
by Public Law 103-382, the Equity in Educational Land-Grant
Status Act, provides an endowment for the 1994 land-grant
institutions (34 tribally controlled colleges). This program
will enhance educational opportunity for Native Americans by
building educational capacity at these institutions in the
areas of student recruitment and retention, curricula
development, faculty preparation, instruction delivery systems,
and scientific instrumentation for teaching. Income funds are
also available for facility renovation, repair, construction,
and maintenance. On the termination of each fiscal year, the
Secretary shall withdraw the income from the endowment fund for
the fiscal year, and after making adjustments for the cost of
administering the endowment fund, distribute the adjusted
income as follows: 60 percent of the adjusted income from these
funds shall be distributed among the 1994 land-grant
institutions on a pro rata basis, the proportionate share being
based on the Indian student count; and 40 percent of the
adjusted income shall be distributed in equal shares to the
1994 land-grant institutions.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,880,000
for the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund.
EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $477,391,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 462,890,000
Committee recommendation................................ 481,376,000
Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
Lever Act of May 8, 1914, as amended. The Department of
Agriculture is authorized to provide, through the land-grant
colleges, cooperative extension work that consists of the
development of practical applications of research knowledge and
the giving of instruction and practical demonstrations of
existing or improved practices or technologies in agriculture
and related subjects, and to encourage the application of such
information by demonstrations, publications, through 4-H clubs,
and other means to persons not in attendance or resident at the
colleges.
To fulfill the requirements of the Smith-Lever Act, State
and county extension offices in each State, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa, the Northern Marianas, and Micronesia conduct
educational programs to improve American agriculture and
strengthen the Nation's families and communities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $481,376,000
for extension activities of the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for extension activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c) and 7 U.S.C. 343(b) and (c) and 208(c) of Public 300,000
Cooperative Extension. Law 93-471.
Extension Services at 1890 Institutions....... 7 U.S.C. 3221.................................. 45,620
Extension Services at 1994 Institutions....... 7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3)............................. 6,446
Facility Improvements at 1890 Institutions.... 7 U.S.C. 3222b................................. 19,730
Renewable Resources Extension Act............. 16 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.......................... 4,060
Rural Health and Safety Education Programs.... 7 U.S.C. 2662(i)............................... 3,000
Food and Animal Residue Avoidance Database 7 U.S.C. 7642.................................. 1,250
Program.
Women and Minorities in STEM Fields........... 7 U.S.C. 5925.................................. 400
Food Safety Outreach Program.................. 7 U.S.C. 7625.................................. 7,000
Smith-LeverAct, Section 3(d):
Food and Nutrition Education.............. 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 67,934
Farm Safety and Youth Farm Safety 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 4,610
Education Programs.
New Technologies for Agricultural 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 1,550
Extension.
Children, Youth, and Families at Risk..... 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 8,395
Federally Recognized Tribes Extension 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 3,039
Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Section 3(d)..................... ............................................... 85,528
Necessary Expenses of Research and Education
Activities:
Agriculture in the K-12 Classroom......... ............................................... 552
Federal Administration--Other Necessary ............................................... 7,790
Expenses for Research and Education
Activities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Necessary Expenses............. ............................................... 8,342
Total, Extension Activities........... ............................................... 481,376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $36,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 20,276,000
Committee recommendation................................ 37,000,000
Section 406, as amended, of the Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 authorizes an
integrated research, education, and extension competitive
grants program.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $37,000,000
for integrated activities of the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for integrated activities:
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Program/Activity Authorization recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methyl Bromide Transition Program............. 7 U.S.C. 7626.................................. 2,000
Organic Transition Program.................... 7 U.S.C. 7626.................................. 5,000
Regional Rural Development Centers............ 7 U.S.C. 450i(c)............................... 2,000
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative....... 7 U.S.C. 3351.................................. 8,000
Crop Protection/Pest Management............... 7 U.S.C. 343(d)................................ 20,000
----------------
Total, Integrated Activities............ ............................................... 37,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative.--The Committee
supports the important work being done through the publicly
funded diagnostic laboratory network and encourages NIFA to
prioritize funding to strengthen animal health diagnostic
laboratories taking into consideration the degree to which the
capacity for surveillance, monitoring, response, and capacity
is enhanced; the concentration of human and animal populations
that are directly at risk; trade, tourism, and cultural
considerations; geography, ecology, and climate; evidence of
active collaboration with, and support of, the State animal
health officials; those States with highest risk for the
introduction of foreign and emerging pests and diseases; and
evidence of stakeholder support and engagement.
Potato Research.--To minimize the application of pesticides
and to maximize the yield and quality of harvested potatoes,
the Committee directs the Secretary to support pest management
programs in potato growing States. Such programs help
scientists track potential pest outbreaks and provide growers
and industry professionals with current information on specific
and timely treatments. Additionally, the programs help identify
serious diseases, such as late blight disease, in their early
stages, allowing for preventive measures to be put into place
quickly to avoid crop losses.
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $901,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 891,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in
carrying out laws with respect to the Department's marketing,
grading, and standardization activities related to grain;
competitive marketing practices of livestock, marketing orders,
and various programs; veterinary services; and plant protection
and quarantine. The Office has oversight and management
responsibilities for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service; Agricultural Marketing Service; and Grain Inspection,
Packers and Stockyards Administration.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory
Programs.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $946,212,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 810,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 953,212,000
The Secretary of Agriculture established the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] on April 2, 1972, under
the authority of reorganization plan No. 2 of 1953, and other
authorities. The major objectives of APHIS are to protect the
animal and plant resources of the Nation from diseases and
pests. These objectives are carried out under the major areas
of activity, as follows:
Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness/Response.--The
agency monitors plant and animal health worldwide, and sets
import polices to prevent the introduction of foreign plant and
animal pests and diseases. Domestically, the agency works
cooperatively to conduct plant and animal health monitoring
programs, pursue eradication, or limit the spread of the
threat. The agency also conducts diagnostic laboratory
activities that support disease prevention, detection, control,
and eradication programs. In addition, the agency protects
agriculture from detrimental animal predators, and through its
regulatory structure helps advance genetic research while
protecting against the release of harmful organisms.
Safe Trade and International Technical Assistance.--The
agency helps resolve technical trade issues to ensure the
smooth and safe movement of agricultural commodities into and
out of the United States. The agency negotiates animal and
plant health certification requirements and assists U.S.
exporters meet foreign regulatory demands. In addition, the
agency assists developing countries in improving their
safeguarding systems, to protect the United States from
emerging plant and animal pests and diseases.
Animal Care.--The agency conducts regulatory activities
that ensure the humane care and treatment of animals and horses
as the Animal Welfare and Horse Protection Acts require. These
activities include inspection of certain establishments that
handle animals intended for research, exhibition, and as pets,
and monitoring certain horse shows.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $953,212,000
for salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
The following table reflects the Committee's specific
recommendations for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service:
ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safeguarding and International Technical Assistance:
Animal Health Technical Services......................... 37,857 35,272 37,857
Aquatic Animal Health.................................... 2,253 2,249 2,253
Avian Health............................................. 55,340 55,235 55,340
Cattle Health............................................ 91,500 91,326 91,500
Equine, Cervid and Small Ruminant Health................. 20,000 19,463 20,000
National Veterinary Stockpile............................ 5,723 3,965 5,723
Swine Health............................................. 24,800 24,753 24,800
Veterinary Biologics..................................... 16,417 16,386 16,417
Veterinary Diagnostics................................... 39,540 36,471 39,540
Zoonotic Disease Management.............................. 16,523 9,505 16,523
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Animal Health................................ 309,953 294,625 309,953
==================================================
Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated)........ 29,330 27,847 29,330
Cotton Pests............................................. 11,520 7,000 11,520
Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystems Pests.................. 8,826 8,809 8,826
Pest Detection........................................... 27,446 27,394 27,446
Plant Protection Methods Development..................... 20,686 20,647 20,686
Specialty Crop Pests..................................... 166,500 148,033 166,500
Tree & Wood Pests........................................ 54,000 30,000 56,000
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Plant Health................................. 318,308 269,730 320,308
==================================================
Wildlife Damage Management............................... 103,376 56,331 108,376
Wildlife Services Methods Development.................... 18,856 18,820 18,856
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Wildlife Services............................ 122,232 75,151 127,232
==================================================
Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement............. 16,224 16,193 16,224
Biotechnology Regulatory Services........................ 18,875 18,839 18,875
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Regulatory Services.......................... 35,099 35,032 35,099
Contingency Fund......................................... 470 469 470
Emergency Preparedness & Response........................ 40,966 16,934 40,966
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Emergency Management......................... 41,436 17,403 41,436
==================================================
Subtotal, Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness/ 827,028 691,941 827,028
Response..............................................
==================================================
Safe Trade and International Technical Assistance:
Agriculture Import/Export................................ 15,599 15,070 15,599
Overseas Technical & Trade Operations.................... 22,114 22,072 22,114
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Safe Trade................................... 37,713 37,142 37,713
==================================================
Animal Welfare:
Animal Welfare........................................... 28,810 28,356 28,810
Horse Protection......................................... 697 696 697
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Animal Welfare............................... 29,507 29,052 29,507
==================================================
Agency Management:
APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure.............. 4,251 4,243 4,251
Physical/Operational Security............................ 5,146 5,136 5,146
Rent and DHS security payments........................... 42,567 42,486 42,567
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Agency Management............................ 51,964 51,865 51,964
==================================================
Total, Direct Appropriation............................ 946,212 810,000 953,212
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Quarantine Inspection.--The Committee
recognizes that prevention of infestations of pests and
diseases is much more cost effective than subsequent control or
eradication. This is an important Federal responsibility and
the Committee provides $29,330,000 for the agricultural
quarantine inspections [AQI] function, including pre-departure
and interline inspections.
The Committee is concerned that new fee regulations under
the AQI program may not be equitable to small commercial
aircraft. The Committee directs the Secretary to review AQI
user fees to ensure they are in line with the costs of
delivering AQI services, ,and to review both the equity of user
fees among smaller regional jets compared to larger
transpacific aircraft, and a pro-rated fee based on aircraft
size. The Committee directs the Secretary to report on these
findings to this Committee within 90 days of enactment of this
Act.
Animal Disease Traceability.--The Committee is concerned
with APHIS' consideration of expanding the Animal Disease
Traceability [ADT] program related to requiring identification
of beef cattle younger than 18 months of age or feeder cattle.
While the committee supports the agency's mission to conduct
animal disease tracing, the mandatory identification and
tracing of feeder cattle would be costly. Prior to
implementation of any new changes to the ADT program related to
feeder cattle, the committee directs the Secretary to submit a
report detailing the cost and benefits to all pertinent
stakeholders, including but not limited to, livestock markets,
livestock producers, meatpackers, and livestock dealers, of any
proposed program changes. The report shall consider costs of
tagging and reading tags such as labor, facilities, and speed
of commerce.
Bee Pests.--The Committee remains concerned with declining
bee populations and the tragic implications for pollination of
U.S. agriculture. The Committee directs the agency to continue
priority work with other Federal and State agencies and the
public to manage, suppress, and eradicate varroa mites, small
hive beetles, and other pests and diseases contributing to
colony collapse disorder.
Cattle Fever Ticks.--The Committee appreciates the
commitment by APHIS, including recent additional funding, to
respond to the most recent outbreak of cattle fever ticks. The
Committee encourages the agency to maintain this focus and
provide adequate funding for all activities under the Cattle
Fever Tick Eradication Program [CFTEP]; heighten efforts to
coordinate the response with the Department of Interior on
national wildlife refuges; and provide sufficient funding for
research and scientific tools to be developed that concentrate
on the following: new systematic cattle fever tick treatment
products with longer treatment intervals for cattle; new cattle
fever tick treatment products for wildlife, especially nilgai
antelope; and new or improved cattle fever tick preventative
therapies, such as vaccines, for both cattle and wildlife
hosts.
Ceratocystis Disease.--The Secretary is directed to
continue the study of Ceratocystis in the United States and
implement actions and recommendations for response and
management in the report mandated by this Committee in fiscal
year 2017.
Chronic Wasting Disease.--The Committee provides no less
than $3,500,000 for cervid health activities. Within the funds
provided, APHIS should give consideration to indemnity payments
if warranted.
Citrus Health Response Program [CHRP].--CHRP is a national
effort to maintain a viable citrus industry within the United
States, maintain producer's continued access to export markets,
and safeguard citrus producing states against a variety of
invasive pests and diseases. These funds are designed to
partner with state departments of agriculture and industry
groups to address the challenges of citrus pests and diseases.
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.
Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle.--The Secretary is directed to
continue efforts to control and eradicate the coconut
rhinoceros beetle in the Pacific to prevent the spread of the
beetle to the U.S. mainland, and may, if appropriate, provide
additional surge funding to match Department of Defense
spending for this purpose.
Feral Swine Management.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of the National Feral Swine Damage Management
Program in reducing adverse ecological and economic impacts
caused by feral swine. The Committee provides no less than the
fiscal year 2017 level in support of APHIS efforts to decrease
these invasive pests' damage and risk to agriculture, natural
resources, and property.
Huanglongbing Emergency Response.--The Committee maintains
the increased funding levels for Huanglongbing Emergency
Response within the Specialty Crop Pests line item included in
fiscal year 2017. 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 detected the disease in some
backyard trees in the Los Angeles basin. The spread of this
disease has called the domestic citrus industry's future into
question, costing thousands of jobs and millions in lost
revenue and increased production costs per acre. In addition,
the agency is encouraged to support priorities and strategies
identified by the Huanglongbing Multi-Agency Coordination [HLB-
MAC] Group which will benefit the citrus industry. The agency
should appropriately allocate resources based on critical need
and maximum effect to the citrus industry. The Committee
maintains the $2,000,000 increase from fiscal year 2017 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. Helping growers
explore new possible solutions, the MAC has been an effective
resource. 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 $11,000,000,000 in total.
Huanglongbing Multi-Agency Coordination [HLB-MAC] Group.--
The Committee recognizes the significant economic impact of
this disease on the citrus industry, which is especially acute
in Florida and a growing concern in both Texas and California.
The Committee also understands that growers are requesting the
right to try treatments that have begun to show success in
early stages of testing. The Committee encourages the HLB-MAC
group to explore and identify new methods to expedite the
delivery of promising treatments directly to growers. Finally,
the Committee expects any funds which are redirected from
existing HLB-MAC projects be repurposed to other priority HLB-
MAC projects that are showing promising results to ensure these
critical funds remain committed to help facilitate the design
and implementation of the rapid delivery pathway to growers.
Invasive Tree Pests.--The Committee recognizes that the
forests products industry and family forest owners are under
increasing threat from a growing number of invasive forest
pests. It is essential that APHIS carry out a comprehensive
program to counter the spread of invasive species and work
towards complete eradication of the Asian long-horned beetle.
The Secretary is directed to report to the Committee regarding
the steps being taken to eradicate the Asian long-horned beetle
and spotted lanternfly and to minimize the spread of other
pests such as the polyphagous and Kuroshio shot hole borers.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Human Capital Development.--
The Committee notes that significant resources have been
invested in the new National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility
[NBAF] and is concerned about projected staffing shortages of
qualified veterinary diagnosticians and scientists for the
NBAF, which is slated for full operation in 2022. The Committee
provides $3,000,000 to APHIS to ensure necessary steps are
taken to develop a qualified workforce that are subject matter
experts in foreign, emerging and zoonotic diseases capable of
developing, validating and conducting needed diagnostics,
performing epidemiologic studies, and completing bioinformatics
analyses.
Pacific Ants Prevention Plan.--The Secretary is encouraged
to lead the revision of the Pacific Ants Prevention Plan, in
collaboration with U.S. and international partners. The plan
should include: research; the development of technologies and
methodologies for prevention, eradication, and control of
invasive ants; and the collaborative implementation of projects
to prevent, monitor, and control invasive ants in affected
Pacific Islands.
Peer-Reviewed Accreditation.--The Committee notes APHIS's
collaboration with accrediting organizations in the
establishment and operation of the Zoo and Aquarium Hazards
Preparedness, Response and Recovery Fusion Center. The Center's
role in facilitating and enhancing collaboration between the
emergency management community and the greater managed wildlife
community will assist in emergency preparedness and response
for a wide range of circumstances including natural disasters
and animal disease outbreaks. This effort is commended and is
expected and encouraged to continue.
Regional Biosecurity Plan for Micronesia and Hawaii.--The
Secretary is directed to submit a report to this Committee on
USDA activities to implement the Regional Biosecurity Plan for
Micronesia and Hawaii [RBP]. The report shall include an update
on agencies' activities to date to implement the RBP, and
agencies' planned activities for further implementation.
Roseau Cane.--The Committee is concerned with the invasive
species scale insect pest that is destroying Roseau cane in the
Mississippi River's Delta region along the Gulf of Mexico. An
estimated 225,000 acres of wetlands in the Delta have been
affected with the die-off, and Roseau cane is important in
maintaining a healthy marsh and preventing erosion. The
Committee directs APHIS to work with the Agricultural Research
Service [ARS] and stakeholders to develop an integrated
management program for control of the Roseau cane scale insect
pest infestation.
Sudden Oak Death.--APHIS protects natural resources and
nursery stock production and trade by limiting the spread of
Phytopthora ramorum, which causes sudden oak death, from
quarantine areas and affected nurseries through implementation
of best management practices and regulatory activities.
Affected interstate-shipping nurseries include those in the
quarantine area and those outside the quarantine area that have
tested positive in the last 3 years. These nurseries must meet
annual certification survey and sampling requirements to
prevent the movement of potentially infested material. For
these efforts, the Committee provides APHIS no less than the
fiscal year 2017 level of funding.
West Nile Virus.--The Committee remains concerned with the
threats to human and animal health posed by West Nile virus and
recognizes that a critical strategy for addressing these
threats is necessary to prevent the infection and transmission
by known vectors, including farm-raised alligators. The
Committee encourages APHIS to further investigate West Nile
virus and other infectious diseases affecting farm raised
alligators and develop treatments and methods to prevent
infection and transmission.
Wildlife Damage Management.--APHIS is responsible for
providing Federal leadership in managing problems caused by
wildlife. The Committee provides $108,376,000 for wildlife
damage control to maintain priority initiatives, including
preventing the transport of invasive snakes and other harmful
species. 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.
The Committee maintains support for assistance to
aquaculture producers to help mitigate wildlife depredation,
particularly as it pertains to fish-eating and disease-carrying
birds. The Committee provides no less than the fiscal year 2017
level for damage management efforts and the development of
methods to assist producers in combatting the persistent threat
and economic hardship caused by cormorants, pelicans, and other
birds.
The Committee recognizes the importance of the National
Feral Swine Damage Management Program in reducing adverse
ecological and economic impacts caused by feral swine. The
Committee provides an additional $5,000,000 in support of APHIS
efforts to decrease these invasive pests' damage and risk to
agriculture, natural resources, and property.
The Committee provides $28,000,000 for the National Rabies
Management Program to fortify existing barriers and advance
prevention and eradication efforts.
Given the shared and complementary goals of Wildlife Damage
Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to
sustainably integrate wildlife into natural habitats while
protecting livestock, the Secretary is directed to coordinate
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services on innovative
strategies to provide predator management and reduce predator-
livestock conflict. The Secretary is further directed to report
to this Committee on how the two agencies can work together to
improve wildlife management.
Wildlife Services Education and Training.--The Committee is
aware of the wide range of hazardous procedures and materials
utilized by APHIS personnel in the conduct of daily duties. In
addition, a recent comprehensive study noted the critical need
to provide standardized safety training, certification, and
database management for tracking, to ensure the safest working
environment possible. As such, the Committee provides
$2,000,000 within Wildlife Damage Management to maintain a
National Training Academy focused on those areas of greatest
concern such as pyrotechnics, firearms, hazardous materials,
immobilization and euthanasia drugs, pesticides, animal care
and handling, land vehicles, watercraft, and zoonotic diseases.
Wildlife Services Methods Development.--The Committee
appreciates the important work done by the National Wildlife
Research Center and its affiliated field locations to resolve
problems caused by the interaction of wild animals and society.
The Committee provides $18,875,000 to ensure continued
development of technical and scientific information on wildlife
damage management.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $3,175,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 2,852,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,175,000
The APHIS appropriation for ``Buildings and Facilities''
funds major nonrecurring construction projects in support of
specific program activities and recurring construction,
alterations, preventive maintenance, and repairs of existing
APHIS facilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of
$3,175,000 for buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service. This funding is necessary to allow
APHIS to maintain existing facilities, and perform critically
needed repairs to and replacements of building components, such
as heating, ventilation and air-conditioning on a prioritized
basis at APHIS facilities. The Committee notes that due to the
environmentally sensitive nature of many APHIS facilities,
closure of a facility could result if APHIS is unable to
complete the required repairs.
Agricultural Marketing Service
MARKETING SERVICES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $84,933,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 77,462,000
Committee recommendation................................ 88,933,000
The Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS] was established by
the Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972. AMS carries out
programs authorized by more than 50 different statutory
authorities, the primary ones being the Agricultural Marketing
Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627, 1635-1638); the U.S. Cotton
Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51-65); the Cotton Statistics and
Estimates Act (7 U.S.C. 471-476); the Tobacco Inspection Act (7
U.S.C. 511-511q); the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act
(7 U.S.C. 499a-499t); the Egg Products Inspection Act (21
U.S.C. 1031-1056); and section 32 of the Act of 1935 (Public
Law 74-320, 7 U.S.C. 612c).
Programs administered by this agency include the market
news services, standardization, grading, classing, shell egg
surveillance services, transportation services, wholesale
farmers and alternative market development, grant payments to
States for marketing activities, the Federal administration of
marketing agreements and orders, commodity purchases,
Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, the Plant Variety
Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.), and market protection
and promotion activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $88,933,000
for Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
National Organic Program.--The Committee provides
$12,094,000 for the National Organic Program [NOP], an increase
of $3,000,000. A healthy market for organic products requires a
clear market distinction backed by a trusted, verified and
enforced claim. The Committee recognizes that the NOP, which
enforces the organic regulations and ensures they evolve to
keep pace with consumer expectations is essential. The
Committee strongly encourages USDA to focus resources for NOP
on robust oversight of domestic and international operations
that carry the USDA organic seal in light of recent news
reports that have shed light on inadequate enforcement of the
standards.
Public Meeting Transcripts.--The Committee is concerned by
the Department's proposal to replace meeting transcripts for
the National Organic Standards Board public meeting with
meeting summaries. The Committee directs the Secretary to
continue to produce National Organic Standards Board public
meeting transcripts.
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Limitation, 2017........................................ $61,227,000
Budget limitation, 2018................................. 60,982,000
Committee recommendation................................ 60,982,000
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law
97-35) initiated a system of user fees for the cost of grading
and classing cotton, and tobacco. These activities, authorized
under the U.S. Cotton Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51 et seq.), the
Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511 et seq.), and other
provisions of law are designed to facilitate commerce and
protect participants in the industry.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation of $60,982,000 on
administrative expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $20,705,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 20,489,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,489,000
Under section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, (7 U.S.C.
612c), an amount equal to 30 percent of customs receipts
collected during each preceding calendar year and unused
balances are available for encouraging the domestic consumption
and exportation of agricultural commodities. An amount equal to
30 percent of receipts collected on fishery products is
transferred to the Department of Commerce. Additional transfers
to the child nutrition programs of the Food and Nutrition
Service have been provided in recent appropriations Acts.
The following table reflects the status of this fund for
fiscal years 2017-2018:
ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD-- FISCAL YEARS 2017-2018
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 Fiscal year 2018 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30% of Customs Receipts)................... 10,929,841 10,370,877 10,370,877
Less Transfers:
Food and Nutrition Service............................ -9,503,998 -8,872,010 -8,872,010
Commerce Department................................... -145,175 -154,867 -154,867
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Transfers.................................... -9,649,173 -9,026,877 -9,026,877
Prior Year Appropriation Available, Start of Year......... 166,333 125,000 125,000
Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS (F&V)................. -125,000 -125,000 -125,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority, Farm Bill......................... 1,322,000 1,344,000 1,344,000
Rescission of Current Year Funds.......................... -231,374 -263,393 -263,393
Appropriations Temporarily Reduced - Sequestration........ -79,626 -77,352 -77,352
Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to -125,000 -125,000 -125,000
FNS).....................................................
-----------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority, Appropriations Act................ 886,000 878,255 878,255
=====================================================
Less Obligations:
Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities).... 465,000 465,000 465,000
State Option Contract................................. 5,000 5,000 5,000
Removal of Defective Commodities...................... 2,500 2,500 2,500
Emergency Surplus Removal............................. ................ ................ ................
Disaster Relief....................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000
Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases..... 206,000 206,000 206,000
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program..................... 43,000 47,000 47,000
Estimated Future Needs................................ 103,355 91,413 91,413
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Commodity Procurement........................ 829,855 821,913 821,913
Administrative Funds:
Commodity Purchase Support............................ 35,440 35,853 35,853
Marketing Agreements and Orders....................... 20,705 20,489 20,489
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Administrative Funds......................... 56,145 56,342 56,342
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Obligations................................... 886,000 878,255 878,255
=====================================================
Unobligated Balance, End of Year.......................... ................ ................ ................
Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Veg transfer to 125,000 125,000 125,000
FNS).....................................................
Balances, Collections and Recoveries Not Available........ ................ ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total End of Year Balances.......................... 125,000 125,000 125,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds
of $20,489,000 for the formulation and administration of
marketing agreements and orders.
Section 32 Authorities.--Under the authority described in
clause 3 of 7 U.S.C. 612c, the Secretary is able to direct
funds from the section 32 account to increase the purchasing
power of producers. This practice has been used on various
occasions to provide direct assistance to producers when market
forces or natural conditions adversely affect the financial
condition of farmers and ranchers. The Committee notes the
importance of the ability of the Secretary to utilize this
authority, but believes that communication between the
Department and the Congress should be improved when this
practice is used. Therefore, the Committee directs the
Secretary to provide notification to the Appropriations
Committee in advance of any public announcement or release of
section 32 funds under the specific authorities cited above.
PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $1,235,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 1,109,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,235,000
The Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program [FSMIP] is
authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing Act
of 1946 and is also funded from appropriations. Matching grants
are awarded on a competitive basis to State marketing agencies
to identify and test market alternative farm commodities,
determine methods of providing more reliable market
information, and develop better commodity grading standards.
This program has made possible many types of projects, such as
electronic marketing and agricultural product diversification.
Current projects are focused on the improvement of marketing
efficiency and effectiveness, and seeking new outlets for
existing farm produced commodities. The legislation grants the
U.S. Department of Agriculture authority to establish
cooperative agreements with State departments of agriculture or
similar State agencies to improve the efficiency of the
agricultural marketing chain. The States perform the work or
contract it to others, and must contribute at least one-half of
the cost of the projects.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,235,000 for
Payments to States and Possessions for Federal-State marketing
projects and activities.
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $43,482,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 42,975,000
Committee recommendation................................ 43,482,000
The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
[GIPSA] was established pursuant to the Secretary's 1994
reorganization. Grain inspection and weighing programs are
carried out under the U.S. Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71 et
seq.) and other programs under the authority of the
Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, including the inspection
and grading of rice and grain-related products; conducting
official weighing and grain inspection activities; and grading
dry beans and peas, and processed grain products. Under the
Packers and Stockyards Act (7 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), assurance of
the financial integrity of the livestock, meat, and poultry
markets is provided. The Administration monitors competition in
order to protect producers, consumers, and industry from
deceptive and fraudulent practices which affect meat and
poultry prices.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $43,482,000
for salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration.
LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES
Limitation, 2017........................................ $55,000,000
Budget limitation, 2018................................. 60,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 57,500,000
The agency provides an official grain inspection and
weighing system under the U.S. Grain Standards Act [USGSA], and
official inspection of rice and grain-related products under
the Agricultural Marketing Act [AMA] of 1946. The USGSA was
amended in 1981 to require the collection of user fees to fund
the costs associated with the operation, supervision, and
administration of Federal grain inspection and weighing
activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation of $57,500,000 on
inspection and weighing services expenses.
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $819,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 814,000
Committee recommendation................................ 819,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety provides
direction and coordination in carrying out the laws enacted by
the Congress with respect to the Department's inspection of
meat, poultry, and processed egg products. The Office has
oversight and management responsibilities for the Food Safety
and Inspection Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $819,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $1,032,062,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 1,038,069,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,038,069,000
The major objectives of the Food Safety and Inspection
Service are to assure that meat and poultry products are
wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged, as
required by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et
seq.); and to provide continuous in-plant inspection to egg
processing plants under the Egg Products Inspection Act.
The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on
June 17, 1981, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1000-1, issued
pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.
The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection
Service provides in-plant inspection of all domestic plants
preparing meat, poultry or egg products for sale or
distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and
establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for export
to the United States; and provides technical and financial
assistance to States which maintain meat and poultry inspection
programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,038,069,000
for the Food Safety and Inspection Service [FSIS]. The
Committee provides an increase of $5,500,000, for FSIS to fully
implement Siluriformes fish and fish product inspection.
Breed Claim Standards.--FSIS is directed to conduct a study
to (1) evaluate the current processes for the labeling of 100
percent pure breed claim standards for livestock products
within the relevant agencies of the Department; and (2)
identify instances of conflicting 100 percent pure breed claim
standards for livestock. This report shall be completed within
90 days after enactment.
Game Birds.--The Committee directs the FSIS to provide a
report on the impact of defining games birds, such as quail, as
amendable in Federal code in regard to inspection.
Humane Slaughter.--The Committee directs FSIS to continue
to provide annual reports to the Committee on the
implementation of objective scoring methods undertaken by FSIS
to enforce the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.
The Committee also directs FSIS to ensure that personnel
hired with funding previously provided specifically for Humane
Methods of Slaughter Act enforcement focus their attention on
overseeing compliance with humane handling rules for live
animals as they arrive and are offloaded and handled in pens,
chutes, and stunning areas and that all inspectors receive
robust training.
Inspections.--The Committee directs FSIS to complete
equivalence determinations for all countries wishing to
continue exporting Siluriformes to the United States not later
than March 1, 2018, and directs FSIS to complete equivalence
determinations on a country-by-country basis based on volume of
catfish exports to the Unites States.
The following table represents the Committee's specific
recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as
compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget request levels:
FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food safety inspection:
Federal..................................................... 915,755 921,762 921,762
State....................................................... 61,568 61,568 61,568
International............................................... 16,487 16,487 16,487
Codex Alimentarius.......................................... 3,672 3,672 3,672
PHDCIS...................................................... 34,580 34,580 34,580
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 1,032,062 1,038,069 1,038,069
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE II
FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $901,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 896,000
Committee recommendation................................ 901,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and
Conservation provides direction and coordination in carrying
out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to the
Department's commodity programs, farm loans, disaster
assistance, crop insurance, natural resources conservation and
environment programs, and some energy programs. The Office has
oversight and management responsibilities for the Farm Service
Agency (including the Commodity Credit Corporation), Risk
Management Agency, and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $901,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and
Conservation.
Deputy Under Secretary for Conservation.--The Committee
recognizes that NRCS, FSA, and RMA each play an important role
in helping farmers, ranchers, and foresters manage risk and
build the resilience of their operations. Additionally, better
coordination and data sharing between the three agencies can
limit inefficiencies, improve conservation outcomes, and
enhance USDA's ability to serve its customers. The Committee
therefore encourages the Secretary to establish a Deputy Under
Secretary for Conservation under the Farm Production and
Conservation Mission Area to facilitate such coordination and
ensure that each of the three agencies is supporting the
conservation objectives of the producers that they serve.
Emergency Response.--The Committee directs USDA to produce
a report outlining the average and longest length of time it
takes USDA to provide reimbursement under the following
emergency assistance programs: crop insurance; Noninsured Crop
Disaster Assistance Program [NAP]; Livestock Indemnity Program
[LIP]; Livestock Forage Disaster Program [LFP]; Emergency
Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish
Program [ELAP]; Tree Assistance Program [TAP]; Emergency
Conservation Program; and Emergency Forest Restoration Program
[EFRP]. USDA is also directed to include in the report any
barriers to implementing a more efficient reimbursement process
and recommendations to the Committee on potential improvements.
Farm Service Agency
The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established October 13,
1994, pursuant to the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and
Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, Public
Law 103-354. The FSA administers a variety of activities, such
as the commodity price support and production adjustment
programs financed by the Commodity Credit Corporation; the
Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]; the Emergency Conservation
Program; the Commodity Operation Programs including the
warehouse examination function; farm ownership, farm operating,
emergency disaster, and other loan programs; and the Noninsured
Crop Disaster Assistance Program [NAP], which provides crop
loss protection for growers of many crops for which crop
insurance is not available. In addition, FSA currently provides
certain administrative support services to the Foreign
Agricultural Service [FAS] and to the Risk Management Agency
[RMA].
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers from Total, FSA,
Appropriations program salaries and
accounts expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2017......................................... 1,206,110 309,610 1,515,720
Budget estimate, 2018........................................ 1,130,163 297,888 1,428,051
Committee recommendation..................................... 1,212,116 309,610 1,521,726
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The account Salaries and Expenses, Farm Service Agency,
funds the administrative expenses of program administration and
other functions assigned to FSA. The funds consist of
appropriations and transfers from the CCC export credit
guarantees, Food for Peace loans, and Agricultural Credit
Insurance Fund program accounts, and miscellaneous advances
from other sources. All administrative funds used by FSA are
consolidated into one account. The consolidation provides
clarity and better management and control of funds, and
facilitates accounting, fiscal, and budgetary work by
eliminating the necessity for making individual allocations and
allotments and maintaining and recording obligations and
expenditures under numerous separate accounts.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,521,726,000
for salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency, including
a direct appropriation of $1,212,116,000. The Committee
supports the mission of FSA and the important services that
they provide across the country; therefore, the Committee does
not accept the full decrease for information technology as
proposed in the budget. The Committee provides $16,100,000 for
CCC audit readiness, an increase of $6,850,000 for reports and
analytics for field operations, and an increase of $2,918,000
for Bridges to Opportunity.
Continuous Conservation Reserve Program.--The Secretary is
strongly encouraged to, within the total acreage made available
for enrollment in the conservation reserve program and without
reducing the periodic availability of general signup, enroll,
to the maximum extent practicable, acreage for activities
included in the State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement practice
or other similar administratively established wetland and
habitat practices that benefit priority fish and wildlife
species identified in State, regional, and national
conservation initiatives with a priority for initiatives that
provide large blocks of cover ideal for wildlife nesting.
Information Technology.--The Committee remains dedicated to
ensuring FSA has reliable and functioning IT systems because it
is critical that farmers and ranchers have access to the tools
they need to succeed. The Committee has invested significant
taxpayer dollars to modernize outdated systems and continues to
provide resources above the budget request. The Committee
continues statutory language that allows funds for IT to be
obligated only after the Secretary meets certain reporting
requirements. The Committee has reviewed the third-party IT
analysis and expects the agency to follow the recommendations
where applicable.
National Agriculture Imagery Program.--The Committee
recommends that funding shall be allocated to purchase imagery
products to meet programmatic requirements.
STATE MEDIATION GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $3,904,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 3,398,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,904,000
This program is authorized under title V of the
Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 (7 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.).
Originally designed to address agricultural credit disputes,
the program was expanded by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform
and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994
(Public Law 103-354) to include other agricultural issues such
as wetland determinations, conservation compliance, rural water
loan programs, grazing on National Forest System lands, and
pesticides. Grants are made to States whose mediation programs
have been certified by the FSA. Grants will be solely for
operation and administration of the State's agricultural
mediation program.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,904,000 for
State Mediation Grants.
GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 6,500,000
This program is intended to assist in the protection of
groundwater through State rural water associations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,500,000 for
Grassroots Source Water Protection.
DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $500,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 500,000
Under the program, the Department makes indemnification
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products
who, through no fault of their own, suffer income losses
because they are directed to remove their milk from commercial
markets due to contamination of their products by registered
pesticides. The program also authorizes indemnity payments to
dairy farmers for losses resulting from the removal of cows or
dairy products from the market due to nuclear radiation or
fallout.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2018 to be $500,000,
for indemnity payments to dairy farmers.
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is
used to provide direct and guaranteed farm ownership, farm
operating, conservation, Indian highly fractioned land, and
emergency loans to individuals, as well as the following types
of loans to associations: irrigation and drainage, grazing,
Indian tribe land acquisition, and boll weevil eradication.
FSA is also authorized to provide financial assistance to
borrowers by guaranteeing loans made by private lenders having
a contract of guarantee from FSA as approved by the Secretary
of Agriculture and to establish Beginning Farmer and Rancher
Individual Development grant accounts.
The following programs are financed through this fund:
Boll Weevil Eradication Loans.--Made to assist foundations
in financing the operations of the boll weevil eradication
programs provided to farmers.
Credit Sales of Acquired Property.--Property is sold out of
inventory and is made available to an eligible buyer by
providing FSA loans.
Emergency Loans.--Made to producers to aid recovery from
production and physical losses due to drought, flooding, other
natural disasters, or quarantine. The loans may be used to:
restore or replace essential property; pay all or part of
production costs associated with the disaster year; pay
essential family living expenses; reorganize the farming
operation; and refinance certain debts.
Farm Operating Loans.--Provide short-to-intermediate term
production or chattel credit to farmers who cannot obtain
credit elsewhere, to improve their farm and home operations,
and to develop or maintain a reasonable standard of living. The
term of the loan varies from 1 to 7 years.
Farm Ownership Loans.--Made to borrowers who cannot obtain
credit elsewhere to restructure their debts, improve or
purchase farms, refinance nonfarm enterprises which supplement
but do not supplant farm income, or make additions to farms.
Loans are made for 40 years or less.
Indian Tribe Land Acquisition Loans.--Made to any Indian
tribe recognized by the Secretary of the Interior or tribal
corporation established pursuant to the Indian Reorganization
Act (Public Law 93-638) which does not have adequate
uncommitted funds to acquire lands or interest in lands within
the tribe's reservation or Alaskan Indian community, as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior, for use of the
tribe or the corporation or the members thereof.
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.--Made to Indian
tribal members to purchase highly fractionated lands, as
authorized by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a total loan level of
$8,005,610,000 for programs within the Agricultural Credit
Insurance Fund Program Account.
Loan Programs.--The Committee continues to support FSA loan
programs that ensure farmers and ranchers have access to credit
to maintain and improve their operations. The Committee is
aware of the heightened operating loan activity in fiscal year
2017 and notes the statutory authority allowing program level
increases that do not require additional budget authority. The
Committee will continue to monitor program demand in the coming
months and directs FSA to provide timely estimates for future
needs.
The following table reflects the program levels for farm
credit programs administered by the Farm Service Agency
recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year
2017 and the budget request levels:
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Ownership:
Direct................................................... 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
Guaranteed............................................... 2,750,000 2,500,000 2,750,000
Farm Operating:
Direct................................................... 1,530,000 1,304,851 1,530,000
Guaranteed unsubsidized.................................. 1,960,000 1,393,423 1,960,000
Emergency Loans.............................................. 22,576 25,610 22,581
Indian Tribe Land Acquisition................................ 20,000 20,000 20,000
Conservation Loans:
Guaranteed............................................... 150,000 150,000 150,000
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans........................ 10,000 ............... 10,000
Boll Weevil Eradication...................................... 60,000 60,000 60,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the
program account. Appropriations to this account are used to
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed, as well as for
administrative expenses.
The following table reflects the cost of programs under
credit reform:
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm Operating:
Direct................................................... 65,178 52,716 61,812
Guaranteed unsubsidized.................................. 20,972 15,467 21,756
Emergency Loans.............................................. 1,262 1,260 1,111
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans........................ 2,550 ............... 2,272
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk Management Agency
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $74,829,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 55,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 74,829,000
The Risk Management Agency performs administrative
functions relative to the Federal crop insurance program that
is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C.
1508), as amended by the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of
2000 [ARPA], Public Law 106-224, and the Agricultural Act of
2014 (Public Law 113-79).
ARPA authorized significant changes in the crop insurance
program. This act provides higher government subsidies for
producer premiums to make coverage more affordable; expands
research and development for new insurance products and under-
served areas through contracts with the private sector; and
tightens compliance. Functional areas of risk management are:
research and development; insurance services; and compliance,
whose functions include policy formulation and procedures and
regulations development.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,829,000
for the Risk Management Agency.
The Committee recognizes that there are many research
priorities that competitive funding may be used to address,
including the feasibility of insurance programs to cover
business interruption due to integrator bankruptcy and
catastrophic loss in the poultry industry. The Committee
encourages RMA to support research into these priorities.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
The Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] was
established pursuant to Public Law 103-354, the Department of
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6962). The
NRCS works with conservation districts, watershed groups, and
Federal and State agencies to bring about physical adjustments
in land use that will conserve soil and water resources,
provide for agricultural production on a sustained basis, and
reduce flood damage and sedimentation.
CONSERVATION OPERATIONS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $864,474,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 766,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 874,107,000
Conservation operations are authorized by Public Law 74-46
(16 U.S.C. 590a-590f). Activities include:
Conservation Technical Assistance provides assistance to
district cooperators and other land users in the planning and
application of conservation treatments to control erosion and
improve the quantity and quality of soil resources, improve and
conserve water, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, conserve
energy, improve woodland, pasture and range conditions, and
reduce upstream flooding; all to protect and enhance the
natural resource base.
Resource appraisal and program development ensures that
programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture for the
conservation of soil, water, and related resources shall
respond to the Nation's long-term needs.
Plant Materials Centers assemble, test, and encourage
increased use of plant species which show promise for use in
the treatment of conservation problem areas.
Snow Survey and Water Forecasting provides estimates of
annual water availability from high mountain snow packs and
relates to summer stream flow in the Western States and Alaska.
Information is used by agriculture, industry, and cities in
estimating future water supplies.
Soil Surveys inventory the Nation's basic soil resources
and determine land capabilities and conservation treatment
needs. Soil survey publications include interpretations useful
to cooperators, other Federal agencies, State, and local
organizations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $874,107,000
for Conservation Operations. The Committee recommendation
includes $768,844,000 for Conservation Technical Assistance,
$80,802,000 for Soil Surveys, $9,380,000 for Snow Survey and
Water Forecasting, and $9,481,000 for Plant Materials Centers.
Acre-for-Acre Wetlands Mitigation.--The Secretary is
encouraged to use mitigation with the conversion of a natural
wetland and equivalent wetlands functions at a ratio not to
exceed a ratio of 1-to-1 acreage.
Agricultural Conservation Easement Program.--The Committee
notes that no other Federal program exists to protect the long-
term viability of the Nation's food supply by preventing
conversion of productive working farmlands to non-agricultural
uses. The Committee is concerned by the excessive delays in
completing Agricultural Conservation Easement Program
easements, and directs the Department to move additional real
estate functions in-house to improve the quality and speed of
completion of valuations and appraisals for projects. In
addition, the Committee is troubled by a one-size-fits-all
national approach to deed terms for ACEP easements, and
encourages the Department address regional needs and work with
partners to give farmers the ability to anticipate, adapt to,
and address the changing needs of the farm economy.
Agricultural Management Assistance.--In carrying out the
programs under section 524(b) of the Federal Crop Insurance
Act, the Secretary is encouraged to establish multi-year pilot
projects to provide financial and technical assistance to farms
regulated under FSMA Produce Safety Rule, for capital
improvements required to comply with the rule and otherwise
enhance food safety practices at the production level. Payment
limits and other provisions of the AMA program will apply.
Regional Conservation Partnership Program.--The Committee
is concerned that the Natural Resources Conservation Service is
not operating the Regional Conservation Partnership Program
with a consistent standard for reimbursing certain technical
assistance costs. The Committee believes that NRCS should
clarify that travel to and from participating farms and ranches
by a partner to deliver technical services is generally
eligible for reimbursement as a technical assistance cost under
RCPP. Therefore, the Committee encourages the NRCS to use the
same technical assistance reimbursement standard for RCPP as
they do for other NRCS conservation programs, in order to
properly facilitate this important program.
Salton Sea.--The Committee encourages NRCS to closely
coordinate with the Army Corps of Engineers and the State of
California on efforts to restore the Salton Sea in order to
expedite project planning and implementation. NRCS is directed
to brief the Committee not later than 90 days after enactment
of this Act on its current and planned efforts to help restore
the Salton Sea.
Technical Assistance.--The Committee directs NRCS to
maintain a record of total technical assistance dollars for the
past 3 years and annually in the future, and provide the data
to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, and the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. This report
should differentiate mandatory and discretionary allocations.
WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION OPERATIONS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $150,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 150,000,000
The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public
Law 566, 83d Cong.) (16 U.S.C. 1000-1005, 1007-1009) provides
for cooperation between the Federal Government and the States
and their political subdivisions in a program to prevent
erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the watersheds or
rivers and streams and to further the conservation,
development, utilization, and disposal of water, and to further
the conservation and proper utilization of land in authorized
watersheds.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $150,000,000
for the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations Program.
The Committee recognizes the critical challenges facing
rural water resource management and protection and supports
needed investments in watershed operations. These Federal-
State-local partnerships are uniquely positioned to identify
critical watershed protection and flood prevention needs in
rural communities and implement projects that deliver multiple
streams of benefits for homes, businesses, and transportation
infrastructure and natural resources. In selecting projects for
funding, the Committee expects the Agency to balance the needs
of addressing the project backlog, remediation of existing
structures, and new projects.
WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $12,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
The watershed rehabilitation program account provides for
technical and financial assistance to carry out rehabilitation
of structural measures, in accordance with section 14 of the
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, approved August
4, 1954 (16 U.S.C. 1012, U.S.C. 1001, et seq.), as amended by
section 313 of Public Law 106-472, November 9, 2000, and by
section 2803 of Public Law 110-246.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the
Watershed Rehabilitation Program.
CORPORATIONS
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $8,667,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 8,245,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,245,000,000
The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal
Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of
expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss adjustment,
delivery expenses, program-related research and development,
startup costs for implementing this legislation such as
studies, pilot projects, data processing improvements, public
outreach, and related tasks and functions.
All program costs, except for Federal salaries and
expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to appropriation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as
may be necessary, estimated to be $8,245,000,000 in fiscal year
2018 for the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund.
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund
The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned
Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support,
and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced
and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including
products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the orderly
distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally
incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated
June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department
of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act,
approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714).
The Commodity Credit Corporation engages in buying,
selling, lending, and other activities with respect to
agricultural commodities, their products, food, feed, and
fibers. Its purposes include stabilizing, supporting, and
protecting farm income and prices; maintaining the balance and
adequate supplies of selected commodities; and facilitating the
orderly distribution of such commodities. In addition, the
Corporation makes available materials and facilities required
in connection with the storage and distribution of such
commodities. The Corporation also disburses funds for sharing
of costs with producers for the establishment of approved
conservation practices on environmentally sensitive land and
subsequent rental payments for such land for the duration of
Conservation Reserve Program contracts.
Corporation activities are primarily governed by the
following statutes: the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter
Act (Public Law 80-806), as amended; the Agricultural Act of
1949 (Public Law 81-439), as amended (1949 Act); the
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-430), as
amended (the 1938 Act); the Food Security Act of 1985 (Public
Law 99-198), as amended (1985 Act); the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246); and the Agricultural
Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79).
Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of
directors, subject to the general supervision and direction of
the Secretary of Agriculture, who is an ex officio director and
chairman of the board. The board consists of seven members, in
addition to the Secretary, who are appointed by the President
of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Officers of the Corporation are designated according to their
positions in the Department of Agriculture.
The activities of the Corporation are carried out mainly by
the personnel and through the facilities of the Farm Service
Agency [FSA] and the Farm Service Agency State and county
committees. The Foreign Agricultural Service, the General Sales
Manager, other agencies and offices of the Department, and
commercial agents are also used to carry out certain aspects of
the Corporation's activities.
Under Public Law 87-155 (15 U.S.C. 713a-11, 713a-12),
annual appropriations are authorized for each fiscal year,
commencing with fiscal year 1961. These appropriations are to
reimburse the Corporation for net realized losses.
REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $21,290,712,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 17,483,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 17,483,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2018 to be
$17,483,000,000, for the payment to reimburse the Commodity
Credit Corporation for net realized losses.
CRP Wetland Restoration and Wildlife Enhancement.--The
Committee notes that agricultural commodity crops, if left
unharvested, may help reduce degradation of wetlands and
improve sediment trapping, surface and ground water supply,
erosion control, and wildlife habitat while providing winter
food for waterfowl and other wildlife. The Committee directs
the Commodity Credit Corporation, within 60 days of enactment,
to amend its program policies and guidelines for CRP
conservation practices CP23 and CP23A, to provide that current
and future participants are permitted to plant--but not
harvest--agricultural commodity crops as wildlife food plots on
up to 10 percent of the enrolled land to enhance waterfowl and
upland bird food and habitat.
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Limitation, 2017........................................ $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000
The Commodity Credit Corporation's [CCC] hazardous waste
management program is intended to ensure compliance with the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). The CCC
funds operations and maintenance costs as well as site
investigation and cleanup expenses. Investigative and cleanup
costs associated with the management of CCC hazardous waste are
also paid from USDA's hazardous waste management appropriation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation of $5,000,000 for the
Commodity Credit Corporation's hazardous waste management
program.
TITLE III
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
The Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354)
abolished the Farmers Home Administration, Rural Development
Administration, and Rural Electrification Administration and
replaced those agencies with the Rural Housing and Community
Development Service, (currently, the Rural Housing Service),
Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service (currently,
the Rural Business--Cooperative Service), and Rural Utilities
Service and placed them under the oversight of the Under
Secretary for Rural Economic and Community Development,
(currently, Rural Development). These agencies deliver a
variety of programs through a network of State and field
offices.
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $896,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 891,000
Committee recommendation................................ 896,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
provides direction and coordination in carrying out laws with
respect to the Department's rural economic and community
development activities. The Office has oversight and management
responsibilities for the Rural Housing Service, Rural
Business--Cooperative Service, and the Rural Utilities Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $896,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development.
Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels.--The Committee is
concerned with the interim rule proposed by the Department
under the Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels program
(section 9005 of the Energy title of the farm bill, Public Law
113-79), which is intended to promote the development of
different qualifying advanced fuel categories. The Committee is
concerned that the allocation formula for distribution of
section 9005 funds among the qualified fuel categories is
inequitable, disproportionate, and inconsistent with the
purpose and intent of the section 9005 program. The Committee
urges the Department to administer the section 9005 program in
a way that is fuel and technology-neutral. Consistent with
these objectives, the Committee directs USDA to propose
amendments to the interim rule to ensure that any final rule to
implement section 9005 provides for a more equitable and
proportional allocation of funding among the qualified advanced
biofuels and the energy pathways they represent.
RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation................................................ 225,835 186,076 225,835
Transfer from:
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account........ 412,254 244,249 412,254
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Program 33,270 38,027 33,270
Account.................................................
Rural Development Loan Program Account................... 4,468 ............... 4,468
Community Facilities Program Account..................... ............... 147,591 ...............
Distance Learning, Telemedicine and Broadband Program ............... 8,057 ...............
Account.................................................
--------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Development salaries and expenses......... 675,827 624,000 675,827
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These funds are used to administer the loan and grant
programs of the Rural Utilities Service, the Rural Housing
Service, and the Rural Business--Cooperative Service, including
reviewing applications, making and collecting loans and
providing technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; and
to assist in extending other Federal programs to people in
rural areas.
Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts.
Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for
costs associated with grant programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends $675,827,000 for salaries and
expenses of Rural Development.
Rural Housing Service
The Rural Housing Service [RHS] was established under the
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture
Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994.
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2017 (budget authority)................. $509,892,000
Budget estimate, 2018 (budget authority)................ 244,249,000
Committee recommendation (budget authority)............. 478,338,000
This fund was established in 1965 (Public Law 89-117)
pursuant to section 517 of title V of the Housing Act of 1949
(42 U.S.C. 517(d)), as amended. This fund may be used to insure
or guarantee rural housing loans for single-family homes,
rental and cooperative housing, farm labor housing, and rural
housing sites. Rural housing loans are made to construct,
improve, alter, repair, or replace dwellings and essential farm
service buildings that are modest in size, design, and cost.
Rental housing insured loans are made to individuals,
corporations, associations, trusts, or partnerships to provide
low-cost rental housing and related facilities in rural areas.
These loans are repayable in terms up to 30 years.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $478,338,000
for the Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account [RHIF].
The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508)
established the RHIF program account. Appropriations to this
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees
committed in 2018, as well as for administrative expenses. The
following table presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to
the 2017 levels and the 2018 budget request:
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Levels:
Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct............................................... 1,000,000 ............... 1,000,000
Guaranteed........................................... 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
Housing repair (sec. 504)................................ 26,278 ............... 26,278
Direct rental housing (sec. 515)......................... 35,000 ............... 35,000
Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538)..................... 230,000 250,000 230,000
Site development loans (sec. 524)........................ 5,000 ............... 5,000
Credit sales of acquired property........................ 10,000 10,000 10,000
Self help land development loans (sec. 523).............. 5,000 ............... 5,000
Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)...................... 23,855 ............... 23,855
--------------------------------------------------
Total, loan levels..................................... 25,335,133 24,260,000 25,335,133
==================================================
Loan Subsidies and Grants:
Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
Direct............................................... 67,700 ............... 38,500
Housing repair (sec. 504)................................ 3,663 ............... 3,240
Direct rental housing (sec. 515)......................... 10,360 ............... 9,209
Site development (sec. 524).............................. 111 ............... 58
Self help land development (sec. 523).................... 417 ............... 368
Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514)...................... 7,051 ............... 6,374
Farm labor housing grants (sec. 516)..................... 8,336 ............... 8,336
--------------------------------------------------
Total, loan subsidies and grants....................... 97,638 ............... 66,085
==================================================
Administrative expenses...................................... 412,254 244,249 412,254
==================================================
Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses...... 509,892 244,249 478,338
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Efficiency.--The Committee recognizes opportunities
to reduce costs for rural housing and save taxpayer money by
embracing energy efficiency standards in rural housing, with
measures such as air sealing, and installing insulation, window
films, and roofs.
Maturing Mortgages.--The Committee is very concerned about
the alarming number of multi-family housing mortgages scheduled
to mature in the next few years. As these mortgages mature,
projects and units will be removed from USDA's affordable rural
housing program, placing very low income rural residents in
jeopardy of untenable rent increases and possible eviction. In
spite of numerous requests from the Committee, the Department
has failed to identify and develop potential solutions to this
looming crisis.
The Secretary is directed to engage affordable housing
advocates, project owners, tenants, and others as practicable,
to find acceptable and effective long term solutions that will
retain projects in the affordable rural housing program. The
need for affordable rural housing is too great to allow the
program to expire.
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $1,405,033,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 1,345,293,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,345,293,000
Rental assistance is authorized under section 521(a)(2) of
the Housing Act of 1949, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1490a). The
objective of the program is to reduce rents paid by low-income
families living in Rural Housing Service financed rental
projects and farm labor housing projects. Under this program,
low-income tenants will contribute the higher of: (1) 30
percent of monthly adjusted income; (2) 10 percent of monthly
income; or (3) designated housing payments from a welfare
agency.
Payments from the fund are made to the project owner for
the difference between the tenant's payment and the approved
rental rate established for the unit.
The program is administered in tandem with the Rural
Housing Service section 515 rural rental housing program and
the farm labor loan and grant programs. Priority is given to
existing projects for units occupied by rent over-burdened low-
income families and projects experiencing financial
difficulties beyond the control of the owner.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,345,293,000
for the Rental Assistance Program.
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $41,400,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 41,400,000
The Rural Housing Voucher Program was authorized under the
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1940r) to assist very low income
families and individuals who reside in rental housing in rural
areas. Housing vouchers may be provided to residents of rental
housing projects financed by section 515 loans that have been
prepaid after September 30, 2005. Voucher amounts reflect the
difference between comparable market rents and tenant-paid rent
prior to loan prepayment. Vouchers allow tenants to remain in
existing projects or move to other rental housing.
The Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program includes
funding for housing vouchers and a demonstration program for
the preservation and revitalization of affordable multi-family
housing projects. Rural Development's multi-family housing
portfolio faces dual pressures for loan prepayments and repair/
rehabilitation stemming from inadequate reserves resulting in
deferred property maintenance.
Provision of affordable rental housing can be accomplished
more economically by revitalizing existing housing stock rather
than funding new construction. The Multi-family Housing
Revitalization Program includes revitalization tools for
maintenance of existing units and vouchers to protect tenants
in those projects that prepay. Flexibility is provided to allow
Rural Development to utilize funding to meet the most urgent
local needs for tenant protection and project revitalization.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,400,000
for the Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program, including
$19,400,000 for vouchers and $22,000,000 for a housing
preservation demonstration program.
MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 30,000,000
The Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants Program is
authorized by title V of the Housing Act of 1949. Grants are
made to local organizations to promote the development of
mutual or self-help programs under which groups of usually 6 to
10 families build their own homes by mutually exchanging labor.
Funds may be used to pay the cost of construction supervisors
who work with families in the construction of their homes and
for administrative expenses of the organizations providing the
self-help assistance.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,000,000
for Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants.
RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $33,701,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 33,701,000
The Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program consolidates
funding for rural housing grant programs. This consolidation of
housing grant funding provides greater flexibility to tailor
financial assistance to applicant needs.
Very Low-Income Housing Repair Grants.--The Very Low-Income
Housing Repair Grants Program is authorized under section 504
of title V of the Housing Act of 1949. The rural housing repair
grant program is carried out by making grants to very low-
income families to make necessary repairs to their homes in
order to make such dwellings safe and sanitary, and remove
hazards to the health of the occupants, their families, or the
community.
These grants may be made to cover the cost of improvements
or additions, such as repairing roofs, providing toilet
facilities, providing a convenient and sanitary water supply,
supplying screens, repairing or providing structural supports
or making similar repairs, additions, or improvements,
including all preliminary and installation costs in obtaining
central water and sewer service. A grant can be made in
combination with a section 504 very low-income housing repair
loan.
No assistance can be extended to any one individual in the
form of a loan, grant, or combined loans and grants in excess
of $27,500, and grant assistance is limited to persons, or
families headed by persons who are 62 years of age or older.
Supervisory and Technical Assistance Grants.--Supervisory
and technical assistance grants are made to public and private
nonprofit organizations for packaging loan applications for
housing assistance under sections 502, 504, 514/516, 515, and
533 of the Housing Act of 1949. The assistance is directed to
very low-income families in underserved areas where at least 20
percent of the population is below the poverty level and at
least 10 percent or more of the population resides in
substandard housing. In fiscal year 1994 a Homebuyer Education
Program was implemented under this authority. This program
provides low-income individuals and families education and
counseling on obtaining and/or maintaining occupancy of
adequate housing and supervised credit assistance to become
successful homeowners.
Compensation for Construction Defects.--Compensation for
construction defects provides funds for grants to eligible
section 502 borrowers to correct structural defects, or to pay
claims of owners arising from such defects on a newly
constructed dwelling purchased with RHS financial assistance.
Claims are not paid until provisions under the builder's
warranty have been fully pursued. Requests for compensation for
construction defects must be made by the owner of the property
within 18 months after the date financial assistance was
granted.
Rural Housing Preservation Grants.--Rural housing
preservation grants (section 533) of the Housing and Urban-
Rural Recovery Act of 1983 (42 U.S.C. 1490m) authorizes the
Rural Housing Service to administer a program of home repair
directed at low- and very low-income people.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $33,701,000
for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program.
The following table compares the grant program levels
recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2017 levels and
the budget request:
RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very low-income housing repair grants........................ 28,701 ............... 28,701
Housing preservation grants.................................. 5,000 ............... 5,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................. 33,701 ............... 33,701
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends that the Rural Housing Service
prioritize funding for communities with unique weather patterns
in need of replacing antiquated heating systems with more
efficient technologies.
Rural Community Facilities Program Account
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $47,100,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 48,628,000
Community facility loans were created by the Rural
Development Act of 1972 (7 U.S.C. 1926 et seq.) to finance a
variety of rural community facilities. Loans are made to
organizations, including certain Indian tribes and corporations
not operated for profit and public and quasi-public agencies,
to construct, enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community
facilities providing essential services to rural residents.
Such facilities include those providing or supporting overall
community development, such as fire and rescue services,
healthcare, transportation, traffic control, and community,
social, cultural, and recreational benefits. Loans are made for
facilities which primarily serve rural residents of open
country and rural towns and villages of not more than 20,000
people. Healthcare, fire and rescue facilities, and educational
facilities are the priorities of the program and receive the
majority of available funds.
The Community Facility Grant Program authorized in the
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public
Law 104-127), is used in conjunction with the existing direct
and guaranteed loan programs for the development of community
facilities, such as hospitals, fire stations, and community
centers. Grants are targeted to the lowest income communities.
Communities that have lower population and income levels
receive a higher cost-share contribution through these grants,
to a maximum contribution of 75 percent of the cost of
developing the facility.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,628,000
for the Rural Community Facilities Program Account.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget
request levels:
RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Community facilities direct loans........................ 2,600,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Community facilities guaranteed loans.................... 148,305 ............... 148,305
--------------------------------------------------
Total loan levels...................................... 2,748,305 3,000,000 3,148,305
==================================================
Budget authority:
Community facilities guaranteed loans.................... 3,322 ............... 4,850
Community facilities grants.............................. 30,000 ............... 30,000
Economic initiative grants............................... 5,778 ............... 5,778
Rural community development initiative................... 4,000 ............... 4,000
Tribal college grants.................................... 4,000 ............... 4,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total budget authority................................. 47,100 ............... 48,628
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Business--Cooperative Service
The Rural Business--Cooperative Service [RBS] was
established by Public Law 103-354, Federal Crop Insurance
Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of
1994, dated October 13, 1994. Its programs were previously
administered by the Rural Development Administration, the Rural
Electrification Administration, and the Agricultural
Cooperative Service.
RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $65,319,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 64,342,000
The Rural Business and Industry Loan Program was created by
the Rural Development Act of 1972, and finances a variety of
rural industrial development loans. Loans are made for rural
industrialization and rural community facilities under Rural
Development Act amendments to the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932 et seq.) authorities. Business
and industrial loans are made to public, private, or
cooperative organizations organized for profit, to certain
Indian tribes, or to individuals for the purpose of improving,
developing or financing business, industry, and employment or
improving the economic and environmental climate in rural
areas. Such purposes include financing business and industrial
acquisition, construction, enlargement, repair or
modernization, financing the purchase and development of land,
easements, rights-of-way, buildings, payment of startup costs,
and supplying working capital.
Rural business development grants were authorized by the
Agricultural Act of 2014 and can be made to governmental and
nonprofit entities, and Indian tribes. Up to 10 percent of
appropriated funds may be used to: identify and analyze
business opportunities; identify, train, and provide technical
assistance to existing or prospective rural entrepreneurs and
managers; assist in the establishment of new rural businesses
and the maintenance of existing businesses; conduct economic
development planning, coordination and leadership development;
and establish centers for training, technology, and trade. The
balance of appropriated funding may be used for projects that
support the development of business enterprises that finance or
facilitate: the development of small and emerging private
business enterprise; the establishment, expansion, and
operation of rural distance learning networks; the development
of rural learning programs; and the provision of technical
assistance and training to rural communities for the purpose of
improving passenger transportation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $64,342,000
for the Rural Business Program Account.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget
request levels:
RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Business and industry guaranteed loans loan levels....... 919,765 ............... 919,765
Budget authority:
Business and industry guaranteed loans................... 35,319 ............... 37,342
Rural business development grants........................ 24,000 ............... 24,000
Delta Regional Authority grants.......................... 6,000 ............... 3,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total budget authority................................. 65,319 ............... 64,342
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional Food Hubs.--The Committee encourages USDA to
partner with States and other interested partners to build and
refurbish food hub and food distribution centers that serve
rural farmers but are located in urban areas through programs
like the Business and Industry guaranteed loan program.
Rural Business Development Grants.--Rural coastal economies
have often been economically disadvantaged by the loss of
natural resource-related jobs and have been the first rural
communities to feel the negative effects of a changing climate.
As these rural coastal communities continue to have
agriculture-related economic opportunity such as value-added
seafood processing as well as new opportunities, the use of
Rural Business Development grants may be prioritized in rural
coastal communities to support innovation and job growth within
all sectors, including for related infrastructure. Particular
priority should be given in the case of public-private
partnerships and cross-jurisdictional efforts.
Rural Business Program Account.--The Committee recommends
$500,000 for transportation technical assistance.
The Committee directs that of the $4,000,000 recommended
for grants to benefit Federally Recognized Native American
Tribes, $250,000 shall be used to implement an American Indian
and Alaska Native passenger transportation development and
assistance initiative.
INTERMEDIARY RELENDING PROGRAM FUND
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 Fiscal year 2018 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level...................................... 18,889 ................ 18,889
Direct loan subsidy....................................... 5,476 ................ 4,361
Administrative expenses................................... 4,468 ................ 4,468
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses... 9,944 ................ 8,829
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rural development intermediary relending loan program
was originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of
1964 (Public Law 88-452). The making of rural development loans
by the Department of Agriculture was reauthorized by Public Law
113-79, the Agricultural Act of 2014.
Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (small investment
groups) who in turn will reloan the funds to rural businesses,
community development corporations, private nonprofit
organizations, public agencies, et cetera, for the purpose of
improving business, industry, community facilities, and
employment opportunities and diversification of the economy in
rural areas.
The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct
loans obligated in 2018, as well as for administrative
expenses.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,829,000 for
the Intermediary Relending Program Fund.
RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan
level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 level................................. 42,213
Fiscal year 2018 request............................... ...............
Committee recommendation............................... 42,213
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rural Economic Development Loans program was
established by the Reconciliation Act of December 1987 (Public
Law 100-203), which amended the Rural Electrification Act of
1936 (Act of May 20, 1936), by establishing a new section 313.
This section of the Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 901)
established a cushion of credit payment program and created the
rural economic development subaccount. The Administrator of RUS
is authorized under the act to utilize funds in this program to
provide zero interest loans to electric and telecommunications
borrowers for the purpose of promoting rural economic
development and job creation projects, including funding for
feasibility studies, startup costs, and other reasonable
expenses for the purpose of fostering rural economic
development.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a loan program level of
$42,213,000, to be funded from earnings on the Cushion of
Credit and fees on guaranteed underwriting loans made pursuant
to section 313A of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936.
RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $26,550,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 26,550,000
Rural cooperative development grants are authorized under
section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act, as amended. Grants are made to fund the establishment and
operation of centers for rural cooperative development with
their primary purpose being the improvement of economic
conditions in rural areas. Grants may be made to nonprofit
institutions or institutions of higher education. Grants may be
used to pay up to 75 percent of the cost of the project and
associated administrative costs. The applicant must contribute
at least 25 percent from non-Federal sources, except 1994
institutions, which only need to provide 5 percent. Grants are
competitive and are awarded based on specific selection
criteria.
Cooperative research agreements are authorized by 7 U.S.C.
2204b. The funds are used for cooperative research agreements,
primarily with colleges and universities, on critical
operational, organizational, and structural issues facing
cooperatives.
Cooperative agreements are authorized under 7 U.S.C. 2201
to any qualified State departments of agriculture, university,
and other State entity to conduct research that will strengthen
and enhance the operations of agricultural marketing
cooperatives in rural areas.
The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas [ATTRA]
program was first authorized by the Food Security Act of 1985.
The program provides information and technical assistance to
agricultural producers to adopt sustainable agricultural
practices that are environmentally friendly and lower
production costs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,550,000
for Rural Cooperative Development Grants.
Of the funds recommended, $2,750,000 is for the Appropriate
Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program.
The Committee has included language in the bill that not
more than $3,000,000 shall be made available to cooperatives or
associations of cooperatives whose primary focus is to provide
assistance to small, minority producers.
Value Added.--The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for
value-added agricultural product market development grants. Of
this amount, the Secretary is directed to make $1,000,000 for
Agriculture Innovation Center funding available as grants to
States authorized to host, and that have previously hosted a
USDA Agriculture Innovation Center and where the State
continues to demonstrate support, and provide non-Federal grant
funding to producers developing, producing, and marketing
value-added agricultural and food products.
RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $352,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 293,000
The Rural Energy for America Program is authorized under
section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107). This program may fund energy audits,
direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants to farmers, ranchers,
and small rural businesses for the purchase of renewable energy
systems and for energy efficiency improvements.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $293,000 for
the Rural Energy for America Program.
The following table provides the Committee's recommendation
as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget request levels:
RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level............................................ 7,576 .............. 7,576
Guaranteed loan subsidy......................................... 352 .............. 293
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Efficiency Coordination.--The Committee directs
increased coordination and cooperation among USDA agencies and
offices to better utilize the energy efficiency and renewable
energy programs available through the Rural Energy for America
program. Additionally, no later than 120 days after enactment
of this Act, USDA is directed to submit a report to the
Committee detailing how the agencies make information about its
energy programs accessible to rural communities and how funds
are being leveraged for energy efficiency investments in rural
areas.
Rural Utilities Service
The Rural Utilities Service [RUS] was established under the
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture
Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354), October 13,
1994. RUS administers the electric and telephone programs of
the former Rural Electrification Administration and the water
and waste programs of the former Rural Development
Administration.
RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $571,190,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 550,383,000
The water and waste disposal program is authorized by
sections 306, 306A, 309A, 306C, 306D, 306E, and 310B of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et
seq., as amended). This program makes loans for water and waste
development costs. Development loans are made to associations,
including corporations operating on a nonprofit basis,
municipalities and similar organizations, generally designated
as public or quasi-public agencies, that propose projects for
the development, storage, treatment, purification, and
distribution of domestic water or the collection, treatment, or
disposal of waste in rural areas. Such grants may not exceed 75
percent of the development cost of the projects and can
supplement other funds borrowed or furnished by applicants to
pay development costs.
The solid waste grant program is authorized under section
310B(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
Grants are made to public bodies and private nonprofit
organizations to provide technical assistance to local and
regional governments for the purpose of reducing or eliminating
pollution of water resources and for improving the planning and
management of solid waste disposal facilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $550,383,000
for the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account.
The Committee recommends $66,500,000 for water and waste
disposal systems grants for Native Americans, including Native
Alaskans, and the Colonias. The Committee recognizes the
special needs and problems for delivery of basic services to
these populations, and encourages the Secretary to distribute
these funds in line with the fiscal year 2014 distribution, to
the degree practicable. In addition, the Committee makes up to
$18,000,000 available for the circuit rider program.
The following table provides the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget
request levels:
RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2017 Fiscal year 2018 Committee
enacted budget request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
Water and waste disposal direct loans................. 1,200,000 ................ 1,200,000
Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans............. 50,000 ................ 50,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total loan levels................................... 1,250,000 ................ 1,250,000
=====================================================
Budget authority:
Water and waste disposal direct loans................. 52,080 ................ 25,680
Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans............. 240 ................ 230
Water and waste disposal grants....................... 391,980 ................ 393,980
Solid waste management grants......................... 4,000 ................ 4,000
Water well systems grants............................. 993 ................ 993
Colonias and AK/HI/Native American grants............. 64,000 ................ 66,500
Water and waste water revolving funds................. 1,000 ................ 1,000
High energy cost grants............................... 10,000 ................ 10,000
Circuit rider......................................... 16,897 ................ 18,000
Emergency community water assistance grants........... 10,000 ................ 10,000
Technical assistance grants........................... 20,000 ................ 20,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, budget authority............................. 571,190 ................ 550,383
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et
seq.) provides the statutory authority for the electric and
telecommunications programs.
The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508)
established the program account. An appropriation to this
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees
committed in fiscal year 2018, as well as for administrative
expenses.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The following table reflects the Committee's recommendation
for the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans
Program Account, the loan subsidy and administrative expenses,
as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget request levels:
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
Electric:
Direct FFB........................................... 5,500,000 5,500,000 5,500,000
Guaranteed underwriting.............................. 750,000 ............... 750,000
Telecommunications:
Direct, Treasury Rate................................ 345,000 345,000 345,000
Direct, FFB.......................................... 345,000 345,000 345,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total loan authorization............................... 6,940,000 6,190,000 6,940,000
==================================================
Total budget authority................................. 3,071 863 863
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM LOANS AND GRANTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan and grant levels:
Distance learning and Telemedicine Program:
Grants............................................... 26,600 ............... 26,600
Broadband program:
Treasury rate loans...................................... 27,043 26,991 27,043
Treasury rate loans budget authority..................... 4,500 4,521 4,530
Grants................................................... 34,500 ............... 30,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total DLT and Broadband Program level.................. 88,143 26,991 83,643
==================================================
Total DLT and Broadband Budget authority............... 65,600 4,521 61,130
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program
is authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade
Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), as amended by the
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public
Law 104-127). This program provides incentives to improve the
quality of phone services, to provide access to advanced
telecommunications services and computer networks, and to
improve rural opportunities.
This program provides the facilities and equipment to link
rural education and medical facilities with more urban centers
and other facilities providing rural residents access to better
healthcare through technology and increasing educational
opportunities for rural students. These funds are available for
loans and grants.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $61,130,000
for the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program.
Funds recommended for the RUS broadband program are intended to
promote broadband availability in those areas where there is
not otherwise a business case for private investment in a
broadband network. The Committee encourages RUS to focus
expenditures on projects that bring broadband service to
currently unserved households.
The Committee is concerned about the longstanding, unmet
health needs in the Mississippi River Delta. The Committee
recommendation includes $3,000,000 to address critical
healthcare needs in the region, as authorized by section 379G
of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
Broadband Grants.--Of the funds recommended, $30,000,000 in
grants shall be made available to support broadband
transmission for rural areas.
Broadband Infrastructure.--The Committee notes that it is
the policy of RUS to avoid duplication of efforts when
financing telecommunications infrastructure via its programs;
however, the Committee is concerned that this policy does not
extend to the deployment of broadband-capable infrastructure.
In order to prevent duplication of services, the Committee
directs RUS to implement operational changes and report back to
the Committee on administrative efforts to eliminate
duplicative or over building of broadband technology.
Multi-Strand Fiber Optic Cable.--The Committee recommends
that, within these funds, the Secretary explore a pilot grant
program to demonstrate the use of multi-strand fiber optic
cable that exist as part of electrical transmission
infrastructure to provide state-of-the-art broadband services
to currently underserved rural schools and medical centers
within a mile of the existing cable.
RURAL ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE ACCOUNT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Economic Infrastructure Grants............................ .............. $161,893 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rural Economic Infrastructure grant program represents
a proposal to merge five existing grants programs: very low
income housing repair grants; housing preservation grants;
rural community facilities grants; distance learning and
telemedicine grants; and broadband grants.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommendation does not include funding for
Rural Economic Infrastructure grants but continues to fund each
component grant program individually.
TITLE IV
DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $814,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 809,000
Committee recommendation................................ 814,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and
Consumer Services provides direction and coordination in
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to
the Department's nutrition assistance activities. The Office
has oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and
Nutrition Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $814,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and
Consumer Services.
Food and Agriculture Service Learning Program.--Recognizing
the widespread need for children and schools to access food and
agriculture education, the Committee encourages USDA to provide
funding, through existing resources, for the Food and
Agriculture Service Learning Program, authorized under section
4209 of the Agricultural Act of 2014.
Food Security in Frontier Communities.--The Committee
appreciates the intent of the Food and Nutrition Service to
focus on implementing locally-designed initiatives to increase
food security in frontier communities within its area of
responsibility. Helping these communities to adapt to changing
growing conditions and subsistence food availability and to
develop the capacity to grow more food locally will improve
their tenuous food security and provide opportunities for
economic development in extremely low-income regions. The
Committee therefore strongly encourages the Food and Nutrition
Service to finalize plans to work with relevant stakeholders to
develop and implement the plans that were initiated in the past
year.
Interagency Partnerships.--The Committee commends USDA for
its work to support access to combating hunger and eliminating
barriers to healthy food access through innovative interagency
partnerships. The Committee encourages USDA to continue these
partnerships, particularly the new Summer VISTA partnership
program.
Nutrition Program Efficiency.--The Committee encourages the
Secretary to focus process and technology improvement grants
within the Food and Nutrition Service [FNS] to expand public-
private partnerships to increase food security in a cost-
efficient and accountable manner.
School Meals.--The Committee is concerned with practices in
some school districts that unintentionally shame students with
unpaid school meal fees. The Committee encourages the Food and
Nutrition Service to work with stakeholders, including parents,
guardians, and school food service professionals to move
towards a solution to avoid embarrassment and shaming of school
children for unpaid school meal fees.
Food and Nutrition Service
The Food and Nutrition Service represents an organizational
effort to eliminate hunger and malnutrition in this country.
Nutrition assistance programs provide access to a nutritionally
adequate diet for families and persons with low incomes and
encourage better eating patterns among the Nation's children.
These programs include:
Child Nutrition Programs.--The National School Lunch and
School Breakfast, Summer Food Service, and Child and Adult Care
Food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam for use in serving
nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending schools
of high school grades and under, to children of preschool age
in child care centers, and to children in other institutions in
order to improve the health and well-being of the Nation's
children, and broaden the markets for agricultural food
commodities. Through the Special Milk Program, assistance is
provided to the States for making reimbursement payments to
eligible schools and child care institutions which institute or
expand milk service in order to increase the consumption of
fluid milk by children. Funds for this program are provided by
direct appropriation and transfer from section 32.
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants,
and Children [WIC].--This program safeguards the health of
pregnant, postpartum, and breast-feeding women, infants, and
children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk because of
inadequate nutrition and income by providing supplemental
foods. The delivery of supplemental foods may be done through
health clinics, vouchers redeemable at retail food stores, or
other approved methods which a cooperating State health agency
may select. Funds for this program are provided by direct
appropriation.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.--This program
seeks to improve nutritional standards of needy persons and
families. Assistance is provided to eligible households to
enable them to obtain a better diet by increasing their food
purchasing capability, usually by furnishing benefits in the
form of electronic access to funds. The program also includes
Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico.
The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on
Indian Reservations, which provides nutritious agricultural
commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian
reservations who choose not to participate in the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program.
Commodity Assistance Program [CAP].--This program provides
funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP], the
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, Disaster Assistance, Pacific
Island Assistance, and administrative expenses for TEFAP.
CSFP provides supplemental foods to low-income elderly
persons age 60 and over.
TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State
agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of
donated commodities.
Nutritious agricultural commodities are provided to
residents of the Federated States of Micronesia and the
Marshall Islands. Cash assistance is provided to distributing
agencies to assist them in meeting administrative expenses
incurred. It also provides funding for use in non-
presidentially declared disasters, and for FNS' administrative
costs in connection with relief for all disasters. Funds for
this program are provided by direct appropriation.
Nutrition Programs Administration.--Most salaries and
Federal operating expenses of the Food and Nutrition Service
are funded from this account. Also included is the Center for
Nutrition Policy and Promotion [CNPP] which oversees
improvements in and revisions to the food guidance systems, and
serves as the focal point for advancing and coordinating
nutrition promotion and education policy to improve the health
of all Americans.
CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $22,793,982,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 24,256,266,000
Committee recommendation................................ 24,296,505,000
The Child Nutrition Programs, authorized by the Richard B.
Russell National School Lunch Act (Public Law 79-396) and the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-642), provide
Federal assistance to State agencies in the form of cash and
commodities for use in preparing and serving nutritious meals
to children while they are attending school, residing in
service institutions, or participating in other organized
activities away from home. The purpose of these programs is to
help maintain the health and proper physical development of
America's children. Milk is provided to children either free or
at a low cost, depending on their family income level. FNS
provides cash subsidies to States for administering the
programs and directly administers the program in the States
which choose not to do so. Grants are also made for nutritional
training and surveys and for State administrative expenses.
Under current law, most of these payments are made on the basis
of reimbursement rates established by law and applied to
lunches and breakfasts actually served by the States. The
reimbursement rates are adjusted annually to reflect changes in
the Consumer Price Index for food away from home.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends $24,296,505,000 for the Child
Nutrition Programs.
Child and Adult Care Food Program.--The Committee notes
that the Child and Adult Care Food Program [CACFP] is an
important source of funding for nutrition for children in early
childhood education and care programs. Therefore, the Committee
is concerned that complexity of CACFP requirements creates
tremendous administrative challenges for the child care homes,
centers, and agencies that are responsible for delivering these
essential benefits to children. The Secretary shall examine the
recommendations set forth by the Child and Adult Care Food
Program Paperwork Reduction Work Group's 2015 report to
Congress, and submit to the Committee, no later than 60 days
after enactment of this Act, an evaluation of all the
recommendations, including which actions to streamline
administrative processes and remove barriers to participation
the Secretary has the authority to change, without compromising
the measures taken to protect program integrity. The Committee
directs the Secretary to work with States to encourage
implementation of recommendations contained in the Child and
Adult Care Food Program Paperwork Reduction Work Group's 2015
report to Congress that would make monitoring and reporting
processes more effective at improving CACFP participation and
performance in all eligible child and adult care centers and
facilities.
Crediting System for Nutrition Programs.--The Committee
recognizes that the current crediting system used by Food and
Nutrition Service in administering the school lunch program and
the School Breakfast Program is in need of reform. The
crediting system has historically provided significant service
to school food authorities and suppliers to the National School
Lunch and the School Breakfast Program. However, the program
has not been updated to keep pace with innovation in the
marketplace. New products that provide additional nutrition to
program participants have entered the marketplace but school
food authorities are not receiving proper crediting due to the
fact that the system is outdated. For example, Greek yogurt
receives the same protein crediting as other products with less
protein. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall review the system of crediting
and submit to the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee
on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a report
that describes the results of the review.
School Meals Procurement.--The Committee directs the Food
and Nutrition Service to ensure that school food authorities
abide by Section 12(n) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, 42 USC 1760(n), when purchasing seafood or
seafood products for the school meals programs. The Committee
also encourages the Food and Nutrition Service to use the
funding available for training and technical assistance for
school food authorities in procurement practices.
Summer Food Service Program.--The Committee recognizes that
in many rural and frontier areas of the country where homes are
widely scattered, children and youth are unable to access
congregate feeding sites that participate in the Summer Food
Service Program and that existing mobile food delivery efforts
are not able to meet the need. The Committee supports the Food
and Nutrition Service allowing State Agencies to enable Summer
Food Service Program service institutions that serve such areas
where eligible children and youth have barriers to access or
limited access to a congregate feeding site to use their
customary reimbursement payments to develop and implement
innovative methods to deliver or otherwise make available foods
to eligible children and youth by non-congregate means or in
non-congregate settings.
The Committee's recommendation provides for the following
annual rates for the child nutrition programs.
TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Child nutrition programs 2018 budget Committee
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program.................. 13,010,053 13,010,053
School Breakfast Program.............. 4,775,629 4,775,629
Child and Adult Care Food Program..... 3,919,384 3,919,384
Summer Food Service Program........... 639,789 639,789
Special Milk Program.................. 8,759 8,759
State Administrative Expenses......... 299,139 299,139
Commodity Procurement................. 1,489,349 1,489,349
Team Nutrition/HUSSC/CMS.............. 16,972 17,004
Food Safety Education................. 2,880 2,880
Coordinated Review.................... 10,000 10,000
Computer Support...................... 11,921 11,921
Training and Technical Assistance..... 13,702 23,137
CNP Studies and Evaluation............ 21,277 21,277
Farm to School Team................... 3,439 4,168
Payment Accuracy...................... 11,016 11,016
School Meal Equipment Grants.......... ............... 30,000
Summer EBT Demonstration.............. 22,957 23,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee expects FNS to utilize the National Food
Service Management Institute to carry out the food safety
education program.
SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN
[WIC]
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $6,350,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 6,150,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 6,350,000,000
The special supplemental nutrition program for women,
infants, and children [WIC] is authorized by section 17 of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Its purpose is to safeguard the
health of pregnant, breast-feeding and postpartum women and
infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk
because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income.
The WIC program food packages are designed to provide foods
which studies have demonstrated are lacking in the diets of the
WIC program target population. The authorized supplemental
foods are iron-fortified breakfast cereal, fruit or vegetable
juice which contains vitamin C, dry beans, peas, and peanut
butter.
There are three general types of delivery systems for WIC
foods: (1) retail purchase in which participants obtain
supplemental foods through retail stores; (2) home delivery
systems in which food is delivered to the participant's home;
and (3) direct distribution systems in which participants pick
up food from a distribution outlet. The food is free of charge
to all participants.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,350,000,000
for the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants,
and Children [WIC].
The Committee recommendation fully funds estimated WIC
participation in fiscal year 2018. The Committee recommendation
includes $80,000,000 for breastfeeding support initiatives and
$14,000,000 for infrastructure.
WIC Food Package.--The Committee appreciates the work of
the National Academies of Science to review and make
recommendations for updating the WIC food packages to reflect
current science and cultural factors. The Committee notes,
however, that while all revised packages now allow some fish,
the amounts remain low compared to the recommendations of
authoritative agencies such as the World Health Organization
and in some cases, sporadic. The Committee strongly encourages
the Department to prioritize the health and cultural benefits
of fish consumption as regulations are revised to implement the
NAS recommendations and to increase the amount of healthful
fish above the amounts recommended by the NAS. The Committee
also strongly encourages the Department to allow States to
prioritize fish over legumes and peanut butter to respond to
the cultural preferences of WIC participants in States like
Alaska.
WIC Food Package Recommendation.--The Committee supports
the important public health role WIC plays in assuring healthy
pregnancies and birth outcomes, and growing healthy young
children ready to learn when they enter school through quality
nutrition education and prescribed foods. The Committee
encourages the Secretary to review and implement the
recommendations, where appropriate, established in the January
2017 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
report, Review of WIC Food Packages: Improving Balance and
Choice: Final Report. The recommendations are in accordance
with the regular review of the Food Packages provided for under
the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010.
SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $78,480,694,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 73,612,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 73,612,502,000
The Food Stamp Program was reauthorized through fiscal year
2012 and renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
[SNAP] in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. The
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program attempts to alleviate
hunger and malnutrition among low-income persons by increasing
their food purchasing power. Eligible households receive SNAP
benefits with which they can purchase food through regular
retail stores.
Other programs funded through SNAP include Nutrition
Assistance to Puerto Rico and American Samoa, the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, the Emergency Food
Assistance Program, and the Community Food Projects program.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is currently
in operation in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, the
Virgin Islands, and Guam. Participating households receive food
benefits, the value of which is determined by household size
and income. The cost of the benefits is paid by the Federal
Government. As required by law, the Food and Nutrition Service
annually revises household benefit allotments to reflect
changes in the cost of the thrifty food plan.
Administrative Costs.--All direct and indirect
administrative costs incurred for certification of households,
issuance of benefits, quality control, outreach, and fair
hearing efforts are shared by the Federal Government and the
States on a 50-50 basis.
State Antifraud Activities.--Under the provisions of the
Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, States are eligible to be
reimbursed for 50 percent of the costs of their fraud
investigations and prosecutions.
States are required to implement an employment and training
program for the purpose of assisting members of households
participating in SNAP in gaining skills, training, or
experience that will increase their ability to obtain regular
employment. The Department of Agriculture has implemented a
grant program to States to assist them in providing employment
and training services.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$73,612,502,000 for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program. Of the amount recommended, $3,000,000,000 is made
available as a contingency reserve.
State SNAP Implementation.--The Committee is concerned
about implementation of the SNAP program in certain states
where states are failing to meet the required deadlines for
processing applications. USDA is encouraged to work closely
with States to remedy program deficiency and be aggressive in
combating any falsification of SNAP implementation data.
COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $315,139,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 293,591,000
Committee recommendation................................ 317,139,000
The Commodity Assistance Program includes funding for the
Commodity Supplemental Food Program and funding to pay expenses
associated with the storage and distribution of commodities
through The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
The Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP].--Authorized
by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer Protection Act
of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note), as amended in 1981 by Public Law
97-98 and in 2014 by Public Law 113-79, this program provides
supplemental food to low-income senior citizens and in some
cases low-income infants and children up to age six, low-income
pregnant and postpartum women. The Agricultural Act of 2014
discontinued the admission of new pregnant and postpartum women
and children into the program. Those already in the program can
continue to receive assistance until they are no longer
eligible.
The foods for CSFP are provided by the Department of
Agriculture for distribution through State agencies. The
authorized commodities include: iron-fortified infant formula,
rice cereal, cheese, canned juice, evaporated milk and/or
nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned meat or
poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and peanut
butter and dry beans. Elderly participants may receive all
commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice
cereal.
The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP].--Authorized
by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 7501 et
seq.), as amended, the program provides nutrition assistance to
low-income people through prepared meals served on site and
through the distribution of commodities to low-income
households for home consumption. The commodities are provided
by USDA to State agencies for distribution through State-
established networks. State agencies make the commodities
available to local organizations, such as soup kitchens, food
pantries, food banks, and community action agencies, for their
use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need.
Funds are administered by FNS through grants to State
agencies which operate commodity distribution programs.
Allocation of the funds to States is based on a formula which
considers the States' unemployment rate and the number of
persons with income below the poverty level.
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Farmers' Market
Nutrition Program [FMNP] provides WIC or WIC-eligible
participants with coupons to purchase fresh, nutritious,
unprepared foods, such as fruits and vegetables, from farmers'
markets. This benefits both participants and local farmers by
increasing the awareness and use of farmers' markets by low-
income households.
Pacific Island and Disaster Assistance.--This program
provides funding for assistance to the nuclear-affected islands
in the form of commodities and administrative funds. It also
provides funding for use in non-presidentially declared
disasters and for FNS' administrative costs in connection with
relief for all disasters.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $317,139,000
for the Commodity Assistance Program. The Committee continues
to encourage the Department to distribute Commodity Assistance
Program funds equitably among the States, based on an
assessment of the needs and priorities of each State and the
State's preference to receive commodity allocations through
each of the programs funded under this account.
Commodity Supplemental Food Program.--The Committee
recommends $238,120,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food
Program. This amount fully funds participation in fiscal year
2018.
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Committee is aware
that the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program provides fresh
fruits and vegetables to low-income mothers and children,
benefiting not only WIC participants, but local farmers as
well. Therefore, the Committee recommends $18,548,000 for the
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and directs the Secretary to
obligate these funds within 45 days.
The Emergency Food Assistance Program.--The Agricultural
Act of 2014 provides $288,750,000 for TEFAP commodities to be
purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds.
The Committee recommendation includes $59,401,000 for TEFAP
transportation, storage, and program integrity. In addition,
the Committee recommendation grants the Secretary authority to
transfer up to an additional 10 percent from TEFAP commodities
for this purpose and urges the Secretary to use this authority.
The Committee encourages the Secretary to identify
opportunities for increasing the supply of TEFAP commodities in
the coming fiscal year through bonus and specialty crop
purchases. The Department shall make available to the States
domestically produced catfish fillets for distribution to local
agencies.
NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $170,716,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 148,541,000
Committee recommendation................................ 153,841,000
The Nutrition Programs Administration appropriation
provides for most of the Federal operating expenses of the Food
and Nutrition Service, which includes the Child Nutrition
Programs; Special Milk Program; Special Supplemental Nutrition
Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]; Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program; Nutrition Assistance for Puerto
Rico; the Commodity Assistance Program, including the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program and the Emergency Food Assistance
Program; and Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and Pacific
Island and Disaster Assistance.
The major objective of Nutrition Programs Administration is
to efficiently and effectively carry out the nutrition
assistance programs mandated by law. This is to be accomplished
by the following: (1) giving clear and consistent guidance and
supervision to State agencies and other cooperators; (2)
assisting the States and other cooperators by providing
program, managerial, financial, and other advice and expertise;
(3) measuring, reviewing, and analyzing the progress being made
toward achieving program objectives; and (4) carrying out
regular staff support functions.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $153,841,000
for Nutrition Programs Administration. The Committee
recommendation includes $1,825,000 for decentralized rent and
security payments.
TITLE V
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural
Affairs
Appropriations, 2017....................................................
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $875,000
The Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign
Agricultural Affairs provides direction and coordination in
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to
the Department's international affairs (except for foreign
economic development). The Office has oversight and management
responsibilities for the Foreign Agricultural Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriations of $875,000 for
the Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign
Agricultural Affairs.
Food Chain Systems.--The Committee is aware that the lack
of comprehensive cold food chain systems is one of the main
causes of food loss and results in a significant percentage of
food spoilage from farm-to-market. Preventing food loss and
implementing a robust cold food chain results in substantial
benefits such as increased nutrition, a safer food supply,
greater economic opportunity, and increased resilience. In
order to maximize the benefit investment in the agricultural
productivity of the developing world, the Committee encourages
the Department to give strong consideration to the use of cold
chain technologies and include the development of appropriate
cooling technologies in programs, policies, and strategic plans
aimed at hunger prevention and food security in developing
agricultural markets.
Foreign Agricultural Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers from
Appropriations loan accounts Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2017......................................... 196,571 6,074 202,645
Budget estimate, 2018........................................ 188,167 6,382 194,549
Committee recommendation..................................... 197,506 6,074 203,580
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] was established
March 10, 1953, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1320, supplement
1. Public Law 83-690, approved August 28, 1954, transferred the
agricultural attaches from the Department of State to the
Foreign Agricultural Service.
The mission of FAS overseas is to represent U.S.
agricultural interests, to promote export of domestic farm
products, improve world trade conditions, and report on
agricultural production and trade in foreign countries. FAS
staff are stationed at 98 offices around the world where they
provide expertise in agricultural economics and marketing, as
well as provide attache services.
FAS carries out several export assistance programs to
counter the adverse effects of unfair trade practices by
competitors on U.S. agricultural trade. The Market Access
Program [MAP] conducts both generic and brand-identified
promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit agricultural
associations and private firms financed through reimbursable
CCC payments.
The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to
section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit Corporation
and 15 U.S.C. 714-714p. The funds allocated to the General
Sales Manager are used for conducting the following programs:
(1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), including
facilities financing guarantees; (2) Food for Peace; (3)
section 416b Overseas Donations Program; (4) Market Access
Program; and (5) programs authorized by the Commodity Credit
Corporation Charter Act including barter, export sales of most
CCC-owned commodities, export payments, and other programs as
assigned to encourage and enhance the export of U.S.
agricultural commodities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends $203,580,000 for the Foreign
Agricultural Service, including a direct appropriation of
$197,506,000.
Borlaug Fellows Program.--The Committee recommendation
includes $3,500,000 for the Borlaug International Agricultural
Science and Technology Fellows Program. This program provides
training for international scientists and policymakers from
selected developing countries. The fellows work closely with
U.S. specialists in their fields of expertise and apply that
knowledge in their home countries. The Committee recognizes the
importance of this program in helping developing countries
strengthen their agricultural practices and food security.
Cochran Fellowship Program.--The Committee recommendation
includes $6,500,000 for the Cochran Fellowship Program. The
Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to provide
additional support for the program through the Commodity Credit
Corporation Emerging Markets Program.
Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.--The
Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market
Development Cooperator Program.
Market Access Program.--The Committee continues the full
mandatory funding for the Market Access Program and expects the
Department to administer the program as authorized in 7 U.S.C.
5623, without changing the eligibility requirements for
participation of cooperative organizations, small businesses,
trade associations, and other entities.
FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE I DIRECT CREDIT AND FOOD FOR PROGRESS PROGRAM
ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $149,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 149,000
Committee recommendation................................ 149,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $149,000 for
administrative expenses to continue servicing existing Food for
Peace title I agreements.
FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $1,466,000,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,600,000,000
Commodities Supplied in Connection With Dispositions Abroad
(Title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721-1726).--Commodities are supplied
without cost through foreign governments to combat malnutrition
and to meet famine and other emergency requirements.
Commodities are also supplied for nonemergencies through public
and private agencies, including intergovernmental
organizations. The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean
freight on shipments under this title, and may also pay
overland transportation costs to a landlocked country, as well
as internal distribution costs in emergency situations. The
funds appropriated for title II are made available to private
voluntary organizations and cooperatives to assist these
organizations in meeting administrative and related costs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,600,000,000
for Food for Peace title II grants.
MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION
PROGRAM GRANTS
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $201,626,000
Budget estimate, 2018...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 206,626,000
The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program helps support education, child
development, and food security for some of the world's poorest
children. The program provides for donations of U.S.
agricultural products, as well as financial and technical
assistance, for school feeding and maternal and child nutrition
projects in low-income, food-deficit countries that are
committed to universal education. Commodities made available
for donation through agreements with private voluntary
organizations, cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations,
and foreign governments may be donated for direct feeding or
for local sale to generate proceeds to support school feeding
and nutrition projects.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $206,626,000
for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program.
Local and Regional Procurement.--The Committee provides an
appropriation of $15,000,000 for efforts to build long-term
agriculture sustainability and establish a local investment in
school feeding programs. With direct U.S. commodity
contributions, projects supported by the McGovern-Dole Food for
Education Program have significantly improved the attendance,
nourishment, and learning capacity of school-aged children in
low-income countries throughout the impoverished world. New
funding authorities would enable school feeding programs to
proactively transition from direct commodity assistance to
locally source agriculture products. The Committee directs the
Secretary to conduct the Local and Regional Food Aid
Procurement Project Program in accordance with the priorities
of the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child
Nutrition Program.
COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT (EXPORT CREDIT
PROGRAMS AND GSM-102)
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guaranteed loan Administrative
levels expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2017.................. 5,500,000 8,537
Budget estimate, 2018................. 5,500,000 6,735
Committee recommendation.............. 5,500,000 8,537
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1980, the Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] instituted
the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102) under its charter
authority. With this program, CCC guarantees, for a fee,
payments due U.S. exporters under deferred payment sales
contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults due to commercial as
well as noncommercial risks. The risk to CCC extends from the
date of export to the end of the deferred payment period
covered in the export sales contract and covers only that
portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance agreement.
Operation of this program is based on criteria which will
assure that it is used only where it is determined that it will
develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand
existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The
program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide
financing to those areas where the institutions would be
unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC
guarantees. CCC also provides facilities financing guarantees.
The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the
program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export guarantee
programs are exempt from the requirement of advance
appropriations of budget authority according to section
504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public Law
101-508. Appropriations to this account will be used for
administrative expenses.
TITLE VI
RELATED AGENCY AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
Department of Health and Human Services
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is a scientific
regulatory agency whose mission is to promote and protect the
public health and safety of Americans. FDA's work is a blend of
science and law. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments
Act of 2007 [FDAAA] (Public Law 110-85) reaffirmed the
responsibilities of the FDA: to ensure safe and effective
products reach the market in a timely way, and to monitor
products for continued safety while they are in use. In
addition, FDA is entrusted with two critical functions in the
Nation's war on terrorism: preventing willful contamination of
all regulated products, including food, and improving the
availability of medications to prevent or treat injuries caused
by biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agents.
The FDA Foods program has the primary responsibility for
assuring that the food supply, quality of foods, food
ingredients and dietary supplements are safe, sanitary,
nutritious, wholesome, and honestly labeled, and that cosmetic
products are safe and properly labeled. The variety and
complexity of the food supply has grown dramatically while new
and more complex safety issues, such as emerging microbial
pathogens, natural toxins, and technological innovations in
production and processing, have developed. This program plays a
major role in keeping the United States food supply among the
safest in the world.
In January 2011, the Food Safety Modernization Act was
signed into law. This law enables FDA to better protect public
health by strengthening the food safety system. It enables FDA
to focus more on preventing food safety and feed problems
rather than relying primarily on reacting to problems after
they occur. The law also provides FDA with new enforcement
authorities designed to achieve higher rates of compliance with
prevention- and risk-based food and feed safety standards and
to better respond to and contain problems when they do occur.
The law also gives FDA important new tools to hold imported
food and feed to the same standards as domestic food and feed
and directs FDA to build an integrated national food safety
system in partnership with State and local authorities.
The FDA Drugs programs are comprised of four separate
areas, Human Drugs, Animal Drugs, Medical Devices and
Biologics. FDA is responsible for the lifecycle of products,
including premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human
and animal drugs, medical devices and biological products to
ensure their safety and effectiveness. For Human Drugs this
includes assuring that all drug products used for the
prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease are safe and
effective. Additional procedures include the review of
investigational new drug applications; evaluation of market
applications for new and generic drugs, labeling and
composition of prescription and over-the-counter drugs;
monitoring the quality and safety of products manufactured in,
or imported into, the United States; and, regulating the
advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. The Animal
Drugs and Feeds Program ensures only safe and effective
veterinary drugs, intended for the treatment and/or prevention
of diseases in animals and the improved production of food-
producing animals, are approved for marketing.
The FDA Biologics program assures that blood and blood
products, blood test kits, vaccines, and therapeutics are pure,
potent, safe, effective, and properly labeled. The program
inspects blood banks and blood processors, licenses and
inspects firms collecting human source plasma, evaluates and
licenses biologics manufacturing firms and products; lot
releases licensed products; and monitors adverse events
associated with vaccine immunization, blood products, and other
biologics.
The FDA Devices and Radiological program ensures the safety
and effectiveness of medical devices and eliminates unnecessary
human exposure to manmade radiation from medical, occupational,
and consumer products. In addition, the program enforces
quality standards under the Mammography Quality Standards Act
(Public Law 108-365). Medical devices include thousands of
products from thermometers and contact lenses to heart
pacemakers, hearing aids, and MRIs. Radiological products
include items such as microwave ovens and video display
terminals.
FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research in
Jefferson, Arkansas, serves as a specialized resource,
conducting peer-review scientific research that provides the
basis for FDA to make sound science-based regulatory decisions
through its premarket review and postmarket surveillance. The
research is designed to define and understand the biological
mechanisms of action underlying the toxicity of products and
lead to developing methods to improve assessment of human
exposure, susceptibility and risk of those products regulated
by FDA.
In 2009, Congress granted FDA new authority to regulate the
manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products.
FDA exercises this responsibility by protecting the public
health from the health effects of tobacco, setting scientific
standards and standards for tobacco product review, conducting
compliance activities to enforce its authority over tobacco,
and conducting public education and outreach about the health
effects of tobacco products.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation User fees Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2017......... 2,759,378 1,895,711 4,655,089
Budget estimate, 2018........ 1,819,718 3,164,392 4,984,110
Committee recommendation..... 2,760,378 2,386,567 5,146,945
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,760,378,000
for FDA salaries and expenses. The Committee also recommends
$2,386,567,000 in definite user fees, including: $937,434,000
in Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee collections;
$193,291,000 in Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act
user fee collections; and $24,142,000 in Animal Drug User Fee
Act user fee collections; $12,100,000 in Animal Generic Drug
User Fee Act user fee collections; $672,000,000 in Tobacco
Product user fee collections; $493,600,000 in Generic Drug User
Fee Act user fee collections; and $54,000,000 in Biosimilar
User Fee Act user fee collections. The Committee also
recommends $58,960,000 in permanent, indefinite user fees,
including: $5,300,000 in Voluntary Qualified Importer Program
collections; $1,434,000 in food and feed recall collections;
$6,414,000 in food reinspection collections; $20,522,000 in
Mammography Quality Standards Act fee collections; $10,062,000
in color certification collections; $7,686,000 in Pediatric
Disease Priority Review Voucher collections; $1,400,000 in
third-party auditor collections; $1,446,000 in outsourcing
facility collections; and $4,696,000 in export and
certification fees, as assumed in the President's budget. The
Committee recommendation includes bill language which prohibits
FDA from developing, establishing, or operating any program of
user fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701.
The Committee recommendation does not include proposed user
fees for food facility registration and inspection, food
import, food contact substance notification, cosmetics, and
international courier imports. None of these user fee proposals
have been authorized by Congress. The Committee will continue
to monitor any action by the appropriate authorizing Committees
regarding these proposed user fees.
The Committee expects FDA to continue all projects,
activities, laboratories, and programs as included in fiscal
year 2017 unless otherwise specified. The Committee does not
support the proposed $3,120,000 reduction to the National
Center for Toxicological Research. The Committee accepts the
budget proposal to eliminate funding for consumer education and
outreach regarding agricultural biotechnology.
The Committee recommendation includes an increase of
$500,000 to the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and
$500,000 to the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition to
review Botanical Drug and Dietary Supplement interactions.
The following table reflects the Committee's
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2017 and budget
request levels:
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Fiscal year 2018 budget Committee
2017 enacted request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers and related field activities:
Foods.................................................... 1,025,503 910,428 1,026,003
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN]. 310,994 277,643 308,494
Field Activities..................................... 714,509 632,785 717,509
Human Drugs.............................................. 492,203 179,139 492,703
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER]....... 355,996 94,353 356,496
Field Activities..................................... 136,207 84,786 136,207
Biologics................................................ 215,443 95,893 215,443
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER].. 174,052 61,398 174,052
Field Activities..................................... 41,391 34,495 41,391
Animal Drugs............................................. 162,852 107,606 162,852
Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM]................. 98,205 49,117 98,205
Field Activities..................................... 64,647 58,489 64,647
Medical and radiological devices......................... 329,764 140,069 329,764
Center for Devices and Radiological Health........... 246,319 73,842 246,319
Field Activities..................................... 83,445 66,227 83,445
National Center for Toxicological Research............... 63,331 60,211 63,331
Other Activities............................................. 185,087 125,432 185,087
Rent and related activities.................................. 114,987 72,450 114,987
Rental Payments to GSA....................................... 170,208 128,490 170,208
--------------------------------------------------
Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority. 2,759,378 1,819,718 2,760,378
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients.--The Committee is
concerned that the FDA has not yet approved a list of active
pharmaceutical ingredients [APIs] for use by compounding
pharmacists pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act [FDCA]. Within 90 days of the enactment of this act, the
FDA is directed to provide a timeline for when the remaining
substances will be considered, and in the meantime re-consider
its policy with regard to enforcement of the bulk drug
substances provisions under section 503A.
Added Sugar Labeling.--The Committee is concerned about
potential consumer confusion over the new FDA nutritional
labeling requirements for added sugar for single ingredient
products like maple syrup and honey, where sugar is naturally
occurring in the product rather than added to the product. The
Committee is aware that the FDA has had discussions with maple
and honey producers regarding their concerns that the labeling
requirement as currently drafted could mislead consumers to
think that sugar has been added to a pure single-ingredient
maple or honey product. The Committee directs the FDA to report
to the Committee on its efforts to implement regulations and
provide clarity to the maple syrup and honey industries on the
labeling of the sugar content of their packaged products and
avoiding consumer confusion.
Atypical Actives.--The Committee requests that the FDA
provide an update on how it regulates ``atypical actives.''
Autoantibody Qualification.--The appearance of certain
islet autoantibodies in the serum of individuals increases the
chance of developing type 1 diabetes at some point in the
future. Therefore the Committee encourages the FDA to work with
the Type 1 diabetes community on the assessment of potential
diabetes biomarkers related to islet autoimmunity, which might
help inform the design of clinical studies.
Botanical Dietary Supplements Research.--The Committee
appreciates the work CFSAN has done to ensure the safety of
botanical dietary supplements. Existing work to develop
authentication and identification tools for evaluation of
botanical supplements is promising, and the Committee directs
the Center to invest further in this important research.
Botanical Drug and Drug Interactions.--The Committee
commends CDER for its work to ensure that botanical drugs
available to the public are safe and effective. However, little
is known about potential drug interactions caused by botanical
drugs, and given the recent publication of the Botanical Drug
Development Guidance for Industry, the Committee is concerned
that this will likely catalyze additional applications for
approval of botanical drugs. Therefore, the Committee directs
the FDA to invest in this research by working with its Center
of Excellence network partners with expertise in developing
analytical methods and reference standards for botanical
formulations.
Caloric Content.--The Committee is concerned that the FDA
Nutrition Facts Label final rule does not include specific
requirements for certain carbohydrates that may have
insignificant or no caloric content. Consumers generally rely
on the caloric information provided on food and beverage
labels. The Committee is aware that the FDA is working to
provide additional information for food manufacturers
clarifying how certain carbohydrates, as appropriate, that may
have insignificant or no caloric content should be labeled. The
Committee urges the FDA to provide clarity to food
manufacturers on the labeling of such carbohydrates, as
appropriate.
Center for Safety and Nutrition Centers of Excellence.--The
Committee is aware of the important contribution of the FDA
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Centers of
Excellence [COEs] program in supporting critical basic research
as well as facilitating the implementation of the FDA Food
Safety Modernization Act. The Committee encourages the Agency
to continue to fully utilize the COEs to accomplish these
goals, and instructs that it enhance its level of support for
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act activities.
Centers of Excellence in Regulatory Science and
Innovation.--The Committee is encouraged by the ongoing
research and collaboration underway at the Centers of
Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation program. 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 locations in the CERSI
network at their original funding level for a period of at
least 5 years to ensure their efficacy and to capitalize on
existing studies.
Cotton Ginning.--The Committee is concerned about the
impact of the ``Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard
Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for
Animals'' final rule (80 FR 56170; September 17, 2015) on the
cotton industry. The Committee notes post-harvest activity of
ginning cotton does not transform the resulting cottonseed into
a ``processed food,'' and thus, cottonseed should fall within
the definition of a ``raw agricultural commodity'' for purposes
of rules promulgated pursuant to the FSMA. In addition, the
Committee is concerned about the rationale for the definitions
of ``primary production farm'' and ``secondary activities
farm'' and how these definitions factor into the determination
of operations either being exempt from or covered by certain
requirements of the final rule. Therefore, the Committee
directs the FDA to provide outreach and technical assistance to
cotton ginning operations to assist them in complying with the
final rule or subsequent guidance documents.
Dietary Fiber.--The Committee is concerned that the FDA has
not issued final guidance regarding the definition of dietary
fiber, and encourages the FDA to issue these final guidance
documents and provide sufficient time for food manufacturers to
comply.
Dietary Ingredients Guidance.--The Committee encourages FDA
to meet with representatives of the supplement industry as well
as consumer groups and to review all comments received
regarding the ``Dietary Supplements: New Dietary Ingredient
[NDI] Notifications and Related Issues'' guidance.
Donor Milk Supply.--The Committee recognizes the growing
use of donor human milk for newborns, including premature
infants at risk for conditions such as necrotizing
enterocolitis. The Committee directs the FDA to provide a
report no later than 12 months after enactment of this Act on
its efforts to implement regulations to help assure a safe and
stable human milk supply and prevent contaminated milk from
reaching vulnerable infants. The report shall include
information on specific safeguards related to the collection,
processing, testing, and distribution of donor human milk and
products derived from human milk. The report shall also include
FDA's assessment of the possibility of reclassifying donor
human milk and products derived from human milk as exempt
infant formula.
Drug Shortages.--The committee requests that the FDA report
on how it works with manufacturers to facilitate timely
communication to the field on the availability of drugs
application reviews and facility inspections during times of or
risk of critical drug shortages.
Drug Vial Sizes.--Senate Report 114-259 directed the FDA to
provide a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment of
the fiscal 2017 Appropriations Act with recommendations on
``how the FDA may assist in addressing concerns about
appropriate vial sizes and fill volumes from a safety
perspective, to ensure that patients are receiving the
appropriate care.'' The Committee expects the FDA to comply
with this directive.
Duschenne 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 developments and of the agency's work to
implement the law, and we request an update on these efforts
within 180 days of enactment.
Fatal and Debilitating Diseases.--The Committee directs the
FDA to exercise its current law authorities, as provided under
the FDA Safety and Innovation Act and the 21st Century Cures
Act, when reviewing new drug applications for patients with 100
percent fatal and debilitating diseases. The Committee further
encourages the FDA to afford patients, caregivers and treating
physicians the opportunity to participate in the drug review
process.
Food Contact Notification User Fees.--The Committee
recommendation does not include proposed user fees.
Food Safety Mission.--The Committee directs the FDA Foods
Program to report to the Committee all activities and resources
spent on nutrition-related activities for the Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN], associated field offices
[ORA], and support components.
Food Safety Modernization Act.--The Committee is aware that
some states that have entered into cooperative agreements under
the State Produce Implementation Cooperative Agreement Program
to provide education, outreach, and technical assistance are
considering changing the state agency responsible for
implementing these agreements. The Food and Drug Administration
is directed to work with any state that designates a new
implementing agency to ensure it can continue to receive
funding under existing cooperative agreements without delay or
loss of funding.
Foreign High Risk Inspections.--The Committee has provided
robust funding for this initiative over the last several years
and directs the FDA to provide an update on these efforts,
including estimated efficiencies and concerns, and plans to
continue or expand this effort in the future.
FSMA & Strategic Partnerships.--The Committee notes FDA's
public hearing regarding reliance on ``Strategic Partnerships
to Enhance the Safety of Imported Foods.'' In particular, the
Committee recommends that FDA give serious consideration to
suggestions made during the hearing to place greater reliance
on private-sector third party auditors to help FDA implement
FSMA. The Committee supports the FDA's recognition that
strategic partnerships with existing government food safety
programs and accredited private-sector third party auditing/
certification organizations can help achieve cost efficiencies
for Agency programs and encourages the Agency to continue its
dialogue with such organizations.
FSMA Clarification for Small Farms.--The Committee directs
the FDA to provide further clarification to small farms on the
requirements for compliance with the Food Safety Modernization
Act, including information on the qualified exemptions
available to small and very small farms and the actions
required to achieve compliance under these exemptions. The
Committee also urges the Food and Drug Administration to
communicate with (including through appropriate guidance) and
offer technical assistance to assist small farms with
compliance.
Glass Contamination of Injectable Drugs.--In 2011, FDA
issued the Advisory to Drug Manufacturers: Formation of Glass
Lamellae in Certain Injectable Drugs, which noted that drugs
containing glass fragments have the potential to cause embolic,
thrombotic, and other vascular events when administered
intravenously, and when administered subcutaneously, could lead
to the development of foreign body granuloma, local injection
site reactions, and increased immunogenicity. The Committee
understands that the FDA has initiated studies concerning glass
products for injectable products; however the Committee is
concerned about the threat of glass quality issues to public
health. The Committee directs the FDA to evaluate the Agency's
study data and any other appropriate available data and report
back to the Committee within 90 days on the appropriate action
needed to address the issue.
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 did not 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 consider any relevant distinctions between grape varietals,
including grape varietals from different regions, that may
provide additional flexibility to wine grape growers in
demonstrating a product is eligible for exemption or exclusion
from the produce safety regulation, including through listing
as a produce that is rarely consumed raw.
Human Drug Review Committee.--The Committee strongly
encourages the FDA to fully utilize its authorities under 18
U.S.C. 208(b)(3) to include no less than two members with an
expertise in the indication for which the drug is meant to
treat on each Advisory Committee when that Committee is
reviewing a drug that has been designated as an Orphan Drug.
Improving Diversity in Clinical Trials and Safety
Studies.--The Committee supports FDA's efforts, including the
FDASIA 907 Action Plan, to promote inclusion of racially and
ethnically diverse populations into clinical trials. The
Committee encourages FDA to address the specific lack of racial
and ethnic diversity in genome-wide association studies,
precision medicine studies, and post-market surveillance safety
monitoring for drugs, biological products, and devices. The
Committee further encourages FDA to also include data for
Hispanics in the Clinical Trials Drug Snapshots, including
stating when no data is available based on the study design of
the clinical trial. The Committee also directs FDA's to help
ensure that public-facing resources are available in Spanish,
including Medwatch reporting forms and online portal, and
consumer information materials.
Improving Import Review.--The Committee directs the FDA to
submit a report within 180 days of enactment of this Act on how
FDA is monitoring the impact of the reorganization under
Program Alignment, and if such reorganization has improved the
consistency of facility inspections.
In Silico Clinical Trials.--The Committee appreciates FDA's
interest in in silico medicine and directs the Office of the
Chief Scientist to enter into an affiliation agreement with an
academic institution with expertise in physiological modeling
for the purpose of bridging the gaps between genetics and
clinical practice with in silico clinical trials, allowing the
development of personalized medicine and optimizing the
regulatory process, pursuant to the goals set forth in the
Critical Path Initiative.
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 2017 Consolidated 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 into regulations, either through incorporation
by reference or principle-based regulation. 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 and provide a written report to Congress including a
description of the sections 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 No: 115-31 no
later than July 15, 2018.
Misleading Maple Marketing.--The Committee is concerned
about the explosion of products marketed using the word maple
and related iconography, which intentionally misleads consumers
who perceive the use of the word maple and related iconography
to mean that a food product contains some measurable quantity
of maple syrup to flavor or sweeten the product, which
consumers identify as a characterizing ingredient. The
Committee directs the FDA to perform a detailed analysis of
consumer perception of foods marketed with the word maple or
related iconography.
National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System.--The
Committee recommendation includes $10,800,000 for the National
Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, equal to the level
provided in fiscal year 2017.
Olive Oil.--The Committee supports ongoing monitoring by
FDA of the olive oil market to determine if it is adulterated
with seed oil. The Committee also encourages FDA to respond to
a 2012 citizen petition requesting a standard of identity for
olive oil and olive pomace oil.
Opioids.--The Committee is deeply concerned about the
opioid abuse epidemic that took the lives of more than 33,000
Americans in 2015. As the agency that oversees the approval of
these drugs, the FDA has a responsibility to consider the
public health impact of opioid misuse, abuse, diversion and
overdose death. The Committee supports FDA's commitment to
addressing this crisis through all available authorities, and
encourages them to work with other Federal Agencies in their
efforts.
The Committee continues its directive for FDA to refer any
new drug application for an opioid submitted under section
505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to an
advisory committee for their recommendations prior to approval,
unless the FDA finds that holding such advisory committee is
not in the interest of protecting and promoting the public
health.
The Committee notes that the vast majority of patients
prescribed opioids are dispensed a substantially larger amount
of pills than what is effective for pain management, and that 8
percent of patients who receive a week's supply of opioids
continue to use them 1 year later. Additionally, despite
promotion of abuse deterrent varieties of opioid medication,
FDA has itself recognized that these drugs are still
misunderstood as being abuse-proof by prescribers. Therefore,
the Committee believes that it is imperative that FDA,
consistent with its own Advisory Committee recommendations,
take any and all steps necessary to require continuing medical
education, aligned with the most recent Center for Disease
Control and Prevention's Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for
Chronic Pain, for providers who write opioid prescriptions,
including through the Risk Evaluations and Mitigation Strategy.
The Committee directs FDA to establish authoritative opioid
labeling guidelines that align prescribing and dispensing
volumes with the lowest number of pills needed to be effective
for pain management. Additionally, the Committee believes that
FDA should develop messaging to mitigate the risk that
healthcare practitioners will confuse the term ``abuse-
deterrent'' for ``abuse-proof''.
The Committee is also concerned that the Drug Enforcement
Administration's approved annual aggregate production quota for
opioids, which are established through engagement with the FDA,
have increased dramatically in the last two decades. The
Committee directs the FDA to account for changes in the
currently accepted medical use of opioids and the downstream
public health impact when informing DEA's quota-setting
process, and provide public justification for any future
recommended changes to the DEA's aggregate production quote for
opioids.
Opioid Policy Steering Committee.--The Committee strongly
supports the Commissioner's efforts to establish the Opioid
Policy Steering Committee to establish methods to curb our
opioid crisis in part by adequately considering the potential
risk of abuse and misuse as part of the FDA's drug approval
process of prescription opioids. The Committee encourages the
FDA to work with private stakeholders and researchers in this
process. The Committee requests for an update on the Steering
Committee's progress within 90 days, including any legislative
action necessary to achieve the Steering Committee's goals.
Orphan Products Development.--The Committee is encouraged
by the Office of Orphan Products Development and recognizes the
importance of the work being supported by Orphan Product
Grants. The Committee requests for the FDA to provide a review
of the indication for which the drug is intended to treat and
for the number of pediatric clinical trials that have received
a grant since fiscal year 2015.
OTC Switch.--The Committee is concerned that there is a
significant amount of time between an FDA approval of a switch
of a drug from prescription to over-the-counter and when such
switch is enforced. Allowing the prescription products of FDA-
switched OTC drugs to remain on the market has led to physician
and consumer confusion as inaccurate assumptions are made that
the product requires a prescription, as well as additional
costs due to unnecessary physician visits and prescriptions.
The Committee requests the FDA for an update on their progress
and timeline for a final determination regarding the
outstanding prescription products and to comment on a process
for improving these timelines moving forward.
Oversight Activities.--The Committee recommendation
includes $1,500,000 for the HHS Office of Inspector General
specifically for oversight of FDA activities.
Patient Experience.--The Committee is appreciative of the
steps the FDA has taken to implement Subtitle A of Title III
within the 21st Century Cures Act to better incorporate patient
experience in the drug development and approval processes. The
Committee is aware of provisions enacted via the 21st Century
Cures Act to provide for greater transparency on how FDA is
using patient experience and related data to inform regulatory
reviews, and to issue updated guidance to inform developers of
patient-focused drug developments tools. The Committee requests
a status report from FDA on implementation of these provisions
including any challenges or impediments being faced.
Pediatric Cancer Drug Approvals.--The Committee is
encouraged by the enactment of the RACE for Children Act as
part of the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee
Authorization Act. RACE for Children could improve the
treatment options for children battling cancer and close the
divide between adult and pediatric oncology therapies. The
Committee encourages the FDA to fully implement the provisions
specific to the lists of molecular targets and FDA guidance on
pediatric study plans under the Pediatric Research Equity Act
and the Best Pharmaceutical Practices for Children Act.
Pediatric Device Consortia Grants.--The Committee is
pleased that the nine FDA-funded Pediatric Device Consortia
have assisted in the development of more than 650 proposed
pediatric medical devices since its inception in 2009, as well
as promoting job-growth in the healthcare sector, and as such,
continues to support this critical effort. The program funds
consortia to assist innovators in developing medical and
surgical devices designed for the unique needs of children that
often go unmet by devices currently available on the market.
The Committee recommendation includes no less than the fiscal
year 2017 funding level for Pediatric Device Consortia Grants.
Rare Disease Therapies.--The Committee is encouraged by
FDA's recent approvals of therapies to treat rare diseases,
like Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and is aware of the
authorities within Section 3012 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 rare disease therapy development and of the agency's
work to implement the law, and we request an update on these
efforts within 180 days of enactment.
Seafood Advisory.--The Committee is concerned that the FDA
published final seafood advice for pregnant and nursing women
on January 18, 2017, without going through necessary
interagency review, consumer focus group testing, or the
opportunity for the public to comment on the scientific peer
review. Therefore, the Committee directs the FDA to review its
final seafood advice and to make such technical corrections as
are necessary to ensure the advice is consistent with the FDA's
scientific review of the net effects of seafood consumption. In
addition, the Committee directs the FDA to follow the
Administration's review process prior to publishing the updated
seafood advice.
Sunscreen Labeling Regulations.--The Committee remains
significantly concerned that the FDA has not approved a new
over-the-counter [OTC] sunscreen ingredient since the 1990s,
despite having a number of ingredients pending approval for
more than a decade. After the U.S. Surgeon General issued ``A
Call to Action to Prevent Skin Cancer,'' which concluded that
nearly 5 million people are treated annually for all skin
cancers at a cost of approximately $8.1 billion per year,
Congress passed the Sunscreen Innovation Act of 2014 to improve
the process by which the FDA reviews sunscreen ingredients and
to require the FDA to finalize an effective sunscreen monograph
within 5 years. The Committee directs the FDA to work with
stakeholders to develop a testing regimen, consistent with
current scientific standards, that appropriately balances the
benefit of additional skin cancer prevention tools versus the
risk of skin cancer within 90 days of enactment. The Committee
also directs FDA to maintain funding for agency efforts to
clear this backlog of sunscreen applications.
In addition, the Committee is disappointed that FDA has not
yet finalized a rule limiting the maximum Sun Protection Factor
[SPF] to ``50'' or ``50+'' as directed by the fiscal year 2017
Consolidated Appropriations Act, and as such the Committee
directs FDA to finalize the rule immediately. The Committee is
also disappointed that FDA failed to issue a proposed rule to
establish testing and labeling standards for sunscreen sprays
and directs FDA to do so immediately.
Vibrio.--The Committee is aware of the public health
challenge related to the naturally occurring bacteria called
Vibrio parahaemolyticus that can accumulate in shellfish and
believes that more scientific research is necessary to develop
proper controls that will reduce the risk to consumers and
sustain a healthy domestic shellfish industry. The Committee
encourages the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] to increase
funding for research into Vibrio illnesses associated with the
consumption of raw molluscan shellfish, improve risk assessment
models, and develop improved rapid detection methods for
virulent Vibrio strains.
White Oak Expansion.--The Committee is aware of the need
for FDA facilities to accommodate an anticipated expanded
workforce due to broader missions related to food safety and
other mandates in legislation over the last few years. Due to
the challenging fiscal environment, the Committee encourages
the FDA and GSA to consider innovative financing options to
allow for the space allocation required. In particular, the
Committee directs the FDA and GSA to consider partnership
opportunities with non-Federal Government entities that provide
reasonable cost options that will enable the FDA to maintain
very close proximity to its campus headquarters in White Oak,
including space contiguous to the White Oak campus.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $11,788,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 8,771,000
Committee recommendation................................ 11,788,000
FDA maintains offices and staff in 49 States and in the
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, including field
laboratories and specialized facilities, as well as the
National Center for Toxicological Research complex. Repairs,
modifications, improvements, and construction to FDA
headquarters and field facilities must be made to preserve the
properties, ensure employee safety, meet changing program
requirements, and permit the agency to keep its laboratory
methods up to date.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,788,000
for FDA buildings and facilities. This funding shall be used to
upgrade FDA facilities and laboratories which are currently
below public safety standards and incapable of performing
agency requirements.
INDEPENDENT AGENCY
Farm Credit Administration
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2017.................................... $68,600,000
Budget estimate, 2018................................... 72,600,000
Committee recommendation................................ 69,000,000
The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent
agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible
for the examination and regulation of the banks, associations,
and other institutions of the Farm Credit System.
Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the
planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System
institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA
also promulgates regulations, establishes standards, enforces
rules and regulations, and approves certain actions of the
institutions.
The administration and the institutions under its
jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the
Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181, effective December
10, 1971. Public Law 99-205, effective December 23, 1985,
restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory authorities and
enforcement powers.
The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to
make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to
farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural residences,
and associations and other entities upon which farming
operations are dependent, and to modernize existing farm credit
law to meet current and future rural credit needs.
The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the
formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation
[FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and rural
housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, under
section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, is
assigned the responsibility of regulating this entity and
assuring its safe and sound operation.
Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by
assessments collected from the Farm Credit System institutions
and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Corporation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation of $69,000,000 on
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration.
TITLE VII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Committee recommends the following provisions:
Section 701. This section makes funds available for the
purchase, replacement, and hire of passenger motor vehicles.
Section 702. This section gives the Secretary of
Agriculture authority to transfer unobligated balances to the
Working Capital Fund and clarifies longstanding practices
associated with the Fund.
Section 703. This section limits the funding provided in
the bill to 1 year, unless otherwise specified.
Section 704. This section limits negotiated indirect costs
on cooperative agreements between the Department of Agriculture
and nonprofit organizations to 10 percent.
Section 705. This section makes appropriations to the
Department of Agriculture for the cost of direct guaranteed
loans available until expended to disperse obligations for
certain Rural Development programs.
Section 706. This section prohibits the purchase of new
information technology equipment in excess of $25,000 without
the prior approval of the Chief Information Officer.
Section 707. This section makes funds for certain
conservation programs available until expended to disburse
certain obligations made in the current fiscal year.
Section 708. This section makes certain former Rural
Utilities Service borrowers eligible for the Rural Economic
Development loan and grant program.
Section 709. This section provides funds for Rural
Development and the Farm Service Agency information technology
expenses.
Section 710. This section includes language regarding
first-class travel.
Section 711. This section includes language regarding the
Commodity Credit Corporation.
Section 712. This section makes funds available for the
expenses and activities of certain advisory committees, panels,
commissions, and task forces at the Department of Agriculture.
Section 713. This section includes language regarding the
limitation on direct costs for grants awarded by the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture.
Section 714. This section includes language regarding the
availability of funds for certain Department of Agriculture
programs.
Section 715. This section includes language regarding the
availability of funds for certain Department of Agriculture
programs.
Section 716. This section prohibits the use of funds for
user fee proposals that fail to provide sufficient budget
impact information.
Section 717. This section prohibits the reprogramming of
funds for programs, projects, or activities in excess of
$500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less without the prior
notification of the Committee on Appropriations.
Section 718. This section includes language for the
establishment of a fee under the business and industry loan
program.
Section 719. This section prohibits the Department of
Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services
from transmitting questions or responses as a result of the
appropriations hearing process to non-Department employees.
Section 720. This section includes language regarding
prepackaged news.
Section 721. This section requires Department of
Agriculture agencies to provide reimbursement to other
Department of Agriculture agencies for employees detailed for
longer than 60 days.
Section 722. This section includes language regarding
industrial hemp.
Section 723. This section includes language regarding
spending plans.
Section 724. This section provides funding for the
Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers Program.
Section 725. This section includes language regarding
section 502 single family direct loans.
Section 726. This section includes language regarding loans
and loan guarantees.
Section 727. This section includes language regarding
credit card refunds.
Section 728. This section includes language regarding
commodity programs.
Section 729. This section includes language regarding
conservation.
Section 730. This section includes language regarding the
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.
Section 731. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Utilities Service.
Section 732. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Housing Service.
Section 733. This section includes language regarding
disclosure of information for pharmaceuticals.
Section 734. This section includes language regarding
research exemptions.
Section 735. This section includes language regarding dried
spent grain products.
Section 736. This section includes language regarding the
Conservation Reserve Program.
Section 737. This section includes language regarding the
Water Bank Program.
Section 738. This section includes language regarding
partially hydrogenated oils.
Section 739. This section provides funding for a pilot
program through the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
Section 740. This section includes language regarding
reporting requirements.
Section 741. This section includes a rescission of funds.
Section 742. This section includes language regarding Rural
Economic Area Partnership Zones.
Section 743. This section includes language regarding the
Rural Housing Service.
Section 744. This section includes funding for the Healthy
Food Financing Initiative.
Section 745. This section provides funding for a pilot
program through the Rural Housing Service.
Section 746. This section provides funding for a pilot
program through the Farm Service Agency.
Section 747. This section includes language regarding the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Section 748. This section provides funding to carry out a
program for hardwood trees.
Section 749. This section provides funding for a pilot
program through the Food and Nutrition Service.
Section 750. This section includes language regarding
computer networks.
Section 751. This section includes language regarding the
Food and Drug Administration.
Section 752. This section includes language regarding a
Working Capital Fund.
Section 753. This section provides funding for the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service.
Section 754. This section includes language regarding
watersheds.
Section 755. This section includes language regarding rural
development.
Section 756. This section includes language regarding
drought relief.
Section 757. This section includes language regarding
genetically engineered salmon.
Section 758. This section includes language regarding the
use of funds for certain horse inspection activities.
PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
During fiscal year 2018, for purposes of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law
99-177) or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-119), the following
information provides the definition of the term ``program,
project, and activity'' for departments and agencies under the
jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. The
term ``program, project, and activity'' shall include the most
specific level of budget items identified in the Agriculture,
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, and the accompanying Senate
Report.
If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2018 pursuant to
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 or Public Law 100-119 to
all items specified in the explanatory notes submitted to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in support
of the fiscal year 2018 budget estimates, as amended, for such
departments and agencies, as modified by congressional action,
and in addition:
For the Agricultural Research Service the definition shall
include specific research locations as identified in the
explanatory notes.
For the Natural Resources Conservation Service the
definition shall include individual flood prevention projects
as identified in the explanatory notes and individual
operational watershed projects as summarized in the notes.
For the Farm Service Agency the definition shall include
individual, regional, State, district, and county offices.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each
recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.
The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the
spirit of full disclosure.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal
year 2018:
Child Nutrition Program State Administrative Expenses
Farmers Market Nutrition Program
Grain Inspection Service
Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants
and Children
Summer Food Service Program
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 20, 2017,
the Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill (S.
1603) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018, and for other
purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to amendment and
that the bill be consistent with the subcommittee funding
guidance, and provided that the Chairman of the Committee or
his designee be authorized to offer the substance of the
original bill as a Committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the House companion measure, by a recorded vote
of 31-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Cochran
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Mr. Kennedy
Mr. Rubio
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Reed
Mr. Tester
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin
Mr. Murphy
Mr. Manchin
Mr. Van Hollen
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the committee.''
In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law
proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing
law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is
printed in italic; and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman.
TITLE 7--AGRICULTURE
Chapter 36--Crop Insurance
Subchapter I--Federal Crop Insurance
Sec. 1508b. Stacked Income Protection Plan for producers of upland
cotton
(a) Availability
* * * * * * *
(e) Relation to other coverages
The Stacked Income Protection Plan is in addition to all
other coverages available to producers of upland cotton.
(f) Limitation.--Effective beginning with the 2018 crop
year, a farm shall not be eligible for the Stacked Income
Protection Plan for a crop year for which the farm is enrolled
in coverage for cottonseed under--
(1) price loss coverage under section 1116 of the
Agricultural Act of 2014 (7 U.S.C. 9016); or
(2) agriculture risk coverage under section 1117 of
that Act (7 U.S.C. 9017).
* * * * * * *
Chapter 58--Erodible Land and Wetland Conservation and Reserve Program
Subchapter V--Funding and Administration
Sec. 3844. Administrative requirements for conservation programs
(a) Incentives for certain farmers and ranchers and Indian
tribes
* * * * * * *
(l) Funding for Indian tribes
In carrying out the conservation stewardship program under
subpart B of part II of subchapter IV and the environmental
quality incentives program under part IV of subchapter IV, the
Secretary may enter into alternative funding arrangements with
Indian tribes if the Secretary determines that the goals and
objectives of the programs will be met by such arrangements,
and that statutory limitations regarding contracts with
individual producers will not be exceeded by any tribal member.
(m) Exemption From Certain Reporting Requirements.--
(1) Definition of Exempted Producer.--In this
subsection, the term ``exempted producer'' means a
producer or landowner eligible to participate in any
conservation program administered by the Secretary.
(2) Exemption.--Notwithstanding the Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law
109-282; 31 U.S.C. 6101 note), the requirements of
parts 25 and 170 of title 2, Code of Federal
Regulations (and any successor regulations), shall not
apply with respect to assistance received by an
exempted producer from the Secretary, acting through
the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
* * * * * * *
Chapter 98--Department of Agriculture Reorganization
Subchapter III--Rural Economic and Community Development
Sec. 6941. Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development
(a) Authorization
The Secretary [is authorized to] shall establish in the
Department the position of Under Secretary of Agriculture for
Rural Development.
(b) Confirmation required
[If the Secretary establishes the position of Under
Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development authorized under
subsection (a), the Under Secretary] The Under Secretary of
Agriculture for Rural Development shall be appointed by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
* * * * * * *
[(d) Succession
Any official who is serving as Under Secretary of
Agriculture for Small Community and Rural Development on
October 13, 1994, and who was appointed by the President, by
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall not be
required to be reappointed under subsection (b) to the
successor position authorized under subsection (a) if the
Secretary establishes the position, and the official occupies
the new position, within 180 days after October 13, 1994 (or
such later date set by the Secretary if litigation delays rapid
succession).]
[(e)] (d) Loan approval authority
Approval authority for loans and loan guarantees in
connection with the electric and telephone loan and loan
guarantee programs authorized by the Rural Electrification Act
of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) shall not be transferred to, or
conditioned on review of, a State director or other employee
whose primary duty is not the review and approval of such loans
or the provision of assistance to such borrowers.
* * * * * * *
Subchapter IX--Miscellaneous Reorganization Provisions
Sec. 7014. Termination of authority
(b) Functions
Subsection (a) shall not affect:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(8) The authority of the Secretary to carry out
amendments made to this chapter by the Agricultural Act
of 2014.
(9) The authority of the Secretary to establish in
the Department the position of Under Secretary of
Agriculture for Rural Development under section 231.
------
TITLE 16--CONSERVATION
Chapter 18--Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention
Sec. 1002. Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall
mean:
The ``Secretary''--the Secretary of Agriculture of
the United States.
``Works of improvement''--any undertaking for--
(1) flood prevention (including structural
and land treatment measures),
(2) the conservation, development,
utilization, and disposal of water, or
(3) the conservation and proper utilization
of land,
in watershed or subwatershed area not exceeding
two hundred and fifty thousand acres and not
including any single structure which provides
more than twelve thousand five hundred acre-
feet of floodwater detention capacity, and more
than twenty-five thousand acre-feet of total
capacity. No appropriation shall be made for
any plan involving an estimated Federal
contribution to construction costs in excess of
[$5,000,000] $25,000,000, or which includes any
structure which provides more than twenty-five
hundred acre-feet of total capacity unless such
plan has been approved by resolutions adopted
by the appropriate committees of the Senate and
House of Representatives: Provided, That in the
case of any plan involving no single structure
providing more than 4,000 acre-feet of total
capacity the appropriate committees shall be
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on
Agriculture of the House of Representatives and
in the case of any plan involving any single
structure of more than 4,000 acre-feet of total
capacity the appropriate committees shall be
the Committee on Environment and Public Works
of the Senate and the Committee on Public Works
and Transportation of the House of
Representatives, respectively. Each project
must contain benefits directly related to
agriculture, including rural communities, that
account for at least 20 percent of the total
benefits of the project. A number of such
subwatersheds when they are component parts of
a larger watershed may be planned together when
the local sponsoring organizations so desire.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1005. Works of improvement
(1) Engineering and other services; reimbursement; advances
* * * * * * *
(3) Transmission of certain plans to Congress
Whenever the estimated Federal contribution to the
construction cost of works of improvement in the plan
for any watershed or subwatershed area shall exceed
[$5,000,000] $25,000,000 or the works of improvement
include any structure having a total capacity in excess
of twenty-five hundred acre-feet, the Secretary shall
transmit a copy of the plan and the justification
therefor to the Congress through the President.
(4) Transmission of certain plans and recommendations to
Congress
Any plans for works of improvement involving an
estimated Federal contribution to construction costs in
excess of [$5,000,000] $25,000,000 or including any
structure having a total capacity in excess of twenty-
five hundred acre-feet (a) which includes works of
improvement for reclamation or irrigation, or which
affects public or other lands or wildlife under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, (b)
which includes Federal assistance for goodwater
detention structures, (c) which includes features which
may affect the public health, or (d) which includes
measures for control or abatement of water pollution,
shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Interior,
the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, or the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, respectively, for his
views and recommendations at least thirty days prior to
transmission of the plan to the Congress through the
President. The views and recommendations of the
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of the Army,
the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
if received by the Secretary prior to the expiration of
the above thirty-day period, shall accompany the plan
transmitted by the Secretary to the Congress through
the President.
* * * * * * *
Chapter 58--Erodible Land and Wetland Conservation and Reserve Program
Subchapter IV--Agricultural Resources Conservation Program
Part IV--Environmental Quality Incentives Program
Sec. 3839aa-2. Establishment and administration
[(a) Establishment
During each of the 2002 through 2018 fiscal years, the
Secretary shall provide payments to producers that enter into
contracts with the Secretary under the program.]
(a) Establishment.--During each of the 2002 through 2019
fiscal years, the Secretary shall provide payments to producers
that enter into contracts with the Secretary under the program.
* * * * * * *
Subchapter V--Funding And Administration
Sec. 3841. Commodity Credit Corporation
(a) Annual funding
For each of fiscal years 2014 through [2018] 2018 (and
fiscal year 2019 in the case of the program specified in
paragraph (5)), the Secretary shall use the funds, facilities,
and authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry
out the following programs under this chapter (including the
provision of technical assistance):
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) The environmental quality incentives program
under part IV of subchapter IV, using, to the maximum
extent practicable--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E) $1,750,000,000 for [fiscal year 2018]
each of fiscal years 2018 through 2019.
(b) Availability of funds
Amounts made available by subsection (a) for fiscal years
2014 through [2018] 2018 (and fiscal year 2019 in the case of
the program specified in subsection (a)(5)) shall be used by
the Secretary to carry out the programs specified in such
subsection and shall remain available until expended.
------
TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
Chapter 13--School Lunch Programs
Sec. 1758. Program requirements
(a) Nutritional requirements
* * * * * * *
(h) Food safety
(1) In general
* * * * * * *
(3) Audits and reports by States
[For fiscal year 2017] For fiscal year 2018, each State
shall annually--
* * * * * * *
(4) Audit by the Secretary
[For fiscal year 2017] For fiscal year 2018, the Secretary
shall annually audit State reports of food safety inspections
of schools submitted under paragraph (3).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1769g. Information clearinghouse
(a) In general
* * * * * * *
(d) Funding
Out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the
Secretary to provide to the organization selected under this
section, to establish and maintain the information
clearinghouse, $200,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996,
$150,000 for fiscal year 1997, $100,000 for fiscal year 1998,
$166,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2004, and
$250,000 for each of fiscal years [2010 through 2017] 2010
through 2018. The Secretary shall be entitled to receive the
funds and shall accept the funds, without further
appropriation.
------
AGRICULTURE ACT OF 2014, PUBLIC LAW 113-79
TITLE I--COMMODITIES
Subtitle A--Repeals and Reforms
Part II--Commodity Policy
SEC. 1111. DEFINITIONS.
In this subtitle and subtitle B:
(1) Actual crop revenue.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(6) Covered commodity.--[The term] (A) In general.--
The term ``covered commodity'' means wheat, oats, and
barley (including wheat, oats, and barley used for
haying and grazing), corn, grain sorghum, long grain
rice, medium grain rice, pulse crops, soybeans, other
oilseeds, and peanuts.
(B) Inclusion.--Effective beginning with the
2018 crop year, the term ``covered commodity''
includes cottonseed.
* * * * * * *
(18) Reference price.--The term ``reference price'',
with respect to a covered commodity for a crop year,
means the following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(N) For large chickpeas, $21.54 per
hundredweight.
(O) For cottonseed, $15.00 per hundredweight.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1113. PAYMENT YIELDS.
(b) Payment Yields for Designated Oilseeds.--
(1) Determination of average yield.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Use of county average yield.--If the yield per
planted acre for a crop of a designated oilseed for a
farm for any of the 1998 through 2001 crop years was
less than 75 percent of the county yield for that
designated oilseed, the Secretary shall assign a yield
for that crop year equal to 75 percent of the county
yield for the purpose of determining the average under
paragraph (1).
(4) Payment yield for cottonseed.--
(A) Payment yield.--Subject to subparagraph
(B), the payment yield for a farm for
cottonseed shall be equal to 1.4 times the
payment yield for upland cotton for the farm
established under section 1104(e)(3) of the
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 8714(e)(3)) (as in effect on February 6,
2014).
(B) Update.--At the sole discretion of the
owner of a farm, the owner of a farm shall have
a 1-time opportunity to update the payment
yield described in subparagraph (A) in
accordance with subsection (d).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1114. PAYMENT ACRES.
(b) Treatment of generic base acres.--
(1) In general.--* * *
(2) Attribution.--With respect to a farm containing
generic base acres, for the purpose of applying
[paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B)] paragraphs (1) and (2)
of subsection (a), generic base acres on the farm are
attributed to a covered commodity in the following
manner:
* * * * * * *
(3) Treated as additional acreage.--When generic base
acres are planted to a covered commodity or acreage
planted to a covered commodity is attributed to generic
base acres, the generic base acres are in addition to
other base acres on the farm.
(4) Cottonseed.--Effective for the 2018 crop year and
each crop year thereafter, the Secretary shall allocate
generic base acres for producers on a farm as follows:
(A) In the case of a farm on which no covered
commodities (including cottonseed) were planted
or were prevented from being planted at any
time during each of the 2009 through 2016 crop
years, generic base acres shall be allocated to
unassigned crop base for which no payments may
be made under section 1116 or 1117.
(B) In the case of a farm not described in
subparagraph (A), generic base acres shall be
allocated--
(i) to cottonseed base acres in a
quantity equal to the greater of--
(I) subject to subparagraph
(C), 80 percent of the generic
base acres on the farm; and
(II) the average number of
cottonseed acres planted or
prevented from being planted on
the farm during each of the
2009 through 2012 crop years
(not to exceed the total
generic base acres on the
farm); or
(ii) to base acres for covered
commodities (including cottonseed), by
applying subparagraphs (B), (D), (E),
and (F) of section 1112(a)(3).
(C) In the case of a farm on which generic
base acres are allocated under subparagraph
(B)(i)(I), the remaining 20 percent of generic
base acres shall be allocated to unassigned
crop base for which no payments may be made
under section 1116 or 1117.
* * * * * * *
(e) Effect of planting fruits and vegetables.--
(1) Reduction required.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Reduction exceptions.--* * *
(A) * * *
(B) in any region in which there is a history
of double-cropping covered commodities with
crops referred to in paragraph (1) and such
crops were so double-cropped on the base acres,
as determined by the Secretary.
(f) Unassigned Crop Base.--The Secretary shall maintain
information on generic base acres on a farm allocated as
unassigned crop base under subparagraphs (A) and (C) of
subsection (b)(4).
SEC. 1115. PRODUCER ELECTION.
(a) Election Required.--[For] Except as provided in
subsection (g), for the 2014 through 2018 crop years, all of
the producers on a farm shall make a 1-time, irrevocable
election to obtain--
* * * * * * *
(f) Prohibition on Reconstitution.--The Secretary shall
ensure that producers on a farm do not reconstitute the farm to
void or change an election or selection made under this
section.
(g) Special Election.--In the case of a farm on which
generic base acres are attributed to cottonseed or on which
generic base acres are allocated to cottonseed, the producers
on the farm shall be given the opportunity to make a new 1-time
election under subsection (a) for the 2018 crop year and each
crop year thereafter to reflect the designation of cottonseed
as a covered commodity under section 1111(6)(B).
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Marketing Loans
SEC. 1202. LOAN RATES FOR NONRECOURSE MARKETING ASSISTANCE LOANS.
(a) In General.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(b) Single County Loan Rate for Other Oilseeds.--The
Secretary shall establish a single loan rate in each county for
each kind of other oilseeds described in subsection (a)(11).
(c) Cottonseed.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of section 1116(b)(2)
and paragraphs (1)(B)(ii) and (2)(A)(ii)(II) of section
1117(b), the loan rate for cottonseed shall be equal to
$8.00 per hundredweight.
(2) Effect.--Nothing in this subsection authorizes
any nonrecourse marketing assistance loan under this
subtitle for cottonseed.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle C--Sugar
Part I--Margin Protection Program for Dairy Producers
SEC. 1401. DEFINITIONS.
In this part and part III:
(1) Actual dairy production margin.--* * *
(2) All-milk price.--* * *
(3) Average feed cost.--* * *
[(4) Consecutive 2-month period.--The term
``consecutive 2-month period'' refers to the 2-month
period consisting of the months of January and
February, March and April, May and June, July and
August, September and October, or November and
December, respectively.]
[(5)] (4) Dairy operation.--* * *
[(6)] (5) Margin protectoin program.--* * *
[(7)] (6) Margin protection program payment.--* * *
[(8)] (7) Participating dairy operation.--* * *
[(9)] (8) Production history.--* * *
[(10)] (9) Secretary.--* * *
[(11)] (10) United states.--* * *
SEC. 1402. CALCULATION OF AVERAGE FEED COST AND ACTUAL DAIRY PRODUCTION
MARGINS.
(b) Calculation of Actual Dairy Production Margin.--
(1) In general.--For use in the margin protection
program, the Secretary shall calculate the actual dairy
production margin for each [consecutive 2-month period]
month by subtracting--
(A) the average feed cost for that
[consecutive 2-month period] month, determined
in accordance with subsection (a); from
(B) the all-milk price for that [consecutive
2-month period] month.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1404. PARTICIPATION OF DAIRY OPERATIONS IN MARGIN PROTECTION
PROGRAM.
(b) Registration Process.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall specify the
manner and form by which a participating dairy
operation may register to participate in the margin
protection program, including the establishment of a
date each coverage year by which a dairy operation
shall register for the coverage year.
(2) Election.--
(A) In general.--For the 2019 through 2023
coverage years, a dairy operation may make an
irrevocable election to participate in the
margin protection program.
(B) Coverage years.--A dairy operation that
elects to participate in the margin protection
program under subparagraph (A) shall
participate in the margin protection program
for the coverage year for which the
participating dairy operation elects to
participate and each subsequent coverage year
through coverage year 2023.
[(2)] (3) Treatment of multiproducer dairy
operations.--If a participating dairy operation is
operated by more than 1 dairy producer, all of the
dairy producers of the participating dairy operation
shall be treated as a single dairy operation for
purposes of participating in the margin protection
program.
[(3)] (4) Treatment of producers with multiple dairy
operations.--If a dairy producer operates 2 or more
dairy operations, each dairy operation of the producer
shall separately register to participate in the margin
protection program.
(c) Annual Administrative Fee.--
(1) Administrative fee required.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Use of fees.--The Secretary shall use
administrative fees collected under this subsection to
cover administrative costs incurred to carry out the
margin protection program.
(4) Exemption.--A limited resource, beginning,
veteran, or socially disadvantaged farmer, as defined
by the Secretary, shall be exempt from the
administrative fee under this subsection.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1405. PRODUCTION HISTORY OF PARTICIPATING DAIRY OPERATIONS.
(a) Production History.--
(1) In general.--* * *
(2) Adjustment.--In subsequent years, the Secretary
shall adjust the production history of a participating
dairy operation determined under paragraph (1) to
reflect any increase in the national average milk
production.
(3) Continued applicability of base production
history.--A production history established for a dairy
operation under paragraph (1) shall be the base
production history for the dairy operation in
subsequent years (as adjusted under paragraph (2)).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1406. MARGIN PROTECTION PAYMENTS.
(a) Coverage Level Threshold And Coverage Percentage.--For
purposes of receiving margin protection payments for a
[consecutive 2-month period] month, a participating dairy
operation shall annually elect--
(1) a coverage level threshold that is equal to
$4.00, $4.50, $5.00, $5.50, $6.00, $6.50, $7.00, $7.50,
or $8.00; and
(2) a percentage of coverage, in 5-percent
increments, beginning with 25 percent and not exceeding
90 percent of the production history of the
participating dairy operation.
(b) Payment Threshold.--A participating dairy operation
shall receive a margin protection payment whenever the average
actual dairy production margin for a [consecutive 2-month
period] month is less than the coverage level threshold
selected by the participating dairy operation.
(c) Amount of Margin Protection Payment.--The margin
protection payment for the participating dairy operation shall
be determined as follows:
(1) The Secretary shall calculate the amount by which
the coverage level threshold selected by the
participating dairy operation exceeds the average
actual dairy production margin for the [consecutive 2-
month period] month.
(2) The amount determined under paragraph (1) shall
be multiplied by--
(A) the coverage percentage selected by the
participating dairy operation; and
(B) the production history of the
participating dairy operation divided by [6]
12.
SEC. 1407. PREMIUMS FOR MARGIN PROTECTION PROGRAM.
(b) [Premium Per Hundredweight for First 4 Million Pounds
of Production] Tier I: Premium Per Hundredweight for First
5,000,000 Pounds of Production._
(1) In general.--For the first [4,000,000] 5,000,000
pounds of milk marketings included in the production
history of a participating dairy operation, the premium
per hundredweight for each coverage level is specified
in the table contained in paragraph (2).
(2) Producer premiums.--Except as provided in
paragraph (3), the following annual premiums apply:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coverage Level Premium per Cwt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$4.00 None
$4.50 [$0.010] None
$5.00 [$0.025] None
$5.50 [$0.040] $0.009
$6.00 [$0.055] $0.017
$6.50 [$0.090] $0.043
$7.00 [$0.217] $0.068
$7.50 [$0.300] $0.094
$8.00 [$0.475] $0.153
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(c) [Premium Per Hundredweight for Production in Excess of
4 Million Pounds] Tier II: Premium Per Hundredweight for
Production in Excess of 5,000,000 Pounds._
(1) In general.--For milk marketings in excess of
[4,000,000] 5,000,000 pounds included in the production
history of a participating dairy operation, the premium
per hundredweight for each coverage level is specified
in the table contained in paragraph (2).
* * * * * * *
(e) Premium Obligations.--
(1) Pro-ration of premium for new participants.--* *
*
(2) Legal obligation.--A participating dairy
operation in the margin protection program [for a
calendar year shall be legally obligated to pay the
applicable premium for that calendar year] shall be
legally obligated to pay the applicable premium elected
by the participating dairy operation for the coverage
year, except that the Secretary may waive that
obligation, under terms and conditions determined by
the Secretary, for any participating dairy operation in
the case of death, retirement, permanent dissolution of
a participating dairy operation, or other circumstances
as the Secretary considers appropriate to ensure the
integrity of the program.
BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(A), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
-------------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount in Committee Amount in
guidance\1\ bill guidance\1\ bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee
allocation for 2018: Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies:
Mandatory........................................... 111,509 111,509 100,005 \2\100,005
Discretionary....................................... 20,525 20,525 21,621 \2\21,621
Security........................................ ............ ............ ............ NA
Nonsecurity..................................... 20,525 20,525 NA NA
Projections of outlays associated with the
recommendation:
2018................................................ ............ ............ ............ \3\104,859
2019................................................ ............ ............ ............ 5,659
2020................................................ ............ ............ ............ 1,282
2021................................................ ............ ............ ............ 565
2022 and future years............................... ............ ............ ............ 1,062
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 40,438 NA \3\32,440
2018...................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\There is no section 302(a) allocation to the Committee on Appropriations for fiscal year 2018.
\2\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\3\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.
NOTE.--Pursuant to section 1002(b)(3)(B) of the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114-255), $60,000,000 in
budget authority and the resulting outlays do not count for the purposes of estimates under the Congressional
Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2018
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2017 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2017
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Processing, Research, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
Office of the Secretary............................................ 5,051 4,859 5,051 ............... +192
Office of Tribal Relations......................................... 502 501 502 ............... +1
Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development................... ............... ............... 800 +800 +800
Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination............. 1,496 1,448 1,496 ............... +48
Office of Advocacy and Outreach.................................... 1,209 1,171 4,209 +3,000 +3,038
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration............... 804 802 804 ............... +2
Departmental Administration........................................ 24,124 22,501 24,124 ............... +1,623
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Departmental Administration........................ 24,928 23,303 24,928 ............... +1,625
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations...... 3,869 3,521 3,869 ............... +348
Office of Communications........................................... 7,500 7,261 7,500 ............... +239
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Secretary............................... 44,555 42,064 48,355 +3,800 +6,291
====================================================================================
Executive Operations:
Office of the Chief Economist.................................. 18,917 17,211 16,917 -2,000 -294
Office of Hearings and Appeals................................. 13,399 14,716 13,399 ............... -1,317
Office of Budget and Program Analysis.......................... 9,525 9,093 9,525 ............... +432
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Executive Operations............................... 41,841 41,020 39,841 -2,000 -1,179
Office of the Chief Information Officer............................ 49,538 58,950 58,950 +9,412 ...............
Office of the Chief Financial Officer.............................. 8,028 5,836 8,028 ............... +2,192
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights................. 901 896 901 ............... +5
Office of Civil Rights............................................. 24,206 23,304 24,206 ............... +902
Building and Facilities Agriculture Buildings and Facilities....... 84,189 62,145 67,293 -16,896 +5,148
Hazardous materials management..................................... 3,633 3,503 3,633 ............... +130
Office of Inspector General........................................ 98,208 92,689 98,208 ............... +5,519
Office of the General Counsel...................................... 44,697 42,970 44,697 ............... +1,727
Office of Ethics................................................... 4,136 3,538 4,136 ............... +598
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental Administration........................... 403,932 376,915 398,248 -5,684 +21,333
====================================================================================
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and 893 891 893 ............... +2
Economics.........................................................
Economic Research Service.......................................... 86,757 76,690 86,757 ............... +10,067
National Agricultural Statistics Service........................... 171,239 185,677 191,717 +20,478 +6,040
Census of Agriculture.......................................... (42,177) (63,900) (63,350) (+21,173) (-550)
Agricultural Research Service:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 1,170,235 993,144 1,182,435 +12,200 +189,291
Buildings and facilities....................................... 99,600 ............... ............... -99,600 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Research Service......................... 1,269,835 993,144 1,182,435 -87,400 +189,291
====================================================================================
National Institute of Food and Agriculture:
Research and education activities.............................. 849,518 769,613 854,871 +5,353 +85,258
Native American Institutions Endowment Fund.................... (11,880) (11,857) (11,880) ............... (+23)
Extension activities........................................... 477,391 462,890 481,376 +3,985 +18,486
Integrated activities.......................................... 36,000 20,276 37,000 +1,000 +16,724
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Institute of Food and Agriculture............ 1,362,909 1,252,779 1,373,247 +10,338 +120,468
====================================================================================
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs 901 891 901 ............... +10
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 946,212 810,000 953,212 +7,000 +143,212
Buildings and facilities....................................... 3,175 2,852 3,175 ............... +323
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service............ 949,387 812,852 956,387 +7,000 +143,535
====================================================================================
Agricultural Marketing Service:
Marketing Services............................................. 84,933 77,462 88,933 +4,000 +11,471
Standardization activities (user fees)..................... (65,000) ............... (65,000) ............... (+65,000)
(Limitation on administrative expenses, from fees collected)... (61,227) (60,982) (60,982) (-245) ...............
Funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (Section
32):
Permanent, Section 32...................................... 1,322,000 1,344,000 1,344,000 +22,000 ...............
Marketing agreements and orders (transfer from section (20,705) (20,489) (20,489) (-216) ...............
32)...................................................
Payments to States and Possessions............................. 1,235 1,109 1,235 ............... +126
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Marketing Service program................ 1,469,395 1,483,553 1,495,150 +25,755 +11,597
====================================================================================
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 43,482 42,975 43,482 ............... +507
Limitation on inspection and weighing services................. (55,000) (60,000) (57,500) (+2,500) (-2,500)
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety...................... 819 814 819 ............... +5
Food Safety and Inspection Service................................. 1,032,062 1,038,069 1,038,069 +6,007 ...............
Lab accreditation fees......................................... (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Processing, Research, and Marketing................... 6,730,384 6,204,268 6,707,123 -23,261 +502,855
====================================================================================
Total, Title I, Agricultural Programs........................ 6,730,384 6,204,268 6,707,123 -23,261 +502,855
(By transfer)............................................ (20,705) (20,489) (20,489) (-216) ...............
(Limitation on administrative expenses).................. (116,227) (120,982) (118,482) (+2,255) (-2,500)
====================================================================================
TITLE II--FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Farm Production Programs
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation. 901 896 901 ............... +5
Farm Service Agency:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 1,206,110 1,130,163 1,212,116 +6,006 +81,953
(Transfer from Food for Peace (Public Law 480))................ (149) (149) (149) ............... ...............
(Transfer from export loans)................................... (2,463) (353) (2,463) ............... (+2,110)
(Transfer from ACIF)........................................... (306,998) (297,386) (306,998) ............... (+9,612)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, transfers from program accounts.................... (309,610) (297,888) (309,610) ............... (+11,722)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses................................. (1,515,720) (1,428,051) (1,521,726) (+6,006) (+93,675)
====================================================================================
State mediation grants......................................... 3,904 3,398 3,904 ............... +506
Grassroots source water protection program..................... 6,500 ............... 6,500 ............... +6,500
Dairy indemnity program........................................ 500 500 500 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Farm Service Agency................................ 1,217,014 1,134,061 1,223,020 +6,006 +88,959
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund [ACIF] Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Farm ownership loans:
Direct............................................. (1,500,000) (1,500,000) (1,500,000) ............... ...............
Guaranteed......................................... (2,750,000) (2,500,000) (2,750,000) ............... (+250,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... (4,250,000) (4,000,000) (4,250,000) ............... (+250,000)
Farm operating loans:
Direct............................................. (1,530,000) (1,304,851) (1,530,000) ............... (+225,149)
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ (1,960,000) (1,393,423) (1,960,000) ............... (+566,577)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... (3,490,000) (2,698,274) (3,490,000) ............... (+791,726)
Emergency loans........................................ (22,576) (25,610) (22,581) (+5) (-3,029)
Indian tribe land acquisition loans.................... (20,000) (20,000) (20,000) ............... ...............
Conservation loans:
Guaranteed......................................... (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) ............... ...............
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.................. (10,000) ............... (10,000) ............... (+10,000)
Boll weevil eradication loans.......................... (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (8,002,576) (6,953,884) (8,002,581) (+5) (+1,048,697)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies:
Farm operating loans:
Direct............................................. 65,178 52,716 61,812 -3,366 +9,096
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ 20,972 15,467 21,756 +784 +6,289
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal......................................... 86,150 68,183 83,568 -2,582 +15,385
Emergency Loans........................................ 1,262 1,260 1,111 -151 -149
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.................. 2,550 ............... 2,272 -278 +2,272
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants..................... 89,962 69,443 86,951 -3,011 +17,508
====================================================================================
ACIF administrative expenses:
Salaries and expenses (transfer to FSA)................ 306,998 297,386 306,998 ............... +9,612
Administrative expenses................................ 10,070 7,905 10,070 ............... +2,165
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, ACIF expenses................................. 317,068 305,291 317,068 ............... +11,777
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund............ 407,030 374,734 404,019 -3,011 +29,285
(Loan authorization)............................... (8,002,576) (6,953,884) (8,002,581) (+5) (+1,048,697)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Farm Service Agency....................... 1,624,945 1,509,691 1,627,940 +2,995 +118,249
====================================================================================
Risk Management Agency:
RMA Salaries and expenses...................................... 74,829 55,000 74,829 ............... +19,829
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Risk Management Agency............................. 74,829 55,000 74,829 ............... +19,829
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Farm Production Programs.............................. 1,699,774 1,564,691 1,702,769 +2,995 +138,078
====================================================================================
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment 901 896 ............... -901 -896
Natural Resources Conservation Service:
Private Lands Conservation Operations.......................... 864,474 766,000 874,107 +9,633 +108,107
Transfer................................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Farm Security and Rural Investment program (transfer ............... (985,000) ............... ............... (-985,000)
authority)................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Conservation operations........................... 864,474 766,000 874,107 +9,633 +108,107
====================================================================================
Watershed flood and prevention operations...................... 150,000 ............... 150,000 ............... +150,000
Watershed rehabilitation program............................... 12,000 ............... ............... -12,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Natural Resources Conservation Service................ 1,026,474 766,000 1,024,107 -2,367 +258,107
====================================================================================
Corporations
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation:
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation fund........................ 8,667,000 8,245,000 8,245,000 -422,000 ...............
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund:
Reimbursement for net realized losses.......................... 21,290,712 17,483,000 17,483,000 -3,807,712 ...............
Hazardous waste management (limitation on expenses)............ (5,000) (5,000) (5,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Corporations.......................................... 29,957,712 25,728,000 25,728,000 -4,229,712 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, Title II, Farm Production and Conservation Programs... 32,684,861 28,059,587 28,454,876 -4,229,985 +395,289
====================================================================================
TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development................ 896 891 896 ............... +5
Rural Development:
Rural development expenses:
Salaries and expenses...................................... 225,835 186,076 225,835 ............... +39,759
(Transfer from RHIF)....................................... (412,254) (244,249) (412,254) ............... (+168,005)
(Transfer from RCFP)....................................... ............... (147,591) ............... ............... (-147,591)
(Transfer from RDLFP)...................................... (4,468) ............... (4,468) ............... (+4,468)
(Transfer from RETLP)...................................... (33,270) (38,027) (33,270) ............... (-4,757)
(Transfer from DLTBP)...................................... ............... (8,057) ............... ............... (-8,057)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Transfers from program accounts................ (449,992) (437,924) (449,992) ............... (+12,068)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural development expenses........................ (675,827) (624,000) (675,827) ............... (+51,827)
====================================================================================
Rural Housing Service:
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Single family direct (Sec. 502)........................ (1,000,000) ............... (1,000,000) ............... (+1,000,000)
Unsubsidized guaranteed............................ (24,000,000) (24,000,000) (24,000,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Single family.......................... (25,000,000) (24,000,000) (25,000,000) ............... (+1,000,000)
Housing repair (Sec. 504).............................. (26,278) ............... (26,278) ............... (+26,278)
Rental housing (Sec. 515).............................. (35,000) ............... (35,000) ............... (+35,000)
Multi-family housing guarantees (Sec. 538)............. (230,000) (250,000) (230,000) ............... (-20,000)
Site development loans (Sec. 524)...................... (5,000) ............... (5,000) ............... (+5,000)
Single family housing credit sales..................... (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) ............... ...............
Self-help housing land development housng loans (Sec. (5,000) ............... (5,000) ............... (+5,000)
523)..................................................
Farm Labor Housing (Sec.514)........................... (23,855) ............... (23,855) ............... (+23,855)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (25,335,133) (24,260,000) (25,335,133) ............... (+1,075,133)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies:
Single Family Direct (Sec. 502)........................ 67,700 ............... 38,500 -29,200 +38,500
Housing repair (Sec. 504).............................. 3,663 ............... 3,240 -423 +3,240
Rental housing (Sec. 515).............................. 10,360 ............... 9,209 -1,151 +9,209
Farm labor housing (Sec.514)........................... 7,051 ............... 6,374 -677 +6,374
Self-Help Land Devleopment Housing Loans (Sec.523)..... 417 ............... 368 -49 +368
Site Development Loans (Sec.524)....................... 111 ............... 58 -53 +58
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies................................ 89,302 ............... 57,749 -31,553 +57,749
====================================================================================
Farm labor housing grants.............................. 8,336 ............... 8,336 ............... +8,336
RHIF administrative expenses (transfer to RD).......... 412,254 244,249 412,254 ............... +168,005
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Housing Insurance Fund program.......... 509,892 244,249 478,339 -31,553 +234,090
(Loan authorization)............................... (25,335,133) (24,260,000) (25,335,133) ............... (+1,075,133)
====================================================================================
Rental assistance program:
Rental assistance (Sec. 521)............................... 1,405,033 1,345,293 1,345,293 -59,740 ...............
Multi-Family Housing Revitalization Program Account:
Rural housing voucher program.................................. 19,400 20,000 19,400 ............... -600
Multi-family housing revitalization program.................... 22,000 ............... 22,000 ............... +22,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Multi-family housing revitalization................... 41,400 20,000 41,400 ............... +21,400
====================================================================================
Mutual and self-help housing grants............................ 30,000 ............... 30,000 ............... +30,000
Rural housing assistance grants................................ 33,701 ............... 33,701 ............... +33,701
Rural Community Facilities Program Account:
Loan authorizations:
Community facility:
Direct............................................. (2,600,000) (3,000,000) (3,000,000) (+400,000) ...............
Guaranteed......................................... (148,305) ............... (148,305) ............... (+148,305)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations....................... (2,748,305) (3,000,000) (3,148,305) (+400,000) (+148,305)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Community facility:
Guaranteed......................................... 3,322 ............... 4,850 +1,528 +4,850
Grants............................................. 30,000 ............... 30,000 ............... +30,000
Rural community development initiative................. 4,000 ............... 4,000 ............... +4,000
Economic impact initiative grants...................... 5,778 ............... 5,778 ............... +5,778
Tribal college grants.................................. 4,000 ............... 4,000 ............... +4,000
RCFP administrative expenses (transfer to RD).......... ............... 147,591 ............... ............... -147,591
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, RCFP Loan subsidies and grants................ 47,100 147,591 48,628 +1,528 -98,963
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, grants and payments........................ 110,801 147,591 112,329 +1,528 -35,262
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Housing Service................................. 2,067,126 1,757,133 1,977,361 -89,765 +220,228
(Loan authorization)..................................... (28,083,438) (27,260,000) (28,483,438) (+400,000) (+1,223,438)
====================================================================================
Rural Business--Cooperative Service:
Rural Business Program Account:
(Guaranteed business and industry loans)................... (919,765) ............... (919,765) ............... (+919,765)
Loan subsidies and grants:
Guaranteed business and industry subsidy............... 35,319 ............... 37,342 +2,023 +37,342
Rural business development grants.................. 24,000 ............... 24,000 ............... +24,000
Delta Regional Authority and Appalachian Regional 6,000 ............... 3,000 -3,000 +3,000
Commission........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, RBP loan subsidies and grants............. 65,319 ............... 64,342 -977 +64,342
====================================================================================
Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account:
(Loan authorization)....................................... (18,889) ............... (18,889) ............... (+18,889)
Loan subsidy............................................... 5,476 ............... 4,361 -1,115 +4,361
Administrative expenses (transfer to RD)................... 4,468 ............... 4,468 ............... +4,468
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, IRP Fund.......................................... 9,944 ............... 8,829 -1,115 +8,829
====================================================================================
Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account:
(Loan authorization)....................................... (42,213) ............... (42,213) ............... (+42,213)
Limit cushion of credit interest spending.................. (132,000) (176,000) (196,000) (+64,000) (+20,000)
(Rescission)........................................... -132,000 -176,000 -196,000 -64,000 -20,000
Rural Cooperative Development Grants:
Cooperative development.................................... 5,800 ............... 5,800 ............... +5,800
Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas............ 2,750 ............... 2,750 ............... +2,750
Grants to assist minority producers........................ 3,000 ............... 3,000 ............... +3,000
Value-added agricultural product market development........ 15,000 ............... 15,000 ............... +15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Cooperative development grants.............. 26,550 ............... 26,550 ............... +26,550
====================================================================================
Rural Energy for America Program (Loan authorization).......... (7,576) ............... (7,576) ............... (+7,576)
Loan subsidy and grants.................................... 352 ............... 293 -59 +293
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Energy for America Program.................. 352 ............... 293 -59 +293
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Business-Cooperative Service.................... -29,835 -176,000 -95,986 -66,151 +80,014
(Loan authorization)..................................... (988,443) ............... (988,443) ............... (+988,443)
====================================================================================
Rural Utilities Service:
Rural water and waste disposal program account:
Loan authorizations:
Direct................................................. (1,200,000) ............... (1,200,000) ............... (+1,200,000)
Guaranteed............................................. (50,000) ............... (50,000) ............... (+50,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorization............................ 1,250,000 ............... 1,250,000 ............... +1,250,000
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Direct subsidy......................................... 52,080 ............... 25,680 -26,400 +25,680
Guaranteed subsidy..................................... 240 ............... 230 -10 +230
Water and waste revolving fund......................... 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
Water well system grants............................... 993 ............... 993 ............... +993
Colonias and AK/HI grants.............................. 64,000 ............... 66,500 +2,500 +66,500
Water and waste technical assistance................... 20,000 ............... 20,000 ............... +20,000
Circuit rider program.................................. 16,897 ............... 18,000 +1,103 +18,000
Solid waste management grants.......................... 4,000 ............... 4,000 ............... +4,000
High energy cost grants................................ 10,000 ............... 10,000 ............... +10,000
Water and waste disposal grants........................ 391,980 ............... 393,980 +2,000 +393,980
306A(i)(2) grants...................................... 10,000 ............... 10,000 ............... +10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants..................... 571,190 ............... 550,383 -20,807 +550,383
====================================================================================
Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program
Account:
Loan authorizations:
Electric:
Direct, FFB........................................ (5,500,000) (5,500,000) (5,500,000) ............... ...............
Guaranteed underwriting............................ (750,000) ............... (750,000) ............... (+750,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Electric............................... (6,250,000) (5,500,000) (6,250,000) ............... (+750,000)
Telecommunications:
Direct, Treasury rate.............................. (345,000) (345,000) (345,000) ............... ...............
Direct, FFB........................................ (345,000) (345,000) (345,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Telecommunications..................... (690,000) (690,000) (690,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations....................... (6,940,000) (6,190,000) (6,940,000) ............... (+750,000)
====================================================================================
Loan Subsidy:
Telecommunications Direct, Treasury Rate........... 3,071 863 863 -2,208 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies............................ 3,071 863 863 -2,208 ...............
====================================================================================
RETLP administrative expenses (transfer to RD)............. 33,270 38,027 33,270 ............... -4,757
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans 36,341 38,890 34,133 -2,208 -4,757
Program Account.........................................
(Loan authorization)............................... (6,940,000) (6,190,000) (6,940,000) ............... (+750,000)
====================================================================================
Broadband Program:
Loan authorizations:
Broadband telecommunications........................... (27,043) (26,991) (27,043) ............... (+52)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan authorizations........................... (27,043) (26,991) (27,043) ............... (+52)
====================================================================================
Loan subsidies and grants:
Distance learning and telemedicine:
Grants............................................. 26,600 ............... 26,600 ............... +26,600
Broadband telecommunications:
Direct............................................. 4,500 4,521 4,530 +30 +9
Grants............................................. 34,500 ............... 30,000 -4,500 +30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Loan subsidies and grants................. 65,600 4,521 61,130 -4,470 +56,609
====================================================================================
DLTBP administrative expenses (transfer to RD)............. ............... 8,057 ............... ............... -8,057
====================================================================================
Total, Rural Utilities Service............................... 673,131 51,468 645,646 -27,485 +594,178
(Loan authorization)..................................... (8,217,043) (6,216,991) (8,217,043) ............... (+2,000,052)
====================================================================================
Rural Economic Infrastructure Grants............................... ............... 161,893 ............... ............... -161,893
====================================================================================
Total, Title III, Rural Development Programs................. 2,937,153 1,981,461 2,753,752 -183,401 +772,291
(By transfer)............................................ (449,992) (437,924) (449,992) ............... (+12,068)
(Loan authorization)..................................... (37,288,924) (33,476,991) (37,688,924) (+400,000) (+4,211,933)
====================================================================================
TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer 814 809 814 ............... +5
Services..........................................................
Food and Nutrition Service:
Child nutrition programs....................................... 22,745,982 24,233,309 24,243,505 +1,497,523 +10,196
School breakfast program equipment grants.................. 25,000 ............... 30,000 +5,000 +30,000
Demonstration projects (Summer EBT)........................ 23,000 22,957 23,000 ............... +43
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Child nutrition programs.......................... 22,793,982 24,256,266 24,296,505 +1,502,523 +40,239
Special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and 6,350,000 6,150,000 6,350,000 ............... +200,000
children (WIC)................................................
Supplemental nutrition assistance program:
(Food stamp program)....................................... 75,479,696 70,611,504 70,611,504 -4,868,192 ...............
Reserve................................................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 ............... ...............
FDPIR nutrition education services..................... 998 996 998 ............... +2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Food stamp program............................ 78,480,694 73,612,500 73,612,502 -4,868,192 +2
Fiscal year 2017....................................... (78,480,694) (73,612,500) (73,612,502) (-4,868,192) (+2)
====================================================================================
Commodity Assistance Program:
Commodity supplemental food program........................ 236,120 238,120 238,120 +2,000 ...............
Farmers market nutrition program........................... 18,548 ............... 18,548 ............... +18,548
Emergency food assistance program.......................... 59,401 54,401 59,401 ............... +5,000
Pacific island and disaster assistance..................... 1,070 1,070 1,070 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Commodity assistance program...................... 315,139 293,591 317,139 +2,000 +23,548
====================================================================================
Nutrition programs administration.............................. 170,716 148,541 153,841 -16,875 +5,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Food and Nutrition Service............................ 108,110,531 104,460,898 104,729,987 -3,380,544 +269,089
Fiscal year 2017................................... (108,110,531) (104,460,898) (104,729,987) (-3,380,544) (+269,089)
====================================================================================
Total, Title IV, Domestic Food Programs...................... 108,111,345 104,461,707 104,730,801 -3,380,544 +269,094
Fiscal year 2017................................... (108,110,531) (104,460,898) (104,729,987) (-3,380,544) (+269,089)
====================================================================================
TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural ............... ............... 875 +875 +875
Affairs...........................................................
Foreign Agricultural Service
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 196,571 188,167 197,506 +935 +9,339
(Transfer from export loans)................................... (6,074) (6,382) (6,074) ............... (-308)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses................................. 202,645 194,549 203,580 +935 +9,031
====================================================================================
Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress Program
Account, Administrative Expenses:
Farm Service Agency, Salaries and expenses (transfer to FSA)... 149 149 149 ............... ...............
Food for Peace Title II Grants:
Expenses....................................................... 1,466,000 ............... 1,600,000 +134,000 +1,600,000
Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program Account
(administrative expenses):
Salaries and expenses (Export Loans):
Foreign Agriculture Service, S&E (transfer to FAS)......... 6,074 6,382 6,074 ............... -308
Farm Service Agency S&E (transfer to FSA).................. 2,463 353 2,463 ............... +2,110
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, CCC Export Loans Program Account.................. 8,537 6,735 8,537 ............... +1,802
====================================================================================
McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition 201,626 ............... 206,626 +5,000 +206,626
program grants....................................................
====================================================================================
Total, Title V, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs...... 1,872,883 195,051 2,013,693 +140,810 +1,818,642
(By transfer)............................................ (6,074) (6,382) (6,074) ............... (-308)
====================================================================================
TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Salaries and expenses, direct appropriation........................ 2,759,378 1,819,718 2,760,378 +1,000 +940,660
Prescription drug user fees.................................... (754,524) (1,262,182) (937,434) (+182,910) (-324,748)
Medical device user fees....................................... (126,083) (439,001) (193,291) (+67,208) (-245,710)
Human generic drug user fees................................... (323,011) (615,746) (493,600) (+170,589) (-122,146)
Biosimilar biological products user fees....................... (22,079) (86,736) (54,000) (+31,921) (-32,736)
Animal drug user fees.......................................... (23,673) (70,252) (24,142) (+469) (-46,110)
Animal generic drug user fees.................................. (11,341) (18,475) (12,100) (+759) (-6,375)
Tobacco product user fees...................................... (635,000) (672,000) (672,000) (+37,000) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, user fees, enacted and definite.................... (1,895,711) (3,164,392) (2,386,567) (+490,856) (-777,825)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal (including user fees)............................... (4,655,089) (4,984,110) (5,146,945) (+491,856) (+162,835)
Mammography user fees.......................................... (20,522) (21,000) (20,522) ............... (-478)
Export and color certification user fees....................... (14,378) (15,000) (14,758) (+380) (-242)
Food and Feed Recall user fees................................. (1,434) (1,000) (1,434) ............... (+434)
Food Reinspection fees......................................... (6,414) (6,000) (6,414) ............... (+414)
Voluntary qualified importer program fees...................... (5,300) (5,000) (5,300) ............... (+300)
Pharmacy compounding fees (CBO estimate)....................... (1,370) (1,000) (1,370) ............... (+370)
Priority review vouchers (PRV) pediatric disease............... (7,686) (8,000) (7,686) ............... (-314)
Third party auditor............................................ (1,400) (1,000) (1,400) ............... (+400)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, FDA user fees...................................... (1,954,215) (3,222,392) (2,445,451) (+491,236) (-776,941)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, FDA (including user fees).......................... (4,713,593) (5,042,110) (5,205,829) (+492,236) (+163,719)
Buildings and facilities........................................... 11,788 8,771 11,788 ............... +3,017
FDA Innovation account............................................. 20,000 60,000 60,000 +40,000 ...............
Offset of appropriation pursuant to Section 1002(b)(3)(B) of the -20,000 -60,000 -60,000 -40,000 ...............
21st Century Cures Act (P.L. 114-255).............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, FDA (w/user fees, including proposals)................ (4,725,381) (5,050,881) (5,217,617) (+492,236) (+166,736)
Total, FDA (w/enacted user fees only)........................ (4,725,381) (5,050,881) (5,217,617) (+492,236) (+166,736)
Total, FDA (excluding user fees)............................. 2,771,166 1,828,489 2,772,166 +1,000 +943,677
====================================================================================
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Farm Credit Administration (limitation on administrative expenses). (68,600) (72,600) (69,000) (+400) (-3,600)
====================================================================================
Total, Title VI, Related Agencies and Food and Drug 2,771,166 1,828,489 2,772,166 +1,000 +943,677
Administration..............................................
====================================================================================
TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Limit Dam Rehab (Sec. 714(1))...................................... -54,000 -55,000 -55,000 -1,000 ...............
Limit Environmental Quality Incentives Program (Sec. 714(2))....... -179,000 -209,000 -179,000 ............... +30,000
Limit Biomass Crop Assistance Program (Sec. 714(3))................ -20,000 -20,000 -21,000 -1,000 -1,000
Limit Biorefinery Assistance (Sec. 714(4))......................... -20,000 ............... -36,000 -16,000 -36,000
Limit Ag Management Assistance (Sec. 714 (5))...................... -2,000 -9,000 ............... +2,000 +9,000
Limit Biorefinery Assistance (Sec. 714 (4)) (cancellation)......... ............... -175,000 ............... ............... +175,000
Limit fruit and vegetable program (Sec. 715)....................... -125,000 -125,000 -125,000 ............... ...............
Section 32 (Sec. 715) (rescission)................................. -231,000 -263,000 -263,000 -32,000 ...............
APHIS B&F--Fruit Fly Rearing (Sec. 743)............................ 47,000 ............... ............... -47,000 ...............
WIC (rescission) (Sec. 745)........................................ -850,000 -500,000 -800,000 +50,000 -300,000
TEFAP (Sec. 748)................................................... 19,000 ............... ............... -19,000 ...............
Ebola/Zika Funding (Sec. 752)...................................... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000 ...............
Citrus Greening (Sec. 757)......................................... 5,500 ............... 5,500 ............... +5,500
RD balances (Sec. 758) (rescission)................................ -3,951 ............... ............... +3,951 ...............
Healthy Food Financing Initiative.................................. 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
RD unobligated balances (rescission)............................... ............... -108,000 ............... ............... +108,000
ARS B&F unobligated balances (rescission).......................... ............... -211,697 ............... ............... +211,697
Hardwood Trees (Reforestation Pilot Program)....................... 600 ............... 600 ............... +600
Water Bank program................................................. 4,000 ............... 4,000 ............... +4,000
Geographic Disadvantaged farmers................................... 1,996 ............... 1,996 ............... +1,996
Emergency Conservation Program..................................... 28,651 ............... ............... -28,651 ...............
Food for Peace..................................................... 134,000 ............... ............... -134,000 ...............
Rural Energy Savings Program....................................... 8,000 ............... 8,000 ............... +8,000
Maturing mortgage pilot............................................ 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
FSA ARC pilot...................................................... 5,000 ............... 5,000 ............... +5,000
NIFA Military Veteran Grants....................................... 5,000 ............... 5,000 ............... +5,000
Conservation Reserve Program Pilot................................. ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
Child Nutrition Training pilot..................................... ............... ............... 2,000 +2,000 +2,000
Cottonseed Dairy program........................................... ............... ............... -66,000 -66,000 -66,000
Electric Loan Refinancing.......................................... 13,800 ............... ............... -13,800 ...............
STEM Program....................................................... 500 ............... ............... -500 ...............
====================================================================================
Total, Title VII, General Provisions......................... -1,199,904 -1,675,697 -1,509,904 -310,000 +165,793
====================================================================================
Grand total.................................................. 153,907,888 141,054,866 145,922,507 -7,985,381 +4,867,641
Appropriations fiscal year 2017.......................... (155,124,839) (142,488,563) (147,181,507) (-7,943,332) (+4,692,944)
Disaster relief.......................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2017................. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
(By transfer).............................................. (786,381) (762,683) (786,165) (-216) (+23,482)
(Loan authorization)....................................... (45,291,500) (40,430,875) (45,691,505) (+400,005) (+5,260,630)
(Limitation on administrative expenses).................... (189,827) (198,582) (192,482) (+2,655) (-6,100)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[all]