69–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–757 

DEBBIE SMITH REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008 

JULY 14, 2008.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. CONYERS, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 5057] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 5057) to reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant 

Program, having considered the same, report favorably thereon 

with amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do 

pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

The Amendments ..................................................................................................... 1 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 5 

Background and Need for the Legislation ............................................................. 5 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 7 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 7 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 7 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 8 

New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 9 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 9 

Performance Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... 11 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 11 

Advisory on Earmarks ............................................................................................. 11 

Section-by-Section Analysis .................................................................................... 12 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 13 

THE AMENDMENTS

The amendments are as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
2 

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANT PROGRAM. 

(a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 

2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended— (1) in subsection (a)— (A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5) as paragraphs (4) 

through (6), respectively; 

(B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph: ‘‘(3) To carry out, for inclusion in such Combined DNA Index System, DNA 

analyses of samples from missing or unidentified persons, including samples 

from the remains, personal effects, or biological relatives of such persons.’’; 

(C) in paragraph (4) (as redesignated by subparagraph (A)), by striking ‘‘paragraph (1) or (2)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1), (2), or (3)’’; and 

(D) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated), by striking ‘‘in paragraph (1)’’ and inserting ‘‘in paragraphs (1) and (3)’’; 

(2) in subsection (b)— (A) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; 

(B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ‘‘(8) provide assurances that the State or unit of local government has implemented, or will implement not later than 2 years after the date of such application, a process under which the State or unit, respectively, provides for the collection, for purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, of DNA samples from all felons who are imprisoned in a prison of such State or unit, respectively, (including all felons imprisoned in such prison or unit, respectively, as of the date of the enactment 

of the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008).’’; 

(3) in subsection (c)(3)— (A) by striking subparagraphs (A) through (D); 

(B) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (A); and 

(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) (as so redesignated) the following 

new subparagraph: ‘‘(B) For each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014, not less than 40 percent of the grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under subsection 

(a)(2) of this section.’’; and 

(4) by amending subsection (j) to read as follows: ‘‘(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to the Attorney General for grants under subsection (a)— ‘‘(1) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and 

‘‘(2) $200,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014.’’. (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (2) of subsection (a) 

shall apply to grants made on or after January 1, 2009. 

SEC. 3. STUDY TO ASSESS THE DNA ANALYSIS BACKLOG. 

(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) despite the funding provided for more than 5 fiscal years by the Federal 

Government to assist in the reduction of the DNA analysis backlog, the backlog 

continues to exist in many crime laboratories around the country; 

(2) as a consequence of the continuance of the DNA analysis backlog, many 

violent crimes that could be solved remain unsolved, and individuals who have 

been wrongfully convicted who could be determined to be innocent through DNA 

testing remain in prison; and 

(3) the causes of the DNA analysis backlog are complex and require a thorough and detailed study. 

(b) STUDY REQUIRED.—The National Academy of Sciences shall, in consultation 

with no fewer than 3 forensic science practitioners from States and units of local 

government, conduct a study to determine the resources and other requirements 

necessary to eliminate the DNA analysis backlog and to prevent such a backlog from 

reoccurring after it has been eliminated.

(c) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the National Academy of Sciences shall submit to the Attorney General and to Congress a report on the results of the study conducted under subsection (b). 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2009. 

SEC. 4. INCENTIVES FOR PERMANENT STATE-GENERATED DNA FUNDING STREAMS. 

(a) MATCHING FUNDS.—For each fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act, each eligible DNA funding State, with respect to a funding mechanism described in subsection (b) implemented by such State, shall be eligible for 

Federal matching funds to carry out such mechanism in an amount determined to 

be appropriate by the Attorney General. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
3 

(b) ELIGIBLE DNA FUNDING STATES DESCRIBED.—For purposes of this section, the 

term ‘‘eligible DNA funding State’’ means a State that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the State has implemented (and applies) a permanent funding mechanism that generates funds, whether by fees or penalties, that 

are allocated by the State only for purposes of the analysis of DNA samples for law 

enforcement purposes. 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 

2009 through 2013. 

SEC. 5. EVALUATION OF DNA INTEGRITY AND SECURITY. 

(a) EVALUATION.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, and annually thereafter, the Attorney General shall evaluate the integrity and 

security of DNA collection and storage practices and procedures at a sample of crime 

laboratories in the United States to determine the extent to which DNA samples 

are tampered with or are otherwise contaminated in crime laboratories. Such sample shall be a representative sample of crime laboratories in the United States. 

(b) REPORT.—The Attorney General shall annually report to Congress the findings 

of the evaluation conducted under subsection (a). 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2015. 

SEC. 6. INCENTIVES FOR STATES TO COLLECT DNA SAMPLES FROM INDIVIDUALS ARRESTED 

FOR OR CHARGED WITH MURDER AND SEX CRIMES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a State that receives funds for a fiscal year under 

subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 

of 1968 and that has an implemented enhanced State DNA collection process for 

such year, the amount of funds that would otherwise be allocated for that fiscal year 

to the State under such subpart shall be increased by 10 percent. 

(b) ENHANCED STATE DNA COLLECTION PROCESS DEFINED.—For purposes of this 

section, the term ‘‘enhanced State DNA collection process’’ means, with respect to 

a State, a process under which the State provides for the collection, for purposes 

of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of DNA samples from individuals who are at least 18 years of age and who 

are arrested for or charged with a criminal offense under State law that consists 

of—

(1) murder or voluntary manslaughter or any attempt to commit murder or 

voluntary manslaughter; or 

(2) an element involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another, any 

other criminal offense that is a specified offense against a minor (as defined in 

section 111(7) of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 

16911(7))), or an attempt to commit such an offense. 

The expungement requirements under section 210304(d) of the DNA Identification 

Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(d)) shall apply to any samples collected pursuant to 

this section for purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System. 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The provisions of this section shall apply to grants made 

on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated, 

in addition to funds made available under section 508 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3758), such sums as may be necessary 

to carry out this section for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013. 

SEC. 7. ADDITIONAL STUDY AND REPORT ON INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS RELATED 

TO CODIS ‘‘HITS’’. 

(a) STUDY.—The Inspector General of the Department of Justice shall carry out 

a study on—

(1) the number of instances in which DNA samples that are matched with 

samples included in the Combined DNA Index System database of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation that are followed up on by appropriate law enforcement 

entities; 

(2) the number of such matches described in paragraph (1) that are brought 

to the attention of a prosecutor; 

(3) the number of the investigations described in paragraph (2) that result in 

a trial; and 

(4) in the case of matches described in paragraph (1) that were not followed 

up on by appropriate law enforcement entities, were not brought to the attention of a prosecutor, or did not result in a trial—

(A) the reasons why such matches were not pursued accordingly; and 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
4 

(B) the resulting impact on the criminal justice system, including whether 

other crimes were committed that could have been prevented if such 

matches had been pursued accordingly. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the Inspector General shall submit to Congress a report on the study under subsection (a). 

SEC. 8. NATIONAL DNA INDEX SYSTEM ADVISORY BOARD. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Attorney General shall establish the National DNA 

Index System Advisory Board (in this section referred to as the ‘‘NDIS Advisory 

Board’’ to develop and, if appropriate, periodically revise standards and requirements for the use of and access to the index described in section 210304(a) of the 

DNA Identification Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(a)). 

(b) MEMBERSHIP.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall appoint members to 

the NDIS Advisory Board as follows: 

(1) At least 4 directors of State or local forensic laboratories. 

(2) One representative from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

(3) One representative from the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis 

Methods. 

(4) One representative from the Office of Legal Policy of the Department of 

Justice. 

(5) One representative from the National Institute of Justice. 

(6) One representative from the National Academies of Science. 

(7) One State or local prosecutor. 

(8) One criminal defense attorney. 

(9) One representative from the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

(10) One member of the academic community who specializes in DNA privacy 

issues. 

(11) One crime victim or crime victim advocate. 

(12) One representative of a State police agency. 

(13) One representative of a local police agency. 

(c) APPLICATION OF FACA.—The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), 

other than section 14 of such Act, shall apply to the NDIS Advisory Board. 

(d) NOTICE, COMMENT, AND PUBLICATION.—The Attorney General shall provide for 

public notice and comment for each standard developed under this section and for 

publication of each such standard. 

(e) PAY AND REIMBURSEMENT.—

(1) NO COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF NDIS ADVISORY BOARD.—Except as 

provided in paragraph (2), a member of the NDIS Advisory Board may not receive pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on the Board. 

(2) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Each member shall receive travel expenses, including 

per diem in lieu of subsistence under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, 

United States Code. 

(f) QUALITY ASSURANCE STANDARDS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 

this Act, the NDIS Advisory Board shall develop (and provide recommendations 

to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on) standards governing 

the use of and access to the index described in subsection (a). The NDIS Advisory Board shall periodically update such standards as appropriate. The standards shall provide for the expedited uploading into such index by State and 

local forensic laboratories of DNA analyses of samples obtained from persons 

convicted of crimes, including such analyses processed by private forensic laboratories. 

(2) CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL PROPOSALS TO EXPEDITE PROCESSING AND

UPLOADING OF DNA SAMPLES.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the NDIS Advisory Board shall also provide recommendations to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the following: 

(A) The feasibility and desirability of entering into agreements with private forensic laboratories to enable direct access to the Combined DNA 

Index System of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the purpose of 

uploading DNA analyses of samples obtained from persons convicted of 

crimes. 

(B) The feasibility and desirability of providing for more limited technical 

review audits of DNA analyses of samples prior to uploading such data into 

the Combined DNA Index System. 

(C) The feasibility and desirability of permitting greater participation in 

the technical review of DNA analyses of samples by contractor personnel. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
5 

(D) The feasibility and desirability of allowing immediate upload of DNA 

profiles obtained from crime scene samples and rape kits. 

(3) ISSUANCE OF POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND STANDARDS.—The Director of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the approval of the Attorney General, 

after taking into consideration the recommended policies, procedures, and 

standards recommended by the NDIS Advisory Board under this section shall 

issue (and revise from time to time) policies, procedures, and standards relating 

to the administration of the National DNA Index System including, standards 

for quality assurance, testing the proficiency of forensic laboratories, and forensic analysts, in conducting analyses of DNA. 

(g) EXCLUSIVITY OF POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND STANDARDS.—The policies, procedures, and standards issued under subsection (f)(3) shall be the exclusive policies, 

procedures, and standards issued with respect to State, local, and private laboratories that participate in the National DNA Index System. Polices, procedures, laboratory audit requirements, standards, and any other manner of regulation or control (other than any condition imposed pursuant to a grant awarded through the Department of Justice) may not be inconsistent with, or expand upon provisions contained in such approved policies, procedures, or standards. 

SEC. 9. DNA TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall establish a grant program under 

which the Attorney General may make grants to States and units of local government to purchase forensic DNA technology or to improve such technology. 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

$50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out subsection 

(a). 

SEC. 10. REAUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN DNA-RELATED GRANT PROGRAMS. 

(a) DNA TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL, AND COURT OFFICERS.—Section 303(b) of the Justice For All Act of 2004 

(42 U.S.C. 14136(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2014’’. 

(b) SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC EXAM PROGRAM GRANTS.—Section 304(c) of such 

Act (42 U.S.C. 14136a(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2014’’. 

(c) DNA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—Section 305(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

14136b(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2014’’. 

(d) DNA IDENTIFICATION OF MISSING PERSONS.—Section 308(c) of such Act (42 

U.S.C. 14136d(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2014’’. 

Amend the title so as to read: 

A bill to reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program, and for 

other purposes. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

Re-authorization of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program will facilitate the development of a comprehensive national 

DNA data base against which samples from current crime scenes 

can be compared. It will allow laboratories to reduce unacceptable 

delays in processing DNA samples that currently exist in many 

States. Finally, it will provide law enforcement and prosecutors important tools to quickly identify and prosecute criminals, reducing 

not only the costs of investigation and prosecution, but also the risk 

of prosecuting the wrong person. Ultimately, it is likely to have a 

significant deterrent effect on the commission of crimes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

DNA EVIDENCE BACKLOG ELIMINATION

In recent years, law enforcement agencies have realized the critical value that DNA evidence has in helping more quickly solve 

cases. Often, a DNA sample result can scientifically link a perpetrator to a crime, or prove a defendant’s innocence, with virtual 

certainty. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
6 

2Ohio Crime Lab Shortages Cause Headaches, THE IDAHO STATESMAN, Mar. 19, 2008. 3 Jessica Logan, Riverside Police Seek Grant for More DNA Testing in Old Cases, THE PRESSENTERPRISE, Feb. 28, 2008. 4Pub. L. No. 106–546 (2000). 

Unfortunately, many of the Nation’s Federal and State criminal 

forensics laboratories are currently overwhelmed with samples 

awaiting DNA analysis. As of 2003, a comprehensive report funded 

by the Department of Justice estimated the total crime DNA backlog at more than 48,000 samples.1 While the National Institute of 

Justice has not yet issued its current backlog reports, it is likely 

that the current DNA backlog is similarly high. 

Due to this backlog and resulting long delays in processing DNA 

samples at public laboratories, many local police departments have 

been resorting to sending DNA samples to private labs for timely 

analyses, costing upwards of $700 per sample.2 As recently as February 2008, at least one public laboratory had a reported delay 

time of 16 months for the processing of a DNA sample.3

The consequences of this backlog are unacceptable. Too many 

dangerous criminals remain on the streets, free to commit new 

crimes. Too many victims live in fear of another attack. And too 

many innocent people may remain unjustly incarcerated until the 

real perpetrator can be discovered and apprehended. 

Named for Debbie Smith, who was kidnapped in her Virginia 

home and raped in a nearby woods by a stranger, the Debbie Smith 

DNA Backlog Grant Program authorized grant money to States to 

collect samples from crime scenes and convicted persons, conduct 

DNA analyses, and enter these results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith’s attacker remained unidentified for 

more than 6 years, until a DNA sample collected from a convicted 

person serving time in a Virginia State prison revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified, the 6 years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith’s attacker to continue engaging in criminal activity. 

PUBLIC LAW 106–546, THE INITIAL DNA ANALYSIS BACKLOG

ELIMINATION ACT

Recognizing that the backlog of biological evidence that had to be 

entered in State databases was preventing law enforcement officials from solving many of the Nation’s most heinous crimes, Congress passed the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000.4

That law authorized the United States Attorney General to make 

grants to eligible States to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and crime scenes for inclusion in the Federal DNA database, the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), and to increase 

the capacity of State crime laboratories. In addition, the Act required the Bureau of Prisons and the military to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and forward these samples for analysis, and required the FBI to expand its CODIS database to include 

the analyses of these DNA samples. 

The Act also amended the criminal code to require all defendants 

on probation or supervised release to cooperate with the collection 

of a DNA sample. The Act expressed the sense of Congress that 

State grants should be conditioned upon the State’s agreement to 

ensure post-conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases; and that 

Congress should work with the States to improve the quality of 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
7 

5Pub. L. No. 108–405 (2004). 6Pub. L. No. 108–9405, tit. II (2004) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 14135). 

legal representation in capital cases. Finally, the Act authorized 

such sums as might be necessary for the Attorney General to carry 

out the Act. 

REAUTHORIZATION AS THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG DGRANT

PROGRAM

In 2004, DNA backlog elimination was incorporated into the Justice for All Act of 2004,5 and was renamed the Debbie Smith DNA 

Backlog Grant Program.6 While the Act authorized $151 million for 

each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009, Congress did not appropriate any money until fiscal year 2008, at which time it appropriated $147.4 million. 

The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program expires at the 

end of fiscal year 2009. H.R. 5057, the ‘‘Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act,’’ would reauthorize the Program for fiscal years 2009 

through 2014. H.R. 5057 specifies that not less than 40 percent of 

the total amount awarded in grants must be used for DNA analyses of samples from crime scenes, from rape kits and other sexual 

assault evidence, and from cases that do not have an identified suspect. 

There is strong State support for the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008. To date, at least nine States, including Alabama, 

Alaska, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Vermont, 

and West Virginia, have introduced or passed resolutions urging 

Congress to reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program. 

HEARINGS

The Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held 1 day of hearings on H.R. 5057, on April 10, 

2008. Testimony was received from Representative Carolyn B. 

Maloney of New York, sponsor of H.R. 5057; Debbie Smith, the 

namesake of the Program; Dr. David W. Hagy, Director, National 

Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of 

Justice; Peter Marone, Director, State of Virginia Crime Labs; 

Peter Neufeld, Esq., Co-founder and Co-Director of the Innocence 

Project; and Allen Newton, who was exonerated through post-conviction DNA testing. Additional material was submitted by Human 

Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On May 13, 2008, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and 

Homeland Security met in open session and ordered the bill, H.R. 

5057, favorably reported, without amendment, by voice vote, a 

quorum being present. On June 11, 2008, the Committee met in 

open session and ordered the bill, H.R. 5057, favorably reported, 

with an amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the following 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
8 

rollcall vote occurred during the Committee’s consideration of H.R. 

5057: 

1. An amendment by Mr. Schiff offering grant incentives to 

States that collect DNA samples from suspects arrested for or 

charged with murder, voluntary manslaughter, and sex offenses for 

inclusion in CODIS. Passed 19 to 12. 

ROLLCALL NO. 1 

Ayes Nays Present 

Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman ............................................................................... X 

Mr. Berman ....................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Boucher .......................................................................................................

Mr. Nadler .........................................................................................................

Mr. Scott ........................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Watt ............................................................................................................ X 

Ms. Lofgren ....................................................................................................... X 

Ms. Jackson Lee ................................................................................................ X 

Ms. Waters ........................................................................................................ X 

Mr. Delahunt .....................................................................................................

Mr. Wexler .........................................................................................................

Ms. Sanchez ...................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Cohen .......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Johnson ....................................................................................................... X 

Ms. Sutton ......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Gutierrez .....................................................................................................

Mr. Sherman ..................................................................................................... X 

Ms. Baldwin ......................................................................................................

Mr. Weiner ......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Schiff .......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Davis ...........................................................................................................

Ms. Wasserman Schultz .................................................................................... X 

Mr. Ellison ......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Smith (Texas) ............................................................................................. X 

Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr. ...................................................................................... X 

Mr. Coble ........................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Gallegly ....................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Goodlatte .................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Chabot ........................................................................................................ X 

Mr. Lungren ....................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Cannon ....................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Keller ........................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Issa ............................................................................................................. X 

Mr. Pence .......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Forbes ......................................................................................................... X 

Mr. King ............................................................................................................ X 

Mr. Feeney .........................................................................................................

Mr. Franks .........................................................................................................

Mr. Gohmert ...................................................................................................... X 

Mr. Jordan ......................................................................................................... X 

Total ................................................................................................ 19 12 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the findings 

and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
9 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does not provide new 

budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with respect to 

the bill, H.R. 5057, the following estimate and comparison prepared 

by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, July 10, 2008. 

Hon. JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Chairman, 

Committee on the Judiciary, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has completed the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5057, the Debbie Smith 

Reauthorization Act of 2008. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz (for 

Federal costs), who can be reached at 226–2860, and Melissa 

Merrell (for the impact on State and local governments), who can 

be reached at 225–3220. 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG, 

DIRECTOR. 

Enclosure. 

cc: Honorable Lamar S. Smith, 

Ranking Member. 

H.R. 5057—Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008. 

SUMMARY

H.R. 5057 would authorize the appropriation of about $1.6 billion 

over the 2009–2015 period for Department of Justice (DOJ) programs to enhance the analysis of DNA samples relating to criminal 

investigations. In addition, CBO estimates that the bill would authorize the appropriation of about $75 million over the 2009–2013 

period for other DOJ programs. Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, we estimate that implementing H.R. 5057 would 

cost about $875 million over the 2009–2013 period, with remaining 

amounts spent in subsequent years. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 5057 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 impact of H.R. 5057 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice). 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
10 

BASIS OF ESTIMATE

For this estimate, CBO assumes that the necessary amounts will 

be appropriated near the start of each fiscal year and that spending will follow the historical spending patterns for the existing programs or similar activities. 

By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 1

Spending Under Current Law for Programs Authorized by H.R. 

5057: 

Budget Authority/Authorization Level 1 152 211 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays 118 145 124 80 51 27 

Proposed Changes: 

Programs with Specified Funding Levels: 

Authorization Level 0 62 320 320 320 320 

Estimated Outlays 0 22 93 181 240 286 

Other Programs: 

Estimated Authorization Level 0 16 15 15 15 15 

Estimated Outlays 0 4 8 11 13 15 

Total Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level 0 78 335 335 335 335 

Estimated Outlays 0 26 101 192 253 301 

Spending Under H.R. 5057: 

Estimated Authorization Level 152 289 335 335 335 335 

Estimated Outlays 118 171 225 272 304 328 

1. The 2009 level is the amount authorized under current law for that year for the programs authorized by the bill. For 

those programs, the Congress appropriated $152 million for 2008. 

Programs with Specified Funding Levels 

H.R. 5057 would authorize the appropriation of about $1.6 billion 

over the 2009–2015 period for DOJ programs to enhance the analysis of DNA samples relating to criminal investigations. The bill 

would authorize the appropriation of: 

• $200 million annually over the 2010–2014 period for the 

Debbie Smith DNA Backlog grant program; 

• $50 million annually over the 2009–2013 period for DOJ to 

make grants to State and local governments to improve the 

technology used in forensic DNA analysis; 

• $30 million annually over the 2010–2014 period for DOJ to 

make grants to State and local governments and other entities 

for programs to collect and use DNA evidence relating to sexual assaults; and 

• A total of $220 million over the 2009–2015 period for other 

programs to enhance DNA collection and analysis. 

Other Programs 

In addition to the specified authorizations identified above, CBO 

estimates that H.R. 5057 would authorize the appropriation of 

about $75 million over the 2009–2013 period for other DOJ programs. 

The bill would authorize the appropriation of whatever funds are 

necessary for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to increase by 10 perVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:38 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR757.XXX HR757

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
11 

cent the amounts received by States through DOJ’s Byrne Justice 

Assistance Grants if States collect DNA samples from certain types 

of offenders. The Congress appropriated $170 million for fiscal year 

2008 for this grant program, and we expect that nearly all States 

would qualify for the increased funding. Assuming that appropriations for this program for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 are similar to the 2008 level, CBO estimates that this provision would require additional funding of about $15 million annually over the 

2009–2013 period. 

In addition, CBO estimates that it would cost about $1 million 

in fiscal year 2009 and less than $500,000 for each subsequent year 

for a DOJ study on the use of DNA samples by prosecutors, a national advisory board to develop standards for use of a Federal 

DNA database, and other programs. 

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE-SECTOR IMPACT

H.R. 5057 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on State, 

local, or tribal governments. Assuming appropriation of authorized 

amounts, State and local governments would receive about $800 

million over the 2009–2013 period for DNA collections and analysis. Any costs to those governments would be incurred voluntarily. 

ESTIMATE PREPARED BY: 

Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz (226–2860). 

Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell 

(225–3220). 

Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach (226–2940). 

ESTIMATE APPROVED BY: 

Peter H. Fontaine 

Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R. 5057 will assist 

States in reducing the backlog of DNA samples in the Nation’s 

labs, thereby assisting law enforcement in solving and deterring 

crimes. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for this legislation in article I, section 8, clause 18 of the Constitution. 

ADVISORY ON EARMARKS

In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, H.R. 5057 does not contain any congressional 

earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 

in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
12 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

The following discussion describes the bill as reported by the 

Committee. 

Sec. 1. Short title. Section 1 sets forth the short title of the bill 

as the ‘‘Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008.’’

Sec. 2. Reauthorization of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Elimination Act of 2000. Section 2 renews the United States Attorney 

General’s authority under section 14135 of title 42 of the United 

States Code to issue grants to States to help eliminate the backlog 

of DNA samples in the Nation’s labs. 

This section also amends the current provision in three ways. 

First, it raises the funding authorization from $151 million in fiscal 

year 2009 to $200 million for each of fiscal years 2010 through 

2014. Second, it broadens the allowable uses of grants funded 

under this Program beyond criminal investigation, to include analyzing and cataloguing biological samples from missing persons and 

relatives of missing persons to help identify those missing persons. 

Finally, it conditions eligibility for a grant upon a State conducting 

mandatory DNA testing for all felons imprisoned within its system, 

for including the DNA samples in CODIS, within 2 years of receiving the grant. 

Sec 3. Study to Assess the DNA Analysis Backlog. Section 3 authorizes $2 million for a study to be completed by the National 

Academies of Science that would identify the best practices for 

eliminating the backlog of DNA samples in the Nation’s labs. Despite 5 years of funding to help eliminate the backlog, the backlog 

remains high. This study would identify the necessary level of 

funding, training needs, personnel levels, and any other pertinent 

information that would eliminate the backlog and prevent it from 

recurring. The National Academies of Science would submit the 

findings to the Attorney General of the United States within 1 year 

after the date of enactment of the Act. 

Sec. 4. Incentives for Permanent State-Generated DNA Funding 

Programs. Section 4 authorizes additional funding, beyond that authorized in section 2, to match funds that a State generates by fees 

or penalties to analyze DNA samples for law enforcement purposes. 

Funding is authorized for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013. 

Sec. 5. Evaluation of DNA Integrity and Security. Section 5 authorizes $10 million for each fiscal year 2009 through 2015 for the 

United States Attorney General to evaluate the integrity and security of DNA collection practices and security of collected samples. 

The evaluation would be conducted through a representative audit 

sample of labs around the country each year, the results of which 

the Attorney General is to report to Congress. 

Sec. 6. Incentives for States to Collect DNA Samples from Individuals Arrested for or Charged with Murder and Sex Crimes. Section 6 provides grant incentives for States that mandate DNA testing for arrestees charged with murder, voluntary manslaughter, 

and certain sex offenses for including the results of the testing in 

CODIS. States that conduct such mandatory testing would be eligible for a 10 percent increase in the funding they receive under section 3758 of title 42 of the United States Code, the Edward Byrne 

Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, and funds are authorized as are necessary to carry out this section. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
13 

7 42 U.S.C. § 14132(d). 8 42 U.S.C. § 14136(b). 

Persons whose DNA profiles are entered in CODIS under this 

section pursuant to arrest, but who are not convicted may under 

certain circumstances have their DNA profiles removed from 

CODIS. Such expungement procedures are governed by section 

210304(d) of the DNA Identification Act of 1994.7

Sec. 7. Additional Study and Report on Investigations and Prosecutions Related to CODIS ‘‘Hits.’’ Section 7 directs the Attorney 

General to conduct a study to determine the effectiveness of investigative use of matches of DNA crime scene evidence to DNA samples taken from individuals. The study must detail the number of 

matches, the investigations that resulted in trial and conviction, 

and the cases that did not result in trial, or in conviction. For those 

instances where convictions were not attained, the study must detail the reasons why and whether there were any consequence that 

the lack of conviction had on the criminal justice system (i.e., 

whether the suspect has committed further crimes that could have 

been prevented). The study must be completed not later than 1 

year after the date of enactment of the Act, and the Attorney General is to report the results of the study to Congress. 

Sec. 8. National DNA Index System Advisory Board. Section 8 directs the Attorney General to establish the National DNA Index 

System Advisory Board to ensure diversity of views in the development of standards and requirements for the use of and access to 

the national DNA index, and provides for the establishment of 

standards providing for the expedited uploading of certain DNA 

profiles. 

Sec. 9. DNA Technology Enhancement Grants. Section 9 directs 

the Attorney General to establish a grant program under which the 

Attorney General may make grants to States and local governments for improving their DNA technology. This grant program is 

authorized $50 million for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013. 

Sec. 10. Reauthorization of Certain DNA-Related Grant Programs. Section 10 reauthorizes section 303(b) of the Justice for All 

Act of 2000,8 which is currently set to expire at the end of fiscal 

year 2009, for five additional years. The grants under this section 

fund sexual assault forensic exams, DNA research and development, and DNA identification of missing persons. 

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 (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

DNA ANALYSIS BACKLOG ELIMINATION ACT OF 2000 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2. THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANT PROGRAM. 

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.—The Attorney General may 

make grants to eligible States or units of local government for use 

by the State or unit of local government for the following purposes: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
14 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) To carry out, for inclusion in such Combined DNA Index 

System, DNA analyses of samples from missing or unidentified 

persons, including samples from the remains, personal effects, 

or biological relatives of such persons. 

ø(3)¿ (4) To increase the capacity of laboratories owned by 

the State or by units of local government to carry out DNA 

analyses of samples specified in øparagraph (1) or (2)¿ paragraph (1), (2), or (3). 

ø(4)¿ (5) To collect DNA samples specified øin paragraph (1)¿ 

in paragraphs (1) and (3). 

ø(5)¿ (6) To ensure that DNA testing and analysis of samples 

from crimes, including sexual assault and other serious violent 

crimes, are carried out in a timely manner. 

* * * * * * * 

(b) ELIGIBILITY.—For a State or unit of local government to be eligible to receive a grant under this section, the chief executive officer of the State or unit of local government shall submit to the Attorney General an application in such form and containing such information as the Attorney General may require. The application 

shall, as required by the Attorney General—

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(6) if submitted by a unit of local government, certify that 

the unit of local government has taken, or is taking, all necessary steps to ensure that it is eligible to include, directly or 

through a State law enforcement agency, all analyses of samples for which it has requested funding in the Combined DNA 

Index System; øand¿ 

(7) specify that portion of grant amounts that the State or 

unit of local government shall use for the purpose specified in 

subsection (a)(4)ø.¿; and 

(8) provide assurances that the State or unit of local government has implemented, or will implement not later than 2 years 

after the date of such application, a process under which the 

State or unit, respectively, provides for the collection, for purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, of DNA samples from all felons who are imprisoned in a prison of such State or unit, respectively, (including all felons imprisoned in such prison or 

unit, respectively, as of the date of the enactment of the Debbie 

Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008). 

(c) FORMULA FOR DISTRIBUTION OF GRANTS.—

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) LIMITATION.—Grant amounts distributed under paragraph (1) shall be awarded to conduct DNA analyses of samples from casework or from victims of crime under subsection 

(a)(2) in accordance with the following limitations: 

ø(A) For fiscal year 2005, not less than 50 percent of the 

grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under subsection (a)(2). 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
15 

ø(B) For fiscal year 2006, not less than 50 percent of the 

grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under subsection (a)(2). 

ø(C) For fiscal year 2007, not less than 45 percent of the 

grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under subsection (a)(2). 

ø(D) For fiscal year 2008, not less than 40 percent of the 

grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under subsection (a)(2).¿ 

ø(E)¿ (A) For fiscal year 2009, not less than 40 percent 

of the grant amounts shall be awarded for purposes under 

subsection (a)(2). 

(B) For each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014, not 

less than 40 percent of the grant amounts shall be awarded 

for purposes under subsection (a)(2) of this section. 

ø(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Amounts are authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General for grants under 

subsection (a) as follows: 

ø(1) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; 

ø(2) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; 

ø(3) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; 

ø(4) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and 

ø(5) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.¿ 

(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to 

be appropriated to the Attorney General for grants under subsection 

(a)— (1) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and 

(2) $200,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 

2014. 

* * * * * * * 

JUSTICE FOR ALL ACT OF 2004 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE III—DNA SEXUAL ASSAULT 

JUSTICE ACT OF 2004 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 303. DNA TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, 

CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL, AND COURT OFFICERS. 

(a) * * * 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $12,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 

ø2009¿ 2014 to carry out this section. 

SEC. 304. SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC EXAM PROGRAM GRANTS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 

ø2009¿ 2014 to carry out this section. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
16 

SEC. 305. DNA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 

ø2009¿ 2014 to carry out this section. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 308. DNA IDENTIFICATION OF MISSING PERSONS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 

ø2009¿ 2014 to carry out this section. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS