[House Report 115-82]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-82
======================================================================
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS AND PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE VOLUNTARY
SEPARATION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS ACT
_______
April 6, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Chaffetz, from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1003]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 1003) to authorize the
establishment of a program of voluntary separation incentive
payments for nonjudicial employees of the District of Columbia
courts and employees of the District of Columbia Public
Defender Service, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Committee Statement and Views.................................... 2
Section-by-Section............................................... 3
Explanation of Amendments........................................ 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Roll Call Votes.................................................. 4
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch..................... 4
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the
Committee...................................................... 4
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 4
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 4
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 4
Federal Advisory Committee Act................................... 5
Unfunded Mandate Statement....................................... 5
Earmark Identification........................................... 5
Committee Estimate............................................... 5
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate... 5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill as Reported............. 8
Committee Statement and Views
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
H.R. 1003, the District of Columbia Courts and Public
Defender Service Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments Act,
provides the District of Columbia Courts System and the
District of Columbia Public Defender Service with authority to
create a voluntary separation incentive payments program. The
program is substantially similar to the existing federal
program. Payments made under the program allow the District
Courts System and Public Defender Service to right size their
workforces and reduce unnecessary overhead costs.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The use of voluntary separation incentive payments (VSIPs)
by federal agencies and the federal judicial branch was made
permanent in 2002.\1\ The program established under this
statute provides authority for the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) to authorize agencies to provide buyouts to
employees in surplus positions or employees with unnecessary
skill sets. Employees receive a VSIP in exchange for
voluntarily resigning or retiring. VSIP payment amounts are
determined as the lesser of either the amount of severance pay
the individual would receive under a reduction in force per
section 5595 of title 5, United States Code, or an amount
determined by the agency.\2\ The amount an agency may pay to an
employee under a VSIP is capped at $25,000.\3\ This same cap
would apply to the District of Columbia VSIP authorization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\5 USC Sec. Sec. 3521-3525
\2\Workforce Restructuring, Office of Personnel Mgmt., available at
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/
voluntary-separation-incentive-payments/ (last accessed Mar. 14, 2017).
\3\Id. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017
(P.L. 114-328) authorized a one-year increase in the VSIP cap for
Department of Defense civilian employees from $25,000 to $40,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1996, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
reviewed cost savings that could be realized by using VSIPs.\4\
The review compared the savings that result from a VSIP
program, termed ``buyouts'' in the study, to that of a
reduction in force effort.\5\ GAO found that buyouts could
result in up to 50 percent greater savings than reduction in
force efforts due to a number of factors.\6\ The most
significant of these factors is that while reductions in force
generally impact junior employees, VSIP offers attract more
senior employees, particularly those eligible for
retirement.\7\ As a result of this disparate impact, GAO found
that the average salary for individuals receiving buyouts was
$34,745 for resigning employees and $48,000 for retiring
employees, compared to an average salary of $29,495 for
employees separated through a reduction in force.\8\ In
addition to the greater cost savings of VSIPs, OPM also noted
that VSIPs are far less disruptive than reductions in force on
impacted agencies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal Downsizing: The Costs
and Savings of Buyouts Versus Reductions-in-Force, GAO-96-63 (May 14,
1996). The name of the General Accounting Office has since changed to
the Government Accountability Office.
\5\Id.
\6\Id.
\7\Id.
\8\Id.
\9\Office of Personnel Mgmt., Guide to Voluntary Separation
Incentive Payments (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although VSIP authority is available to federal agencies
and the federal judicial branch, neither the District Courts
System nor the Public Defender Service has such authority.
H.R. 1003 provides the necessary authority for the District
Courts System and the Public Defender Service to create and
implement VSIP programs. This authority allows these agencies
access to a much-needed human resources tool, enabling them to
eliminate unnecessary positions and the federal government to
realize associated cost savings.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
On February 13, 2017, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)
introduced H.R. 1003, the District of Columbia Courts and
Public Defender Service Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments
Act. H.R. 1003 was referred to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform. The Committee considered H.R. 1003 at a
business meeting on February 14, 2017 and ordered the bill
favorably reported, without amendment, by voice vote.
In the 114th Congress, Delegate Norton introduced similar
legislation, H.R. 5037. The Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform ordered H.R. 5037 favorably reported, and
H.R. 5037 passed the House with overwhelming bipartisan
support, with a vote total of 413-1.
In addition, Delegate Norton introduced earlier iterations
of the bill in the 113th and 109th Congresses. In the 113th
Congress, Delegate Norton introduced H.R. 5006. During the
109th Congress, Delegate Norton introduced H.R. 5711.
Section-by-Section
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 establishes the bill's short title as the
``District of Columbia Courts and Public Defender Service
Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments Act.''
Section 2. Authorization for program of voluntary separation incentive
payments for District of Columbia Courts
Section 2 amends Chapter 17 of title 11 of the D.C. Code by
inserting a new section, 1726A, which authorizes the Joint
Committee on Judicial Administration to establish a voluntary
separation incentive payment program for nonjudicial employees.
The program is substantially similar to the program for federal
judicial branch employees authorized under subchapter II of
chapter 35 of title 5, United States Code.
Section 3. Authorization for program of voluntary separation incentive
payments for District of Columbia Public Defender Service
Section 3 amends section 305 of the District of Columbia
Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 by adding a new
subsection (d), which would provide that the Director of the
District of Columbia Public Defender Service may establish a
program substantially similar to that established under
subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 5, United States Code.
Explanation of Amendments
No amendments were offered on H.R. 1003.
Committee Consideration
On February 14, 2017, the Committee met in open session and
ordered reported favorably the bill, H.R. 1003, by voice vote,
a quorum being present.
Roll Call Votes
There were no recorded votes during consideration of H.R.
1003.
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch
Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch where the bill relates to the terms and conditions of
employment or access to public services and accommodations.
This bill provides the District of Columbia Courts System and
Public Defender Service with authority to create a voluntary
separation incentive payments program. As such, this bill does
not relate to employment or access to public services and
accommodations.
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the descriptive portions of
this report.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance
goal or objective of this bill is to authorize the
establishment of a program of voluntary separation incentive
payments for nonjudicial employees of the District Courts
System and employees of the District of Columbia Public
Defender Service.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings
The Committee estimates that enacting this bill does not
direct the completion of any specific rule makings within the
meaning of section 551 or title 5, United States Code.
Federal Advisory Committee Act
The Committee finds that the legislation does not establish
or authorize the establishment of an advisory committee within
the definition of Section 5(b) of the appendix to title 5,
United States Code.
Unfunded Mandate Statement
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement as to
whether the provisions of the reported bill include unfunded
mandates. In compliance with this requirement, the Committee
has included below a letter received from the Congressional
Budget Office.
Earmark Identification
This bill does not include any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of rule XXI.
Committee Estimate
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out
this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides
that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has
included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the
bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, which the Committee has included below.
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received
the following cost estimate for this bill from the Director of
Congressional Budget Office:
March 16, 2017.
Hon. Jason Chaffetz,
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1003, the District
of Columbia Courts and Public Defender Service Voluntary
Separation Incentive Payments Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Dan Ready.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall.
Enclosure.
H.R. 1003--District of Columbia Courts and Public Defender Service
Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments Act
Summary: H.R. 1003 would amend the District of Columbia
(D.C.) Code to permit the relevant authorities to establish a
program to offer incentive payments to certain nonjudicial
employees of the D.C. courts and the D.C. Public Defender
Service for voluntarily separating from their positions. CBO
estimates that enacting H.R. 1003 would increase direct
spending for retirement annuities and related health benefits
by $1 million in fiscal year 2018 and $7 million over the 2018-
2027 period. In addition, because those agencies are funded by
federal appropriations, CBO estimates that the separation
payments would increase discretionary outlays by $3 million
over that same period, assuming availability of the necessary
funds.
Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the
legislation would affect direct spending.
CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would not
increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits by more than
$5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods
beginning in 2028.
H.R. 1003 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary effect of H.R. 1003 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 550
(health), 600 (income security), 750 (administration of
justice) and 800 (general government).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2017-2022 2017-2027
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCREASES OR DECREASES (-) IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority........................... 0 1 2 2 2 1 * * * * * 8 7
Estimated Outlays.................................... 0 1 2 2 2 1 * * * * * 8 7
INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level........................ 0 1 1 1 * * * * * * * 3 3
Estimated Outlays.................................... 0 1 1 1 * * * * * * * 3 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * = between -$500,000 and $500,000. Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Basis of estimate: This estimate assumes that H.R. 1003
will be enacted late in 2017 and that the necessary funds will
be available each year.
Direct spending
H.R. 1003 would authorize both the D.C. courts and the
Public Defender Service to establish a program to provide
voluntary separation payments for nonjudicial employees. This
program would be similar to one used by most federal agencies
to provide cash payments (often called ``buyouts'') of up to
$25,000 to employees who voluntarily leave federal service.
H.R. 1003 would not limit the number of employees who could
receive such payments or the period of time during which
buyouts could be offered.
The two affected agencies have indicated that they would
use the authority under H.R. 1003 to restructure their
workforce to better match their needs. To achieve that end, the
agencies would target separation payments to employees who are
near retirement. Based on an analysis of data provided by the
agencies, CBO estimates that over the next 10 years the
incentive payments would induce about 120 employees of the D.C.
courts and Public Defender Services to retire one or two years
earlier than they otherwise would have.
Employees of the D.C. courts and Public Defender Service
participate in the federal government's retirement programs.
Because H.R. 1003 would induce employees to enter the
retirement rolls sooner than they otherwise would have, the
government would be required to pay additional benefits
initially.
However, in subsequent years, benefit payments for
individuals who accept the buyout would be smaller because
retirement benefits are based on the number of years of service
that the annuitant worked; that number would be somewhat lower
as a result of the decision to accept early retirement. Thus,
while the total amount of benefits paid would be higher in the
near term, reduced annuities would lead to a small savings in
later years. On net, CBO estimates that enacting the
legislation would increase spending for retirement benefits by
$5 million over 2018-2027 period.
The agencies' employees also participate in the Federal
Employees Health Benefits program (FEHB). When those employees
retire, the federal government pays a portion of the premium;
those payments are classified as direct spending. Thus, because
of the increase in early retirements resulting from H.R. 1003,
the legislation also would increase the federal government's
contributions for annuitants under the FEHB program. CBO
estimates that those contributions would increase direct
spending by $2 million over the 2018-2027 period.
Spending subject to appropriation
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1003 would increase
spending to make buyout payments by about $1 million in fiscal
year 2018 and $3 million over the 2018-2027 period, assuming
the availability of appropriated funds. That cost stems from
CBO's expectation that the buyout authority would be used for
about 120 employees at a cost of $25,000 per employee.
Providing such buyout authority could also have other
effects on personnel costs at the two agencies (spending for
the agencies is part of the federal budget). For example, if
the agencies hired less expensive employees to replace retiring
employees, they could save on personnel costs. However, those
potential savings could be offset by other personnel decisions,
such as promoting current employees into vacated, higher-paying
positions; hiring additional people to fill agency needs; or
rewarding high-performing employees with bonuses. CBO has no
basis for predicting which of those actions, if any, the
agencies might take. Therefore, CBO does not estimate any
changes in spending resulting from other personnel decisions
related to employee buyouts.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table.
CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 1003, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM ON FEBRUARY 14, 2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2017-2022 2017-2027
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NET INCREASE IN THE ON-BUDGET DEFICIT
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact....................... 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Increase in long-term direct spending and deficits: CBO
estimates that enacting the legislation would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion
in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in
2028.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1003
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Dan Ready; Impact on
state, local, and tribal governments: Zach Byrum; Impact on the
private sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: H. Samuel Papenfuss; Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICIAL CODE
* * * * * * *
TITLE 2--GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 16--PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2-1605. Employment of attorneys and other personnel; compensation;
private practice by attorneys not permitted
(a) The Director shall employ a staff of attorneys and
clerical and other personnel necessary to provide adequate and
effective services. The Director shall make assignments of the
personnel of the Service. The compensation of all employees of
the Service, other than the Director and the Deputy Director,
shall be fixed by the Director, but shall not exceed the
compensation which may be paid to persons of similar
qualifications and experience in the office of the United
States Attorney for the District of Columbia. All attorneys
employed by the Service to represent persons shall be members
of the bar of the District of Columbia.
(B) No attorney employed by the Service shall engage in the
private practice of law or receive a fee for representing any
person.
(c)(1) Employees of the Service shall be treated as employees
of the Federal Government solely for purposes of any of the
following provisions of Title 5, United States Code: subchapter
1 of Chapter 81 (relating to compensation for work injuries),
Chapter 83 (relating to retirement), Chapter 84 (relating to
Federal Employees' Retirement System), Chapter 87 (relating to
life insurance), and Chapter 89 (relating to health insurance).
(2) The Service shall make contributions under the provisions
referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection at the same
rates applicable to agencies of the Federal Government.
(3) An individual who is an employee of the Service on the
date of the enactment of this subsection may make, within 60
days after the issuance of regulations under paragraph (4) of
this subsection, an election under Sec. 8351 or 8432 of Title
5, United States Code, to participate in the Thrift Savings
Plan for Federal employees.
(4) This subsection shall apply with respect to all months
beginning after the date on which the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management issues regulations to carry out this
subsection.
(5) For purposes of vesting pursuant to Sec. 1-626.10(b),
creditable service with the District for employees whose
participation in the District Defined Contribution Plan ceases
as a result of implementation of this subsection shall include
service performed thereafter for the Service.
(d) The Director may establish a program substantially
similar to the program established under subchapter II of
chapter 35 of title 5, United States Code, for employees of the
Service, except that the maximum amount of the payment made
under the program to any individual may not exceed the amount
referred to in section 3523(b)(3)(B) of title 5, United States
Code.
* * * * * * *
TITLE 11--ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 17--ADMINISTRATION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS
Sec.
SUBCHAPTER I--Court Administration
11-1701. Administration of District of Columbia court system.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--Court Personnel.
* * * * * * *
11-1726A. Voluntary separation incentive payments.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--Court Personnel
* * * * * * *
Sec. 11-1726A. Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments
The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration may, by
regulation, establish a program substantially similar to the
program established under subchapter II of chapter 35 of title
5, United States Code, for nonjudicial employees of the
District of Columbia courts, except that the maximum amount of
the payment made under the program to any individual may not
exceed the amount referred to in section 3523(b)(3)(B) of title
5, United States Code.
* * * * * * *
[all]