68–271 PDF 

Calendar No. 171 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 112–79 

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2011.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DURBIN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1573] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1573) making appropriations for financial services and general government 

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2012 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $44,640,384,000 

Amount of 2011 appropriations ............................... 44,688,058,000 

Amount of 2012 budget estimate ............................ 48,726,741,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2011 appropriations .......................................... ¥47,674,000 

2012 budget estimate ........................................ ¥4,086,357,000 
(2) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Overview and Summary of Bill .............................................................................. 5 

Program, Project, and Activity ............................................................................... 5 

Reprogramming Guidelines .................................................................................... 5 

Relationship With Budget Offices .......................................................................... 6 

Congressional Budget Justifications ...................................................................... 7 

Agency Reports ........................................................................................................ 7 

Title I: Department of the Treasury: 

Departmental Offices ....................................................................................... 8 

Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs ............ 12 

Office of Inspector General ....................................................................... 12 

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration .............................. 13 

Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program ....... 15 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ........................................................ 15 

Treasury Forfeiture Fund ................................................................................ 17 

Financial Management Service ....................................................................... 17 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau .................................................. 18 

United States Mint ........................................................................................... 19 

Bureau of the Public Debt ............................................................................... 19 

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund ................................. 20 

Bureau of Engraving and Printing ................................................................. 21 

Internal Revenue Service ................................................................................. 22 

Taxpayer Services ..................................................................................... 23 

Enforcement ............................................................................................... 27 

Operations Support ................................................................................... 28 

Business Systems Modernization ............................................................. 29 

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration ......................................... 31 

Administrative Provisions—Internal Revenue Service .......................... 31 

Administrative Provisions—Department of the Treasury ............................. 31 

Title II: Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the 

President: 

Compensation of the President ....................................................................... 33 

The White House .............................................................................................. 33 

Executive Residence at the White House ....................................................... 34 

White House Repair and Restoration ............................................................. 34 

Council of Economic Advisers .......................................................................... 34 

National Security Council and Homeland Security Council ......................... 35 

Office of Administration ................................................................................... 35 

Office of Management and Budget .................................................................. 36 

Government-wide Management Councils ....................................................... 37 

Office of National Drug Control Policy ........................................................... 37 

Funds Appropriated to the President: 

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas ................................................... 39 

Other Federal Drug Control Programs .................................................... 39 

Unanticipated Needs ........................................................................................ 41 

Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation .................................... 41 

Integrated, Efficient, and Effective Uses of Information Technology .......... 42 

Special Assistance to the President ................................................................ 43 

Official Residence of the Vice President ......................................................... 43 

Administrative Provisions—Executive Office of the President and Funds 

Appropriated to the President ..................................................................... 44 

Title III: The Judiciary: 

Supreme Court of the United States .............................................................. 45 

Care of the Building and Grounds .................................................................. 46 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ............................... 46 
Page

3 

Title III—Continued 

United States Court of International Trade ................................................... 47 

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ................. 47 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund ..................................................... 48 

Defender Services ............................................................................................. 49 

Fees of Jurors and Commissioners ................................................................. 49 

Court Security ................................................................................................... 50 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts ........................................ 50 

Federal Judicial Center .................................................................................... 51 

Judicial Retirement Funds .............................................................................. 51 

United States Sentencing Commission ........................................................... 52 

Administrative Provisions—The Judiciary ..................................................... 52 

Title IV—District of Columbia: 

Federal Funds: 

Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support ...................................... 53 

Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 

District of Columbia .............................................................................. 54 

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts ............................ 55 

Federal Payment for Defender Services in District of Columbia 

Courts ..................................................................................................... 56 

Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency for the District of Columbia ..................................................... 57 

Federal Payment to the Public Defender Service for the District 

of Columbia ............................................................................................ 58 

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority ..................................................................................................... 59 

Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council .......... 59 

Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions ............................................ 60 

Federal Payment for School Improvement .............................................. 61 

Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard ....................................... 63 

Federal Payment for Housing for the Homeless ..................................... 64 

Federal Payment for Redevelopment of the St. Elizabeths Hospital 

Campus ................................................................................................... 64 

Federal Payment for HIV/AIDS Prevention ............................................ 65 

Federal Payment for D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities 

Grants ..................................................................................................... 65 

District of Columbia Funds ............................................................................. 65 

Title V—Independent Agencies: 

Administrative Conference of the United States ........................................... 67 

Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation .............................................. 67 

Civilian Property Realignment Board ............................................................ 68 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ...................................................... 68 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ........................................................... 70 

Election Assistance Commission ..................................................................... 73 

Federal Communications Commission ............................................................ 74 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General .......... 75 

Federal Election Commission .......................................................................... 75 

Federal Labor Relations Authority ................................................................. 76 

Federal Trade Commission .............................................................................. 76 

General Services Administration .................................................................... 79 

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation ...................................................... 90 

Merit Systems Protection Board ..................................................................... 91 

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation ....................................... 91 

National Archives and Records Administration ............................................. 92 

National Credit Union Administration ........................................................... 96 

Office of Government Ethics ............................................................................ 98 

Office of Personnel Management ..................................................................... 99 

Office of Special Counsel .................................................................................. 104 

Postal Regulatory Commission ........................................................................ 105 

Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ................................................. 106 

Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board ........................................ 107 

Securities and Exchange Commission ............................................................ 108 

Selective Service System .................................................................................. 111 

Small Business Administration ....................................................................... 112 

United States Postal Service ........................................................................... 116 

Office of Inspector General ....................................................................... 119 

United States Tax Court .................................................................................. 120 

Title VI—General Provisions—This Act ................................................................ 122 
Page

4 

Title VII—General Provisions—Government-wide ............................................... 124 

Title VIII—General Provisions—District of Columbia ......................................... 128 

Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate .......................................................................................................................... 130 

Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 131 

Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 131 

Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... 141 

Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ............................................... 142 
(5) 

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL 

The Financial Services and General Government appropriations 

bill provides funding for the Department of the Treasury, including 

the Internal Revenue Service; the Executive Office of the President; 

the Judiciary; the District of Columbia; and more than two dozen 

independent Federal agencies. 

The Committee recommends $44,640,384,000 in discretionary 

and mandatory appropriations. This represents a decrease of 

$47,674,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level, and a decrease of $4,086,357,000 below the budget request. Of the total, 

$21,898,300,000 is provided in discretionary appropriations, including $167,300,000 for the Small Business Administration Disaster 

Loans Program Account designated by Congress as disaster relief 

pursuant to Public Law 111–25. This discretionary amount is 

$4,092,357,000 below the budget request of $25,990,657,000. Mandatory appropriations total $22,742,084,000. The Committee has 

made difficult but necessary decisions to craft a bill that is within 

strict fiscal limitations. 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2012, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–177), as 

amended, with respect to appropriations contained in the accompanying bill, the terms ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ [PPA] shall 

mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

The Committee includes a provision (sec. 608) establishing the 

authority of agencies to reprogram funds and the limitation on that 

authority. The provision specifically requires the advance approval 

of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA]; (3) increases funds or 

personnel for any PPA for which funds have been denied or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to redirect funds that were 

directed in such reports for a specific activity to a different purpose; (5) augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 

percent, whichever is less; (6) reduces an existing PPA by 

$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or (7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices differently than the congressional 

budget justifications or the table at the end of the Committee report, whichever is more detailed. 
6 

The Committee retains the requirement that each agency submit 

an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities provided in this act. Specifically, each agency should 

provide a table for each appropriation with columns displaying the 

budget request; adjustments made by Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the fiscal year enacted level. The table 

shall delineate the appropriation both by object class and by PPA. 

The report must also identify items of special congressional interest. 

The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a detailed 

justification of increases and reductions and the specific impact the 

proposed changes will have on the budget request for the following 

fiscal year. Except in emergency situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later than June 30. 

The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs and 

activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should be 

submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or a situation that could not have been anticipated when formulating the 

budget request for the current fiscal year. Further, the Committee 

notes that when a Department or agency submits a reprogramming 

or transfer request to the Committees on Appropriations and does 

not receive identical responses from the House and the Senate, it 

is the responsibility of the Department or agency to reconcile the 

House and the Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider the request to reprogram 

funds unapproved. 

RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES 

Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its inquiries and requests for information and assistance through the 

budget offices of the various departments, agencies, offices, and 

commissions. The Committee has often pointed to the natural affinity and relationship between the budget offices and the Committee 

which makes such a relationship workable. The Committee reiterates its longstanding position that while the Committee reserves 

the right to call upon any office or officer in the departments, agencies, and commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and these entities must be through the budget offices. To 

help ensure the Committee’s ability to perform its responsibilities, 

the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and timely 

access to the budget offices and expects to be able to receive forthright and complete responses from those offices and their employees. 

The Committee has encountered growing difficulties in securing 

timely agency compliance with mandated reporting requirements 

and has experienced several situations in which deadlines for submission of reports were disregarded entirely. The Committee expects and directs all agencies from which reports are required to 

allow sufficient time to secure any necessary internal and external 
7 

clearances of reports in order to satisfy congressional deadlines. 

The Committee strongly urges agencies to alert the Committee as 

far as possible in advance of any expected slippage in meeting a report delivery due date. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS 

Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the agency, 

but instead are the primary tool used by the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is aware that 

the format and presentation of budget materials is largely left to 

the agency within presentation objectives set forth by OMB. In 

fact, OMB Circular A–11, part 6 specifically states that the ‘‘agency 

should consult with your congressional committees beforehand to 

ensure their awareness of your plans to modify the format of agency budget documents.’’ The Committee expects all the budget justifications to adhere to this directive and provide the data needed 

to make appropriate and meaningful funding decisions. 

The Committee directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2013 budget requests by agencies funded under this act 

must contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory 

statements to support the appropriations requests at the level of 

detail contained in the funding table included at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the agency’s 

financial plan from prior year enactment, and detailed data on all 

programs and comprehensive information on any office or agency 

restructurings. At a minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and materials that compare programs, projects, and 

activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2013 to the fiscal year 

2012 enacted level. 

The Committee is aware that the analytical materials required 

for review by the Committee are unique to each agency in this act. 

Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency will coordinate 

with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 2013 budget request. 

AGENCY REPORTS 

Hereafter, as a measure to reduce costs and conserve paper, 

agencies funded by this act that currently provide separate copies 

of periodic reports (such as Performance and Accountability Reports) and correspondence to the chairs of the House and Senate 

Appropriations Committees and Subcommittees on Financial Services and General Government, and also to the ranking members of 

the committees and subcommittees, should send only one copy 

jointly addressed to the chairs of the Committee and subcommittee 

and one copy jointly addressed to the ranking members of the Committee and subcommittee (separate copies should be sent to the 

House and the Senate). This will reduce by one-half (from eight to 

four) the copies of periodic reports agencies send to the committees. 
(8) 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $306,388,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 324,889,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 306,388,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Departmental Offices consist of the Office of the Secretary 

and Deputy Secretary, the Office of International Affairs, the Office 

of Domestic Finance, the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, the Office of Tax Policy, the Office of Economic Policy, the 

Office of the General Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the 

Office of Public Affairs, the Office of the Treasurer, and the Office 

of Management. The Secretary of the Treasury has the primary 

role in formulating and managing the domestic and international 

tax and financial policies of the Federal Government. The Secretary’s responsibilities funded by the Salaries and Expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing U.S. domestic and international economic and tax policy; formulating fiscal 

policy; governing the fiscal operations of the Government; executing 

the Nation’s financial sanction policies; disrupting and dismantling 

terrorist financial infrastructure; protecting the United States and 

the international financial system from terrorist financing, money 

laundering, and other financial crimes; managing the public debt; 

managing international development policy; representing the 

United States on international monetary, trade, and investment 

issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury overseas operations; 

and directing the administrative operations of the Department of 

the Treasury. The majority of the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides resources for policy formulation and implementation 

in the areas of domestic and international finance, terrorist financing and financial crimes, tax, economic, trade, financial operations 

and general fiscal policy. This appropriation also provides resources 

to support the Secretary, policy components, and departmental administrative policies in financial and personnel management, procurement operations, and information systems and telecommunications. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $306,388,000 for the Salaries and 

Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices account of the 
9 

Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 2012. This amount is 

$18,501,000 below the budget request and the same as the fiscal 

year 2011 enacted level. The funding recommendations are made 

based on information included in the budget justification. The Committee recommends that the budget activity previously named ‘‘economic policies and programs’’ be renamed ‘‘international affairs and 

economic policy’’ and the budget activity previously named ‘‘financial policies and programs’’ be renamed ‘‘domestic finance and tax 

policy’’ as proposed in the budget request. 

The Committee directs the Department to prioritize resources 

within the Departmental Offices account for the Office of Terrorism 

and Financial Intelligence in order to support safeguarding financial systems against illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, money launderers, proliferators of weapons of 

mass destruction, and other national security threats. The Committee also notes the importance of the Office of Domestic Finance 

and the Office of Tax Policy in developing and implementing policies for stabilizing the economy and creating jobs. The Committee 

supports the Department in expanding the capacity of these offices. 

The Committee makes the following findings: 

Office of Financial Education (Domestic Finance and Tax Policy).—The Committee is concerned about the low level of literacy 

and numeracy skills among the adult population of the United 

States, as one in seven adults do not have basic literacy skills to 

succeed in all but the most rudimentary literacy tasks. The Department’s Office of Financial Education administers the National Financial Literacy Challenge and develops strategies to combat predatory lending. The Office of Financial Education also coordinates 

the efforts of the Financial Literacy and Education Commission, a 

group chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury and composed of 

representatives from 20 Federal departments, agencies, and commissions. The Commission works to improve financial literacy and 

education for people throughout the United States. The Committee 

encourages the Department to explore the degree to which current 

financial literacy programs benefit those individuals with less than 

basic literacy skills and to focus resources on financial education efforts, including to support the revision of the national strategy on 

financial literacy and the development of measurable goals and objectives for the Financial Literacy and Education Commission. Finally, the Committee urges the Department to explore opportunities to work with community-based adult and family literacy organizations to promote and implement future financial literacy initiatives. 

Foreclosure Crisis.—The Committee continues to be concerned 

that the Department’s strategy to reduce mortgage foreclosures and 

keep American families in their homes has fallen far short of the 

goal of modifying 3 to 4 million mortgages. The Committee notes 

that the Home Affordable Modification Program [HAMP] June 

2011 report shows that 657,044 homeowners are in active permanent modification and have been able to remain in their homes because of HAMP. The Committee also notes that approximately 

200,000 additional homeowners are in the process of obtaining assistance through HAMP. The Committee directs the Department to 

focus on how to induce servicers to consider and implement prin-
10 

cipal reductions to allow homeowners to remain in the home with 

a reduced monthly mortgage payment in order to avoid foreclosure 

which often results in vacant real-estate owned property that may 

negatively affect an entire neighborhood. The Committee also directs the Department to ensure mortgage servicers are properly 

complying with HAMP agreements and to provide ample technical 

assistance and outreach to properly educate servicers about their 

responsibilities under the program. 

The Committee supports the administration’s goal of disposing of 

Real-Estate Owned [REO] properties held by Fannie Mae and 

Freddie Mac, including the objectives of returning often vacant 

REO properties to productive use to reduce taxpayer costs and stabilize neighborhoods and home prices. The Committee also supports disposition strategies that increase rental housing and affordable housing stock. The Committee notes that to truly reduce the 

number of REO properties held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, 

it is necessary to prevent homes from foreclosure. The Committee 

urges the Department to better utilize programs like HAMP and 

the Hardest Hit Fund to reduce the foreclosure rate among homes 

financed through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 

Economic Sanctions and Divestments.—The Committee recommendation includes resources for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence programs. With these funds, the Department will continue 

to issue and enforce economic and trade sanctions consistent with 

national security and foreign policy goals. These sanctions are a 

key tool for asserting U.S. policy toward countries and entities 

under sanction. The Committee directs the Department to fully implement all sanctions and divestment measures, particularly those 

applicable to North Korea, Belarus, Burma, Iran, Sudan, and 

Zimbabwe. The Committee directs the Department to promptly notify the Committee of any resource constraints that adversely impact the implementation of any sanctions program. 

Proceeds of Corruption.—Corrupt politicians, terrorists, and those 

involved in organized crime are often able to hide their identity behind a corporate veil, allowing them to enjoy the proceeds of corruption and bribery, including on U.S. soil. The Committee directs 

the Department to use its rulemaking authority to strengthen customer due diligence requirements for U.S. financial institutions, 

consistent with applicable statutory authorities and international 

standards, including by identifying the beneficial owner of corporate vehicles, where appropriate. 

The Committee also directs the Department, in consultation with 

the other members of the United States delegation to the Financial 

Action Task Force [FATF], to take a leadership role in prioritizing 

prevention of the illicit flow of corrupt funds, including by strengthening FATF anti-corruption requirements and by conducting an extensive typology exercise on foreign corruption. The typology exercise will inform financial institutions on how to recognize the proceeds of corruption and therefore help prevent the flow of illicit 

funds into the United States. The Committee also urges the U.S. 

delegation to work with other member states to assess the implementation of the FATF’s 40∂9 Recommendations in practice, as 

well as in law, to ensure that the task force’s recommendations are 

being effectively implemented and enforced by all countries. 
11 

The Committee directs the Department to provide a written report to the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on 

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs within 180 days of enactment 

on activities related to preventing the flow of proceeds of corruption 

into the United States, specifically including activities related to 

identifying the beneficial ownership of corporate vehicles, where 

appropriate, and participation in FATF activities and initiatives. 

Stored Value Cards.—The Committee notes that the Department 

recently issued final regulations establishing a regulatory framework for prepaid access payment methods, including stored value 

cards [SVCs], as mandated by the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–24). The 

Committee is aware that a final rule has been promulgated that 

defines prepaid access in the context of funds transmission, rather 

than monetary instruments, allowing the Bank Secrecy Act to 

evolve with technology. This regulation addresses regulatory gaps 

that have resulted from the proliferation of prepaid access innovations over the last 12 years and their increasing use as an accepted 

payment method. The Committee is disappointed, however, that 

the final regulation was issued more than a year after the deadline. 

The Committee is also aware that a separate notice of proposed 

rulemaking to redefine SVCs as monetary instruments for the purposes of international transport reporting is currently under review 

by the Office of Management and Budget but is concerned that it 

is unlikely to be finalized this year. The Committee is frustrated 

about the slow pace of this rulemaking. The Committee stresses 

the importance of finalizing this regulation in order to stop drug 

cartels and other criminal actors from smuggling ill-gotten gains 

across the border and encourages the administration to prioritize 

this critical regulation. The Committee directs the Department, in 

coordination with the Department of Homeland Security, to submit 

a written report to the Committee on the status of the regulation 

on the international transportation of stored value devices not later 

than 30 days after enactment of this act. 

Management of Capital Investments and Information Security.— 

The Treasury Office of Inspector General continues to cite the Department’s management of capital investments and information security as a top management challenge. Treasury is currently planning and managing several capital investments, including the transition to a new telecommunications contract, the implementation of 

enhanced information security requirements, and a modernization 

of systems supporting the implementation of the Bank Secrecy Act. 

The Committee recognizes efforts the Department has made to emphasize capital investment management Department-wide. 

The Committee directs the Department to continue improving 

the management of capital investments, specifically focusing on integrating all of the Department’s bureaus into improvement efforts 

and institutionalizing improvements so that taxpayers will benefit 

from better management of future capital projects. The Committee 

notes that section 117 of the bill requires the Secretary of the 

Treasury to develop an annual Capital Investment Plan, to be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 

House of Representatives within 30 days following submission of 

the President’s annual budget request. The Committee directs the 
12 

Office of the Chief Information Officer to ensure that adequate resources are devoted both to projects in the capital phase and to 

proper maintenance and modernization of existing systems and to 

ensure that all projects are tracked properly and described completely in the annual Capital Investment Plan. 

DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $3,992,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 

established this account, which is authorized to be used by or on 

behalf of Treasury bureaus at the Secretary’s discretion to modernize business processes and increase efficiency through technology investments, as well as other activities that involve more 

than one Treasury bureau or Treasury’s interface with other Government agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not recommend any new funding for Department-wide systems and capital investments programs [DSCIP] for 

fiscal year 2012 in accordance with the budget request. The recommendation is $3,992,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level. 

The Committee notes that the DSCIP account has been utilized 

to fund a wide variety of multi-year initiatives, many of which are 

ongoing despite the lack of need for new resources for fiscal year 

2012. Given the complexity of these initiatives, the bill includes 

language in section 117 directing the Department of the Treasury 

to submit an annual Capital Investment Plan to the Committees on 

Appropriations within 30 days after the President’s budget submission. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $29,641,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 29,855,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 29,641,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General 

[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989. 

The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the Secretary and Congress 

fully and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs and operations. The audit 

function provides program audit, contract audit, and financial 
13 

statement audit services. Contract audits provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and 

settlement of contracts. Program audits review and audit all facets 

of agency operations. Financial statement audits assess whether financial statements fairly present the agency’s financial condition 

and results of operations, the adequacy of accounting controls, and 

compliance with laws and regulations. These audits contribute significantly to improved financial management by helping Treasury 

managers identify improvements needed in their accounting and 

internal control systems. The evaluations function reviews program 

performance and issues critical to the mission of the Department. 

The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $29,641,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General. This 

amount is a decrease of $214,000 to the budget request and equal 

to the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. The Committee directs that 

the office shall focus resources, when practical, on audits of the 

Bank Secrecy Act Information Technology Modernization project 

currently being planned and implemented by Treasury’s Financial 

Crimes Enforcement Network. The Committee directs that the Inspector General shall submit a written report to the Committee regarding this project, including contractor oversight and progress regarding budget and schedule, on March 31, 2012 and semiannually 

thereafter. In addition, the Committee directs the Inspector General to perform audits, when resources allow, on Treasury’s antimoney laundering and terrorist financing activities, capital investment spending and planning, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, and areas identified by the Inspector General as presenting a high risk to taxpayer-funded spending. 

TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $151,696,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 157,831,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 151,696,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration [TIGTA] 

was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 

(Public Law 105–206). TIGTA was created to provide independent 

audit and investigative services necessary to improve the quality 

and credibility of oversight of the Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. 

TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to assess 

the operations and programs of the IRS and related entities, the 

IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief Counsel to (1) promote 

the economic, efficient and effective administration of the Nation’s 

tax laws and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS programs 

and operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve fraud and 
14 

other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these programs 

and operations, and keep the Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of these issues and the progress made in resolving 

them. TIGTA reviews existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to the programs and operations of the IRS and related entities and makes recommendations concerning the impact 

of such legislation and regulations on the economy and efficiency 

in the administration of programs and operations of the IRS and 

related entities. The audit function provides program audit, limited 

contract audit, and financial audit services. Program audits review 

and audit all facets of the IRS and related entities in an effort to 

improve IRS systems and operations, while ensuring fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers. Contract audits focus on invoices/ 

vouchers submitted to the IRS to determine whether charges are 

valid and to identify erroneous and improper payments. The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving IRS programs and operations 

and protects the IRS and related entities against external attempts 

to corrupt or threaten the administration of the tax laws. 

During fiscal year 2010, TIGTA’s combined audit and investigative efforts recovered, protected, and identified monetary benefits 

totaling more than $8,600,000,000 and identified cost savings of 

$2,820,000,000. TIGTA’s Office of Audit completed 129 reports and 

its Office of Investigations closed 3,743 investigations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $151,696,000 for 

the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This 

amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$6,135,000 below the budget request. The Committee appreciates 

the challenges TIGTA faces in adapting its oversight activities to 

address increasingly complex and high-risk issues associated with 

IRS operations, including detection and investigation of fraud and 

electronic crime, review of procurement activities, and safeguarding 

of taxpayer privacy. The Committee recognizes that growth in the 

size and workload of the IRS generates concomitant increased work 

for TIGTA. 

The Committee commends TIGTA for its ongoing review of the 

IRS’s business systems modernization program and other information technology projects. The Committee shares TIGTA’s ongoing 

concern that the IRS is developing and launching its modernized 

systems without adequately contemplating the security implications. The Committee also acknowledges the critical importance of 

the priorities TIGTA has identified in its strategic plan, including 

adapting to the IRS’s continuously evolving operations and mitigating intensified risks associated with modernization, security, addressing the tax gap, and human capital challenges facing the IRS. 

In addition, TIGTA plays a pivotal role in responding to threats 

and attacks against IRS employees, property, and sensitive information. 

The Committee appreciates and expects TIGTA’s continued vigilance in monitoring IRS efforts to implement the 56 tax provisions 

of the Recovery Act. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act (Public Law 111–148) represents the largest set of tax law 
15 

changes in more than two decades with more than 40 provisions 

that amend the tax code. Despite resource constraints, the Committee strongly urges TIGTA’s vigilant oversight of the IRS’s effective implementation and administration of the myriad new requirements involving taxpayer education and outreach, deliverance of 

tax credits, and development of information technology infrastructure to support all of these areas. 

The Committee would welcome future TIGTA work to evaluate 

the Return Preparer Program; examine ‘‘phishing’’ schemes and 

other external and electronic attempts that expose taxpayers to 

surrendering private information that could be used for identity 

theft and undermine tax administration; and identify best practices 

and safeguards to reduce and mitigate threats to the security of 

IRS employees and its data infrastructure and facilities. 

SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE TROUBLED ASSET RELIEF

PROGRAM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $36,227,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 47,374,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 41,800,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (Public Law 110–343) 

established the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program [SIGTARP] to perform audits and investigations of the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP]. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $41,800,000 for the SIGTARP for 

fiscal year 2012. The recommendation is $5,574,000 below the 

budget request because the SIGTARP will be able to utilize carryover balances to fund a portion of fiscal year 2012. This recommendation is $5,573,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level 

because carryover balances are dwindling. The Committee is 

pleased with the quality of the audits and investigations conducted 

by the SIGTARP, particularly with regard to written materials provided to the Congress and the public. 

FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $110,788,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 84,297,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 110,788,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau 

within the Treasury Department’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, is the largest overt collector of financial intelligence in the United States. FinCEN’s mission is to safeguard the 

financial system from the abuses of financial crime, including terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit activity. 
16 

FinCEN accomplishes its mission by administering the Bank Secrecy Act, a collection of statutes that form the Nation’s anti-money 

laundering/counter-terrorist financing regulatory regime. As the 

delegated administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible for the development and implementation of regulations, 

rules, and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN 

also oversees the work of eight Federal agencies that have been 

delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the financial 

industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act’s requirements. 

FinCEN is responsible for collecting, maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by financial institutions under the 

Bank Secrecy Act through a Government-wide access service. 

FinCEN is the United States’ Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] and 

a founding member of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence 

Units. As the United States’ FIU, FinCEN routinely shares information and cooperates with other FIUs around the world to address the global problems of terrorist financing, money laundering, 

and other illicit activity. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $110,788,000 for the Financial 

Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. This amount is equal to 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $26,491,000 above the budget request. The Committee rejects the proposal to fund a portion 

of FinCEN’s needs in fiscal year 2012 using proceeds from the 

Treasury Forfeiture Fund. The amount recommended above the request reflects the Committee’s recommendation to fund FinCEN exclusively through the account designated for FinCEN Salaries and 

Expenses. 

State and Local Access to Bank Secrecy Act [BSA] Data and Intelligence Support to External Agencies.—The Committee rejects the 

administration’s proposal to decrease FinCEN’s funding by 

$2,319,000 by reducing State and local and intelligence community 

access to BSA information. The data compiled and analyzed by 

FinCEN is a critical tool for investigating serious financial crimes, 

including money laundering, mortgage fraud, drug trafficking, and 

terrorist financing. Law enforcement agencies at all levels of government use the database not only in identifying, investigating, 

and ultimately prosecuting criminals, but also in preventing and 

deterring crime. FinCEN’s support of State and local law enforcement and the intelligence community multiplies the strength of 

force of all levels of government in fighting such crimes. The Committee’s recommended funding level is intended to ensure that BSA 

data is accessible to the appropriate State and local law enforcement personnel, field representatives, and the intelligence community. 

Information Technology Modernization.—The Committee recommendation supports FinCEN’s efforts to modernize the technical 

environment for implementation of the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA]. 

The modernization will re-engineer the BSA data architecture, update antiquated infrastructure required to support data capture 

and dissemination, implement innovative Web services and enhanced electronic filing, and provide enhanced analytical tools. This 

system is used by banks, Federal law enforcement, State and local 
17 

law enforcement, and other Federal intelligence agencies to report, 

gather, and analyze data to identify money laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and vulnerabilities in the financial industry. 

The previous infrastructure is outdated and limits the capabilities 

of these users, which ultimately limits the capability of the Treasury and its partners to pursue money laundering, terrorist financing, and tax evasion. 

The Committee is pleased with the steps FinCEN has taken to 

strengthen its acquisition and project management competencies 

and directs the agency to continue to pursue employee education 

and training efforts in this area, including training on proper budget execution practices. The Committee also directs FinCEN to place 

a top priority on contractor oversight and on involving its wide variety of stakeholders in the development of the modernized system. 

FinCEN is directed to continue to submit a semiannual report to 

the Committee on Appropriations summarizing the agency’s 

progress regarding the modernization effort, including milestones 

planned and achieved, progress on cost and schedule, management 

of contractor oversight, strategies to involve stakeholders, and acquisition management efforts. 

The Committee also directs FinCEN to focus efforts on improving 

the completeness and reliability of BSA data in accordance with 

recommendations by the Treasury Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office. The Committee notes that while a 

new BSA infrastructure will improve the capabilities of processing 

and analyzing BSA data, the accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of 

the data itself will ultimately determine the effectiveness of the 

system and related processes. 

TREASURY FORFEITURE FUND

(RESCISSION)

The Committee recommends a rescission of $750,000,000 of unobligated balances in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $232,786,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 218,805,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 217,805,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In 1940, the Department of the Treasury established the Fiscal 

Service, which consisted of the Bureau of Accounts, the Bureau of 

the Public Debt, and the Office of the Treasurer. A 1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service created the Bureau of Government Financial Operations, which was formed from a merger of the Bureau 

of Accounts and most functions of the Office of the Treasurer. In 

1984, the Bureau of Government Financial Operations was renamed the Financial Management Service [FMS]. 

FMS implements payment policy and procedures for Federal 

agencies, issues and distributes payments, promotes the use of electronics in the payment process, and assists agencies in converting 
18 

payments from paper checks to electronic funds transfer [EFT]. 

FMS provides debt collection operational services to client agencies, 

implements collections policy, regulations, standards, and procedures for the Federal Government, and assists agencies in converting collections from paper to electronic media. 

FMS provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing services to the Federal Government and the Government’s agents who 

participate in the payments and collections process by generating 

a series of daily, monthly, quarterly, and annual Government-wide 

reports. FMS also works directly with agencies to help reconcile reporting differences. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $217,805,000 for salaries and expenses for FMS. This amount is $1,000,000 below the budget request and $14,981,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. An 

additional amount of $97,052,000 is also estimated to be available 

to FMS from reimbursable resources for debt collection activities. 

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $100,798,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 97,878,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 99,878,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the Treasury 

and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting the public. 

TTB enforces certain Federal laws and regulations relating to alcohol and tobacco. TTB works directly and in cooperation with others to maintain a sound revenue management and collection system that continues to reduce the regulatory burden, improve service, collect the revenue due, and prevent tax evasion and other 

criminal conduct. TTB is also responsible for preventing consumer 

deception, ensuring that regulated products comply with Federal 

commodity, safety, and distribution requirements, and providing 

customer service. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $99,878,000 for TTB for fiscal year 

2012. This amount is $2,000,000 above the budget request and 

$920,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 

The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 for the costs 

of special law enforcement agents to target tobacco smuggling and 

other criminal diversion activities. The Committee directs the Department and TTB to place a high priority on conducting robust 

criminal enforcement activities at TTB. 
19 

UNITED STATES MINT

UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic 

and investment products, and provides for security and asset protection. Public Law 104–52 established the U.S. Mint Public Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund, and 

the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits annual 

audited business-type financial statements to the Secretary of the 

Treasury and to Congress in support of the operations of the revolving fund. 

The operations of the Mint are divided into two major activities: 

Manufacturing and sales (including circulating coinage and numismatic and investment products); and protection. The Mint is credited with receipts from its circulating coinage operations, equal to 

the full cost of producing and distributing coins that are put into 

circulation, including depreciation of the Mint’s plant and equipment on the basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay 

for the costs of the Mint’s operations, which include the costs of 

production and distribution. The difference between the face value 

of the coins and these costs is a profit, which is deposited as seigniorage to the general fund. In fiscal year 2010, the Mint transferred $388,000,000 to the general fund. Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint’s capital acquisitions is recorded as budget authority in the year that funds are obligated for this purpose and as receipts over the life of the asset. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a spending level of $20,000,000 for 

circulating coinage and protective service capital investments for 

the Mint. This amount is a decrease of $6,700,000 below the fiscal 

year 2011 enacted level and is equal to the budget request. 

BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT

ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $174,635,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 165,635,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 165,635,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The Public Debt 

Service took general charge of debt operations including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement, which had been conducted by several independent divisions within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the Reorganization Act of 1939, the 

President created the Bureau of the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30, 1940 (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings 
20 

Bonds Division, a separate organization, was made part of the Bureau. 

This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all public 

debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. savings-type 

securities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $165,635,000 for the Bureau of the 

Public Debt for fiscal year 2012. This amount is a decrease of 

$9,000,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and is equal to 

the budget request. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $226,546,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 227,259,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 200,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 

investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments, deposits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing community development financial institutions [CDFIs] through the CDFI 

program. CDFIs include community development banks, credit 

unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, and microloan 

funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in lending and 

investment for affordable housing, small business, and community 

development within underserved communities. The CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program, which provides a financial incentive to insured depository institutions to undertake community development financing activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the CDFI Fund, 

which is $26,546,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$27,259,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee supports funding for the CDFI Fund because of 

the program’s unique ability to leverage private sector investment 

in community development projects such as affordable housing, retail development, and community centers, as well as lending to 

small businesses. Funding for the CDFI Fund expands the power 

of CDFIs to improve urban and rural communities through sound, 

but patient investment. With just a small amount of seed financing 

from the CDFI Fund, CDFIs can transform communities. CDFIs 

often provide the ‘‘last mile’’ of financing to our Nation’s most challenged areas. CDFIs also provide banking services to the unbanked and others targeted by predatory lenders. Nationwide in 

2010, CDFIs leveraged an average of $13 for every Federal dollar 

invested and Federal grants helped create or maintain over 80,000 

jobs. 

Bank on USA.—The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the 

Bank on USA program to promote access to affordable financial 
21 

services and basic consumer credit products for households without 

access to such products and services. These households face a number of problems, including high fees for alternative financial services such as check-cashing, barriers to saving and building credit, 

and increased exposure to risks such as fraud and theft. Many of 

these households also lack access to reasonably priced short-term 

consumer credit to meet emergency or regular needs, often turning 

to payday loans, refund anticipation loans, pawn shops and other 

high-priced alternatives for credit needs. The Committee directs 

the CDFI Fund to submit a detailed spending plan on the Bank on 

USA program to the Committee within 120 days of enactment. 

Healthy Food Financing Initiative.—The Committee recommends 

$22,000,000 for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. The goal of 

the initiative is to increase the availability of affordable, healthy 

foods in underserved urban and rural communities. Many of these 

communities are only served by fast food restaurants and convenience stores that offer few healthy food options. Recommended 

funding will increase the availability of affordable financing for grocery store development, supplies and equipment to improve food 

production technology, and improvements and modernization of 

food distribution mechanisms and infrastructure. 

Native Programs.—The Committee recommends a set-aside of 

$12,000,000 for grants, loans, and technical assistance and training 

programs to benefit Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native 

Hawaiian communities in the coordination of development strategies, increased access to equity investments, and loans for development activities. 

The Committee understands that many CDFIs are experiencing 

difficulty obtaining non-Federal funding due to the economic downturn. The Committee recommends continuing the temporary waiver 

of matching fund requirements for CDFI programs so that CDFIs 

can continue to invest in and assist underserved communities during the economic crisis. The Committee intends to reinstate matching fund requirements when capital markets return to normal function. 

BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the sole 

manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years. The origin of the BEP is traced to an act of Congress passed on February 

25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury 

to issue a new currency—United States notes. While this law was 

the cornerstone authority for the operations of the engraving and 

printing division of the Treasury for many years, it was not until 

an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100, that the Congress first referred to this division as the ‘‘Bureau of Engraving and Printing.’’ 

The Bureau’s status as a distinct bureau within the Department of 

the Treasury was solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 

30 Stat. 18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the 

immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in 31 U.S.C. 

303. 
22 

The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve 

notes and other security documents issued by the Federal Government. 

The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means of a 

revolving fund established in accordance with the provisions of 

Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), which requires the 

BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed. The BEP is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital equipment and provide 

for working capital needs. 

No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities of the 

BEP. 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] administers the Nation’s tax 

laws and collects the revenue that funds more than 96 percent of 

the Federal Government’s operations and public services. The IRS’s 

mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by helping 

them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The IRS focuses 

its enforcement programs toward increasing voluntary tax compliance by deterring taxpayers inclined to evade their tax obligations 

while vigorously pursuing those who violate the law. Each year, 

IRS employees deal directly with more American taxpayers than 

any other institution, public or private. 

During fiscal year 2010, the IRS processed more than 230 million 

returns, provided over 109 million refunds, and collected over 

$2,345,000,000,000 for the Federal Government. Of the 141 million 

individual income tax returns processed, over 69 percent were filed 

electronically. This marks a significant increase in electronically 

filed returns compared to the 31 percent in fiscal year 2001. The 

IRS provided taxpayer assistance through more than 305 million 

visits to the IRS.gov Web site, over 35 million automated telephone 

calls, and 6.4 million walk-in Taxpayer Assistance Center contacts 

and through nearly 36.7 million telephone calls. The IRS employed 

a total work force of 95,425, including seasonal and part-time employees. In fiscal year 2010, the average cost of collecting $100 in 

tax revenue was 53 cents. An important focus for the IRS in recent 

years has been to undertake a major modernization of its systems, 

including expanding its Internet services, and business operations 

to better serve taxpayers and enforce the law. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $11,663,042,000 for the 

Internal Revenue Service for fiscal year 2012. This is a decrease of 

$458,788,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$1,620,865,000 below the budget request. 

Tax Gap.—The vast majority of Americans pay their fair share 

of taxes, yet there is still a ‘‘tax gap.’’ The tax gap is the difference 

between what taxpayers are supposed to pay and what they actually do pay. 
23 

To reduce the $345,000,000,000 gross tax gap, experts recommend a number of approaches. These include improving information reporting, improving taxpayer services, increasing research 

on noncompliance, improving the partnership between the IRS and 

the tax administration community, and leveraging technology to 

improve IRS’s systems. The Committee supports all of these approaches in combination. 

Tax Compliance.—The Committee remains concerned that absent 

a better understanding of the current sources of noncompliance, efforts to improve compliance may be hampered, misdirected, and 

difficult to measure. To gain meaningful insights into taxpayer behavior, the Committee strongly supports the work of the National 

Research Program. 

Operating Plan and Notification.—In addition to the normal operating plan requirements detailed in the introduction in this report, the Committee directs the IRS to include details on any 

planned reorganization, job reductions or increases to offices or activities within the agency, and modifications to any service or enforcement activity. The Committee also directs the IRS to obtain 

and include comments of the IRS Oversight Board as part of its operating plan submission to the Committee. Further, the IRS should 

promptly notify the Committee and the IRS Oversight Board of any 

substantial changes to these plans. 

Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.—Given the remote distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in receiving 

needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line, it is imperative 

that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Centers in these States are 

fully staffed and capable of resolving taxpayer problems of the most 

complex nature. The Committee directs the IRS to continue to staff 

each Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in each of these States 

with a Collection Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical 

Advisor in addition to the current complement of office staff. Staffing should be increased if, as the result of the IRS Restructuring 

and Reform Act of 1998, subsequent legislation, or other factors, 

the volume of cases or their complexity increases. 

TAXPAYER SERVICES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $2,274,272,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 2,345,133,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,195,522,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Taxpayer Services appropriation provides for taxpayer services, including forms and publications; processing tax returns and 

related documents; filing and account services; taxpayer advocacy 

services; and assisting taxpayers to understand their tax obligations, correctly file their returns, and pay taxes due in a timely 

manner. 
24 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,195,522,000 for Taxpayer Services, which is $78,750,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level, 

and $149,611,000 below the budget request. Bill language is included providing not less than $6,100,000 for the tax counseling for 

the elderly program, not less than $10,000,000 for low-income taxpayer clinic [LITC] grants, not less than $12,000,000, to be available for 2 years, for a community volunteer income tax assistance 

[VITA] matching grant program for tax return preparation assistance and $207,738,000 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service. 

The Committee recognizes the significant service challenges requiring rapid implementation that the IRS has faced as a result of 

recent tax law provisions designed to assist taxpayers in difficult 

economic times. 

The Committee acknowledges that telephonic access to the IRS 

is critical to promoting voluntary compliance. In recent years, the 

IRS has experienced a decline in its level of service on its toll-free 

taxpayer service line due to increased volume. In the 2005 to 2007 

span, about 57 million calls were received each year, and the level 

of service stood at 82 percent. When the call volume spiked in 2008 

as a result of inquiries about the economic stimulus payments, the 

level of service slipped to 53 percent. As a result of IRS initiatives, 

the level of service rebounded to around 72 percent in the last 2 

years. Call volume in these past 2 years has been around 77.5 million per year, representing an over 35 percent uptick from 5 years 

ago. The average waiting time for call response has been longer— 

11 minutes on hold in fiscal year 2010 compared to 4.5 minutes in 

fiscal year 2007. 

The Committee encourages the IRS to continue to make steady 

progress in its telephonic response performance and work to sustain taxpayer service delivery in an atmosphere of fiscal austerity 

and budgetary rollbacks. 

E-Filing.—The Committee is heartened by the IRS’s improved 

performance in increasing the number of tax filers who submit 

their returns electronically and without additional cost. Electronic 

filing benefits taxpayers and promotes effective tax administration 

because it decreases processing errors, expedites processing and 

payment of refunds, and allows the IRS to efficiently maintain upto-date records. It costs the IRS 17 cents to process an electronically filed return, compared to $3.66 to process a paper filed return. 

The Committee acknowledges that in the 2011 filing season, IRS 

achieved a major milestone as it passed the 1 billion mark for individual electronically filed tax returns processed safely and securely 

since the program was launched as a pilot test in 1986 and expanded nationwide in 1990. Prior to the April 18 deadline, IRS efile surpassed another record with more than 100 million individual tax returns e-filed during the 2011 filing season. Currently, 

more than 79 percent of taxpayers have used e-file to submit their 

tax returns so far this year. 

In 2009, Congress mandated use of e-filing by all tax preparers 

who file 10 or more tax returns. IRS is phasing in the requirement, 

with tax preparers who filed 100 or more returns in 2011 obligated 
25 

to e-file, and for 2012, tax preparers who file 11 or more returns 

required to e-file. 

Impact on IRS of Healthcare Implementation.—As a prime example of the expanding tasks tied to legislative enactments, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148) includes several provisions that will significantly impact the workload of the IRS over the course of the next several years. IRS’s new 

responsibilities include implementing a Medicare payroll tax on investment income, collecting an excise tax on high-cost insurance 

plans, and delivering hundreds of billions in subsidies for low-income Americans to buy insurance. 

The Committee strongly urges the administration, the Secretary 

of the Treasury, and the IRS Commissioner to evaluate the impact 

of healthcare mandates on the IRS’s overall mission and take all 

appropriate actions to prevent decline in the quality and effectiveness of service or taxpayer perception. The Committee directs the 

IRS to specifically identify in its fiscal year 2013 budget submission 

and operating plan any proposed increases in spending to be designated to implement the healthcare mandates, as well as any proposed changes in spending or prioritization in other mission-critical 

IRS programs as a result of the healthcare responsibilities. 

The Committee directs the IRS to submit to the Committee, 

within 30 days of enactment, a detailed table and explanatory information reflecting the amounts, dates of receipt, and use of funds 

made available to the IRS by transfer from the Department of 

Health and Human Services for purposes of carrying out the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148) and 

the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public 

Law 111–152). 

Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.—In response to the Committee’s 

directive in the fiscal year 2006 Treasury Appropriations Act, the 

IRS, in consultation with the IRS Oversight Board and the National Taxpayer Advocate, developed a ‘‘Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint’’ to institute a 5-year strategic plan for taxpayer services. The 

Committee expects the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint to be an integral and guiding component of delivering services. The Committee supports ongoing efforts to conduct research on taxpayer 

needs and taxpayer service performance. 

The Committee directs the IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and 

the National Taxpayer Advocate to continue to submit to Congress 

annual updates to the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint identifying 

any changes to its strategic plan for taxpayer service, including the 

results of any new research and relevant findings, and any open 

issues requiring additional research. 

Benefits of National Research Program.—The Committee believes 

that the IRS will deliver better taxpayer service, achieve improved 

compliance, and reduce the tax gap if taxpayer behavior is better 

understood and applied research is integrated into the development 

of taxpayer service and enforcement initiatives. Toward that end, 

the Committee supports the work of the National Taxpayer Advocate and the IRS Office of Research to examine factors that influence taxpayer compliance behavior, including how and the extent 

to which various factors influence such behavior, and how the es-
26 

tablishment of a cognitive learning and applied research laboratory 

might facilitate continued evaluation. 

Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.—The Volunteer Income Tax Assistance [VITA] program is an important aspect of IRS 

efforts to provide income tax preparation assistance programs for 

low-income taxpayers. 

A grant program established in 2008 provides direct funds to enable VITA programs to extend services to underserved populations 

and hardest-to-reach areas, both urban and nonurban, as well as 

to increase the capacity to file returns electronically, heighten quality control, enhance training of volunteers, and significantly improve the accuracy rate of returns prepared by VITA sites. 

The Committee notes that of 321 eligible applicants in 2011, 179 

organizations were awarded VITA grants to serve 3,454 sites 

across the country at which 964,297 returns were prepared. The 

Committee recognizes that the applications for these grants far exceed the available resources. 

The Committee provides that, within funds provided, $12,000,000 

shall be available for 2 years for exclusive use as part of continuing 

a matching grant program established and administered by the 

IRS, in consultation with the Taxpayer Advocate Service, for not 

for profit organizations which provide volunteer income tax return 

preparation services for lower income individual taxpayers. 

The Committee strongly urges the IRS to make every effort to 

expand the quantity and funding level of VITA grants focused on 

serving persons with disabilities proportional to the growing disability population requiring tax assistance. The Committee understands that entities that are currently increasing their outreach efforts to better serve the needs of the disability population have experienced difficulty in applying for Federal grant assistance due to 

a lack of resources at the local level needed to complete the application. The Committee urges the IRS to allow national coalitions responsible for the coordination of local community partnerships focused specifically on the expanded provision of tax services for individuals with disabilities to compete in the VITA community matching grant processes. 

Fraudulent Abuse of Tax Credits.—Congress has enacted a series 

of legislative provisions that have enabled first-time homebuyers to 

claim a refundable credit on their 2008, 2009, or 2010 individual 

Federal tax returns. In addition, the Residential Energy Tax Credit 

program rewards homeowners for making eligible energy-saving 

improvements to a principal residence. 

TIGTA has released a series of disturbing investigative reports 

describing a significant amount of fraudulent and erroneous payments in both the First-Time Homebuyer and the Residential Energy tax credit programs, including claims from ineligible incarcerated persons. The Committee directs the IRS to intensify its scrutiny of questionable claims for these and other credits, continue to 

improve the documentation requirements to substantiate eligibility, 

institute effective filters to screen-out ineligible claimants, and employ verification methods for distributing tax credits to diminish 

the incidence of fraud and erroneous payments in these beneficial 

programs. 
27 

ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $5,492,992,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 5,966,619,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,228,613,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Enforcement appropriation provides for the examination of 

tax returns, both domestic and international; the administrative 

and judicial settlement of taxpayer appeals of examination findings; technical rulings; monitoring employee pension plans; determining qualifications of organizations seeking tax-exempt status; 

examining tax returns of exempt organizations; enforcing statutes 

relating to detection and investigation of criminal violations of the 

internal revenue laws; identifying underreporting of tax obligations; securing unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,228,613,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2012. This amount is $264,379,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $738,006,000 below the budget 

request. Bill language is included to transfer not less than 

$60,257,000 to the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement 

[ICDE] program. 

The Committee supports the use and prioritization of enforcement resources to address business and individual international 

tax compliance by building upon steady multi-year investments in 

initiatives and activities to reduce offshore tax evasion, including 

the new special voluntary disclosure program. The Committee further endorses proposals to reduce the reporting compliance tax gap 

through increased examinations of business and high-income individual returns, increased coverage of the Automated Underreporter 

[AUR] Program, and increased audits involving flow-through entities. 

National Research Program.—As noted previously, the Committee strongly supports the work of the National Research Program [NRP] to increase understanding of the tax gap. The Committee acknowledges that the IRS and others have expressed concerns with the certainty of the overall tax gap estimate in part because some aspects of the estimate rely on data from the 1970s and 

1980s and in other areas, no estimates are available. The Committee agrees with GAO, TIGTA, the National Taxpayer Advocate, 

and the IRS Oversight Board, which have all recommended greater 

and more frequent data collection and studies of the tax gap including the portion of the tax gap attributable to international transactions. 

Misclassification of Contractors.—The Committee continues to be 

highly concerned with the misclassification of workers as independent contractors rather than as employees. This 

misclassification leads to the underreporting and underpayment of 

employment and payroll taxes by employers and individuals, which 

accounts for a substantial portion of the gross tax gap. The Committee is encouraged by IRS actions to develop an agency-wide plan 

and a worker classification team to assist external stakeholders. 
28 

The Committee understands that the IRS has begun the random 

sampling selection to study worker classification and other employment tax issues, including the safe harbor provision. The Committee looks forward to reviewing the findings once the 3 years of 

examinations are complete. 

The Committee is concerned that staffing within the IRS’s SS– 

8 program, responsible for making determinations as to a worker’s 

Federal employment tax status, has not kept pace with the record 

and sustained SS–8 filings during the past three filing seasons. 

The Committee believes that the IRS SS–8 program is critical to 

ensuring that workers are classified correctly, identifying leads for 

employment tax exams and criminal investigations, and combating 

the underreporting of employment taxes that contributes significantly to the tax gap. The Committee believes it is crucial, given 

the growing workload, that the IRS maintain sufficient staffing at 

SS–8 processing locations. Prior to making any staffing reductions 

at the SS–8 processing locations, the Committee directs the IRS to 

provide a report to the Committee that details the past 5 years of 

staffing levels and employee productivity, SS–8 receipt volumes, 

and rationale for the proposed workforce changes. 

OPERATIONS SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,075,716,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 4,620,526,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,893,216,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall planning and direction of the IRS including shared service support related to facilities services, rent payments, printing, postage, and security; other support functions that are considered overhead but essential to the successful operation of IRS programs including resources for headquarters management activities, including IRSwide support for strategic planning, communications and liaison, finance, human resources, EEO and diversity; research and statistics 

of income; and necessary expenses for information systems and 

telecommunication support, including developmental information 

systems and operational information systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,893,216,000 for Operations Support for fiscal year 2012. This amount is $182,500,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $727,310,000 below the budget 

request. Bill language is included allowing up to $250,000,000 of 

these funds to remain available until September 30, 2013, for information technology support and not to exceed $1,000,000 to remain 

available until September 30, 2014, for research; not less than 

$2,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Oversight Board; and $25,000 

for official reception and representation expenses. 

Information Technology [IT] Management and Oversight.—The 

IRS has made significant strides in improving the management 

and oversight of its business systems modernization [BSM] program. The IRS needs to vigilantly address major systemic problems 

with its non-BSM portfolio of information technology projects. 
29 

TIGTA has identified problems in several areas of IT management 

and oversight including, but not limited to, such areas as classification of investment projects, oversight and governance structure, 

risk management, contingency planning, and contractor performance and accountability. The IRS funds 155 IT systems. Of these, 

31 are major systems each having an overall life-cycle cost of greater than $50,000,000 or an annual budget of greater than 

$5,000,000. 

The Committee shares the concerns, cited by TIGTA and GAO, 

that the IRS lacks a comprehensive integrated system to provide 

accurate, relevant, and timely financial and operating data that 

can be used to evaluate performance measures, productivity, and 

the associated costs of IRS programs. This deficiency hinders IRS 

management decisionmaking as well as Congressional oversight of 

progress in achieving program goals. 

Although some progress has been made, the Committee is particularly concerned about chronic material weaknesses in IRS’s internal controls over information security that expose systems to serious risk. The Committee expects the IRS to improve its efforts to 

fully address information security vulnerabilities, including 

promptly instituting corrective action in response to recommendations of TIGTA and GAO in this area. 

The Committee expects the IRS to monitor its entire non-BSM IT 

portfolio (regardless of tier classification) and make any changes as 

necessary to ensure that each project has— 

—been properly classified for investment decision and management purposes; 

— the appropriate governance structure in place (such as an executive steering committee); 

—a risk management plan; 

—a contingency plan in case of breakdowns or failures in scheduled deliverables; 

—adequate provisions in the contracts to ensure penalties and 

repayment to the agency if performance is not met; 

—adequate contractor staffing and management in place to fulfill 

the contract terms and deliverables; and 

—been certified by the head of the relevant IRS business unit 

that the project is deemed necessary for its operations and 

meets its requirements. 

The Committee directs the administration and the IRS to include 

within the fiscal year 2013 budget request a proposed long-term 

multiyear funding strategy and timetable within the Operations 

Support account to upgrade and modernize the aging legacy IRS information technology infrastructure. The Committee further directs 

the IRS to incorporate in its 2013 budget justification materials 

submitted to the Committee up-to-date cost and schedule performance measures for all major systems funded within the Operations 

Support account, as it has traditionally done for the Business Systems Modernization components. 

BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $263,369,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 333,600,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 330,210,000 
30 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Business Systems Modernization account provides resources 

for revamping business practices and acquiring new technology. 

The IRS has undertaken a multi-year, multi-billion dollar effort to 

migrate from its antiquated legacy system to bring the IRS tax administration system to a level of public and private sector best 

practices. The IRS is using a formal methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, and evaluate its portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This methodology is designed to enforce a 

documented, repeatable, and measurable process for managing investments throughout their life cycle. The process is reviewed by 

the Government Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of 

the submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan 

approval process prior to the use of appropriated funds continues 

for fiscal year 2012. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $330,210,000 for Business Systems 

Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2012. This amount is 

$66,841,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$3,390,000 below the budget request. The Committee encourages 

the IRS to tap resources available through user fee revenues to 

augment the direct discretionary appropriation for the BSM program. 

The Committee continues to believe that BSM is the IRS’s highest management and administrative priority. As one of the Federal 

Government’s largest, most visible, and sensitive modernization efforts, managing the risks inherent in BSM require vigilant management attention. To the IRS’s credit, the program has made 

steady progress over the past few years. The replacement of the 

aging, vintage 1969 individual master file will permit daily, rather 

than weekly, updating of individual tax accounts. 

Completion of the core taxpayer account database, with anticipated deployment for the 2012 filing season is the cornerstone of 

modernization and a foundational prerequisite upon which the success of other major initiatives depends. The daily processing cycle 

is expected to generate more timely, accurate, and complete data 

resulting in more rapid direct deposit of refunds for electronic filers, faster account adjustments, and expedited resolution of taxpayer account issues and transactions. It will fundamentally transform the IRS’s relationship with its accounts, and promote opportunities for both taxpayer service delivery and enforcement. 

The Committee remains concerned that IRS systems modernization, by its nature, is a high-risk endeavor, and appreciates that 

the IRS has, in recent years, satisfied the majority of developmental milestones planned for completion early, under budget, or 

within 10 percent of cost and schedule estimates. Because of the 

tendency for certain projects or components to exceed schedule and 

cost estimates, the Committee urges IRS management to maintain 

close routine scrutiny of cost and schedule factors. 
31 

HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $15,481,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 18,029,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,481,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides operating funds to administer the 

advance payment feature of a refundable trade adjustment assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The tax credit program 

was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–210) and 

became effective in August 2003. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $15,481,000 for the 

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration in fiscal year 2012. 

This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$2,548,000 below the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

The Committee has included five administrative provisions carried in prior appropriations acts as follows: 

Section 101 continues a provision allowing the IRS to transfer up 

to 5 percent of any appropriation made available to the agency in 

fiscal year 2012 to any other IRS account, with the exception of the 

Enforcement account, which is limited to 3 percent. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee’s reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report. 

Section 102 continues a provision maintaining a training program in taxpayers’ rights and cross-cultural relations. 

Section 103 continues a provision requiring the IRS to institute 

and enforce policies and procedures, which will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information. 

Section 104 continues a provision directing that funds shall be 

available for improved facilities and increased staffing to support 

a 1–800 help line service for taxpayers. 

Section 105 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

in this act to enter into, renew, extend, administer, implement, enforce, provide oversight of, or make any payment related to any 

qualified tax collection contract. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

The Committee includes 12 administrative provisions carried 

over from prior appropriations acts. The administrative provisions 

are as follows: 

Section 106 authorizes certain basic services within the Treasury 

Department in fiscal year 2012, including purchase of uniforms; 

maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign countries; and contracts 

with the Department of State for health and medical services to 

employees and their dependents serving in foreign countries. 

Section 107 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Special Inspector 
32 

General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the Public 

Debt appropriations under certain circumstances. 

Section 108 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration under certain circumstances. 

Section 109 requires that the purchase of law enforcement vehicles be consistent with departmental vehicle management principles. 

Section 110 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1 Federal 

Reserve Note. 

Section 111 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to transfer 

funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management Service, 

to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the costs of debt 

collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to the Salaries and 

Expenses account from debt collections received in the Debt Collection Fund. 

Section 112 extends the authority to conduct a personnel management demonstration project. 

Section 113 requires prior approval for the construction and operation of a museum by the United States Mint. 

Section 114 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint and 

the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval of 

the committees of jurisdiction. 

Section 115 authorizes the Department’s intelligence activities. 

Section 116 permits the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to use $5,000 from the Industrial Revolving Fund for reception and representation expenses. 

Section 117 requires the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an 

annual Capital Investment Plan. 
(33) 

TITLE II 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS 

APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $450,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 450,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 450,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the compensation of the President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 102. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for 

compensation of the President, including an expense allowance of 

$50,000. This is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

the same as the budget request. The expense account is for official 

use as authorized by title 3, United States Code, and is not considered taxable to the President. The bill specifies that any unused 

amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent with 31 U.S.C. 

1552. 

THE WHITE HOUSE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $58,435,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 58,374,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 57,851,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ account of The White House provides staff assistance and administrative services for the direct 

support of the President. The office also serves as the President’s 

representative before the media. In accordance with 3 U.S.C. 105, 

the office also supports and assists the activities of the spouse of 

the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $57,851,000 for 

The White House, Salaries and Expenses. The recommendation is 

$584,000 less than the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and is 

$523,000 less than the budget request. 

The Committee directs the Executive Office of the President to 

allocate sufficient resources to continue the robust operation of the 

Office of National AIDS Policy. The Committee directs the adminis-
34 

tration to continue to coordinate a Government-wide effort to develop and implement a domestic AIDS strategy, including the development of targets for improved prevention and treatment outcomes. 

EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $13,673,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 13,658,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,536,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds provide for the care, maintenance, repair, alteration, 

refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting 

of the White House and the official and ceremonial functions of the 

President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,536,000 for 

the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee recommendation is $137,000 less than the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level and $122,000 less than the budget request. The bill also continues certain restrictions on reimbursable expenses for use of the 

Executive Residence. 

WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $2,001,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 990,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds the repair, alteration, and improvement of 

the Executive Residence at the White House. A separate account 

was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and track expenditures for the capital improvement projects at the Executive Residence at the White House. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $990,000 for 

White House Repair and Restoration, $10,000 less than the budget 

request and $1,011,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,192,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 4,403,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,192,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national economy 

and its various segments, advises the President on economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth and stability, 
35 

appraises economic programs and policies of the Federal Government, and assists in the preparation of the annual Economic Report of the President to Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,192,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This 

amount is $211,000 less than the budget request and is equal to 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND HOMELAND SECURITY COUNCIL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $13,048,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 13,074,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,048,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Security Council advises the President in integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies related to national 

security and the Homeland Security Council advises the President 

in coordinating homeland security-related policies across the Government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,048,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council and the 

Homeland Security Council. This amount is $26,000 less than the 

budget request and equal to the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 

The budget requests that funding for the Homeland Security 

Council, previously funded within The White House Office account, 

be combined with funding for the National Security Council. The 

Committee does not oppose the proposed reorganization and recommends funding for the Homeland Security Council together with 

the National Security Council within a new account titled ‘‘National Security Council and Homeland Security Council.’’ 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $115,049,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 115,848,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 114,908,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Administration’s mission is to provide high-quality, 

cost-effective administrative services to the Executive Office of the 

President. These services, defined by Executive Order 12028 of 

1977, include financial, personnel, library and records services, information management systems support, and general office services. 
36 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $114,908,000 for 

the Office of Administration for fiscal year 2012, a decrease of 

$141,000 to the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $940,000 less 

than the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes $10,670,000 to stabilize and modernize the information technology infrastructure 

within the Executive Office of the President. This funding supports 

the continuation of a major initiative that will refresh the aging information technology infrastructure, strengthen disaster recovery 

and information security capabilities, and transition the Executive 

Office of the President’s communications architecture to integrate 

mobile devices while complying with security and records management requirements. 

The Committee directs the Office of Administration to place a top 

priority on the implementation of comprehensive policies and procedures for the preservation of all records, including electronic 

records such as e-mails, videos, and social networking communication, consistent with the requirements of the Presidential Records 

Act, the Federal Records Act, and other pertinent laws. The Office 

of Administration shall work closely with the National Archives 

and Records Administration [NARA] to ensure the full and complete maintenance and formatting of electronic records that will 

eventually be turned over to NARA. The Committee expects the Office of Administration to keep the Committee fully apprised of 

funding needs related to record preservation and retention. 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $91,750,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 91,660,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 90,833,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and other executive responsibilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $90,833,000 for 

the Office of Management and Budget which is $917,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $827,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee relies on all entities receiving Federal funds, including OMB, to provide detailed information about budget requests and activities conducted using previously appropriated 

funds. The Committee expects OMB to provide timely and complete 

responses to the Committee to all requests for information, including requests related to the budget request for OMB and the Executive Office of the President. 

The Committee directs OMB to submit a written report to the 

Committee within 120 days of enactment detailing the current ca-
37 

pabilities of and deficiencies in the Federal Government’s core 

budgeting system. This system is used Government-wide by all 

Federal agencies for documenting and estimating budget activities, 

ensuring data integrity with other financial and accounting systems, and transmitting a detailed budget request to the Congress. 

A robust system is an essential resource for providing data needed 

to support thorough budget analysis by both the administration 

and the Congress. 

GOVERNMENT-WIDE MANAGEMENT COUNCILS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ($17,000,000) 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... (20,000,000) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. (17,000,000) 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Government-wide Management Councils provide forums for 

improving government performance by facilitating experience exchange and identification of best practices among leaders in Federal agencies. Interagency groups funded under this account include the President’s Management Council for overall management 

improvement initiatives, the Chief Financial Officers Council for financial management initiatives, the Chief Information Officers 

Council for information technology initiatives, the Chief Human 

Capital Officers Council for human capital initiatives, the Chief Acquisition Officers Council for procurement initiatives, and the Performance Improvement Council for performance improvement initiatives. Funding is derived via transfer from the head of each executive department and agency. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for Government-wide 

Management Councils, by transfer, which is equal to the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and $3,000,000 below the budget request. The 

Committee supports the activities of the Government-wide Management Councils and recognizes that regular communication among 

agency leaders can lead to improved performance. The Committee 

directs the Executive Office of the President to continue to include 

a budgetary justification for each council in the annual budget request and to clearly note in the budget justification any items requested in the budget for Government-wide initiatives led or coordinated through the councils. 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $27,084,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 23,413,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 26,125,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], established 

by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and reauthorized by Public 
38 

Law 109–469, is charged with developing policies, objectives, and 

priorities for the National Drug Control Program. In addition, 

ONDCP administers the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 

program, the Drug-Free Communities Support Program, and several other related initiatives. 

This account provides funding for personnel compensation, travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for general policy 

research to support the formulation of the National Drug Control 

Strategy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,125,000 for 

ONDCP’s salaries and expenses. This amount is $959,000 below 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $2,712,000 above the budget 

request. The funding level prevents a reduction-in-force of 20 FTE 

and maintains critical positions. Due to budget constraints, no 

funding is provided for policy research. 

The Committee remains interested in ONDCP’s implementation 

of the study conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA], in particular, fostering openness and participation 

by staff at ONDCP and ensuring that qualified individuals hold 

leadership positions at ONDCP. The Committee applauds efforts by 

top leadership to listen to stakeholders and applauds efforts with 

interagency working groups and their task forces. The Committee 

directs ONDCP to provide an updated report on further actions and 

improvements taken since the last ONDCP report on this topic, 

which shall be due 30 days after enactment of this act. 

The administration’s new drug control strategy places an increased emphasis on demand reduction, therefore, staffing allocations within the Office of Supply Reduction and the Office of Demand Reduction should reflect that strategy. The Committee urges 

ONDCP to ensure that Office of Demand Reduction staff—both current and new—have expertise in prevention and making comprehensive community action a focal point. 

The Committee notes that often a lengthy clearance process at 

the Executive Office of the President [EOP] delays submission of 

information required by Congress in a timely manner and urges 

EOP to improve ONDCP’s responsiveness and ability to provide information critical to the Committee’s ability to make informed 

budgetary decisions. Language has also been included in this topic 

under the White House Office account. 

The Committee supports the goals of the Office of National Drug 

Control Policy’s national action plan, ‘‘Epidemic: Responding to 

America’s Prescription Drug Abuse Crisis’’, and encourages the Director to coordinate interagency efforts and partnerships with law 

enforcement to implement recommendations contained within the 

plan. The Committee requests quarterly reports on the Office’s continued efforts to address prescription drug abuse and diversion 

based upon the plan’s recommendations. 
39 

FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $238,522,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 200,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 238,522,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program 

was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 

100–690) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s reauthorization (Public Law 109–469) to provide assistance to Federal, 

State, and local law enforcement entities operating in those areas 

most adversely affected by drug trafficking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $238,522,000 for 

the HIDTA program, the same as the fiscal year 2011 level and 

$38,522,000 above the budget request. The Committee directs that 

funding shall be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than 

the fiscal year 2011 level. 

ONDCP is directed to consult with the HIDTAs in advance of deciding programmatic spending allocations for discretionary (supplemental) funding. 

The Committee recommendation specifies that up to $2,700,000 

may be used for auditing services and associated activities, and up 

to $500,000 shall be used to ensure the continued operation and 

maintenance of the Performance Management System. 

The Committee directs that the HIDTA funds be transferred to 

the appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously and includes 

provisions in the bill to help prevent delay. 

The Committee recognizes the National HIDTA Assistance Center for providing programmatic support to the HIDTA program to 

include training, financial management/audit review, and other essential services. 

The Committee retains a provision allowing unexpended funds 

obligated prior to 2 years ago for programs addressing the treatment or prevention of drug use to be used for other approved 

HIDTA activities. 

The HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing support for ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control operations 

normally funded out of the operating budgets of each agency. 

ONDCP is directed to withhold all HIDTA funds from a State until 

such time as a State or locality has met its financial obligation. 

OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $140,618,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 143,600,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 105,950,000 
40 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100–690), and the 

Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act (Public 

Law 109–469) established this account to be administered by the 

Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The funds 

appropriated to the program support high-priority drug control programs and may be transferred to drug control agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $105,950,000 for Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $34,668,000 below 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $37,650,000 below the budget request. Within this amount, the Committee provides the following funding levels: 

Amount 

National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign ........................................................................................................ ........................

Drug-Free Communities Support Program ........................................................................................................... 92,600,000 

National Community Anti-Drug Coalition training ..................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Drug court training and technical assistance .................................................................................................... 1,400,000 

Anti-doping activities ........................................................................................................................................... 8,900,000 

World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] ....................................................................................................................... 1,900,000 

Activities as authorized by Public Law 109–469, section 1105 ........................................................................ 1,150,000 

Performance Measures Development ................................................................................................................... ........................

National Youth Anti-drug Media Campaign.—The Committee 

has believed in the importance of maintaining anti-drug messaging 

to the Nation’s youth. However, during the course of the Media 

Campaign, it has received mixed reviews from independent 

sources. During times of fiscal austerity such as the Nation is currently experiencing, funding even the best-performing programs is 

difficult. Therefore, the Committee reluctantly provides no funding 

for the Media Campaign. 

Drug-free Communities Support Program.—ONDCP directs the 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in partnership 

with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. DFCSP provides dollar for dollar matching grants of up to 

$125,000 to local coalitions that mobilize their communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug, and inhalant abuse. Such 

grants support coalitions of youth; parents; media; law enforcement; school officials; faith-based organizations; fraternal organizations; State, local, and tribal government agencies; healthcare professionals; and other community representatives. The DFCSP enables these coalitions to strengthen their coordination and prevention efforts, encourage citizen participation in substance abuse reduction efforts, and disseminate information about effective programs. The Committee provides $92,600,000 for the continuation of 

the DFCSP. 

The Committee includes a provision in the bill directing ONDCP 

to provide $2,000,000 of DFCSP funds for training and related purposes as authorized by section 4 of Public Law 107–82, as amended 

by Public Law 109–469. 

United States Anti-Doping Agency.—The United States AntiDoping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for 

Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for man-
41 

aging the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic, Pan 

Am and Paralympic athletes. As a nonprofit corporation under the 

leadership of an independent Board of Directors, USADA has the 

authority to set forth guiding principles in anti-doping policy and 

to enforce any doping violations. In addition to managing collection 

and testing procedures, USADA is also responsible for enhancing 

research efforts and promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules governing the use of performance enhancing substances, as well as the ethics of doping and its harmful health effects. The Committee provides $8,900,000 for USADA. 

UNANTICIPATED NEEDS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $998,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 988,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or defense. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $988,000, which is $10,000 less 

than the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2011 and $12,000 

below the budget request. 

PARTNERSHIP FUND FOR PROGRAM INTEGRITY INNOVATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $20,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation (Partnership Fund) was initiated in fiscal year 2010. The Partnership 

Fund supports pilot programs designed to reduce errors and improve efficiency and service of Federal programs administered by 

States. The pilot programs focus on coordinating State-administered Federal programs both within States and between State and 

Federal officials and on technology solutions that may serve as best 

practices in the future. The Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget [OMB] chairs an interagency council consisting of representatives of appropriate Federal agencies, States, and other 

stakeholders. The council analyzes and selects pilot programs for 

funding, develops strategies and goals for the overall program as 

well as for each pilot program, and develops methodologies for assessing the performance of the overall program and the pilot programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not recommend additional funding for the 

Partnership Fund in fiscal year 2012. The Committee directs the 

administration to continue to leverage funds provided in fiscal year 

2010 to continue the initiative during fiscal year 2012. 
42 

The Committee is pleased with the proposed initiative to improve 

the operations of State-administered Federal programs. Efficiencies 

can be gained by better coordinating Federal programs, and technology may play a significant role in such improvements. The Committee reminds the interagency council of the semiannual progress 

reports that are required to be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations. 

The Committee notes that OMB does not administer or execute 

Federal programs. While the Committee expects OMB to continue 

to play a coordinating role in designing pilot programs, developing 

performance measures, and allocating funds, the Committee directs 

that the interagency council be the exclusive decisionmaking body 

for such activities. As Chair of the Interagency Council, the Committee directs the Director of OMB to seek consensus and input to 

the maximum extent possible from council members and participating Federal and State agencies. 

INTEGRATED, EFFICIENT, AND EFFECTIVE USES OF INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $60,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The fiscal year 2012 budget request seeks $60,000,000 in dedicated funding for the Integrated, Efficient, and Effective Uses of Information Technology [IEEUIT] program. The goal of the IEEUIT 

is to turn around poorly performing information technology projects 

and to centralize key information technology [IT] services for Government agencies, saving taxpayer dollars in the future that would 

otherwise be spent on inefficient and duplicative IT services. The 

Executive Office of the President began a major IT reform effort in 

fiscal year 2009 by leveraging existing resources provided for management improvements. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee lauds the administration’s comprehensive and innovative approach to improving IT development processes and 

maximizing efficiencies across the Federal IT portfolio. The Federal 

Government invests $80,000,000,000 a year in IT development for 

a wide variety of capabilities, spanning, for example, from basic 

desktop computing to a searchable database for investigating terrorist financing activity. 

Using resources provided for general management improvements, 

in 2009 the administration began a major IT reform effort focused 

on improving poorly performing IT projects, consolidating costly 

data centers, and consolidating common IT functions across Federal agencies. The administration estimates that taxpayer savings 

realized to date under the current IT reform initiative totals approximately $3,000,000,000. 

The Committee is unable to recommend additional dedicated 

funding for the IEEUIT at this time. The Committee directs the ad-
43 

ministration to continue current IT reform efforts during fiscal year 

2012 using resources provided for the Executive Office of the President and other funding sources where appropriate. The Committee 

directs the administration to keep the Committee apprised of the 

results of such efforts. 

The Committee reminds the Executive Office of the President 

that the Committee expects to be regularly apprised of how Government-wide IT reform efforts affect agency-specific projects and 

missions on a case-by-case basis. The Committee directs that IT reform initiatives shall not be a substitute for the Committee’s routine consideration of agency needs in accordance with the regular 

budget process. Finally, the Committee directs the Executive Office 

of the President to notify the Committee immediately upon any 

change in an agency spending plan pursuant to any efforts to modernize, streamline, or improve Federal IT projects. 

SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE PRESIDENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,549,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 4,328,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,328,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to enable the 

Vice President to provide assistance to the President in connection 

with the performance of executive duties and responsibilities. 

These funds also support the official activities of the spouse of the 

Vice President. The Vice President also has a staff funded by the 

Senate to assist him in the performance of his legislative duties. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,328,000 for 

special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as the 

budget request and $221,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level. 

OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $326,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 307,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 307,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account supports the care and operation of the Vice President’s residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory. These 

funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining facilities, 

and services required to perform and discharge the Vice President’s 

official duties, functions, and obligations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $307,000 for the 

official residence of the Vice President. This amount is the same as 
44 

the budget request and $19,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE

PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

Section 201 continues a provision that provides flexibility in the 

use of funds in accounts under the Executive Office of the President. 

Section 202 requires a detailed financial plan by the Director of 

ONDCP prior to the obligation of funds in fiscal year 2012. 

Section 203 allows for the transfer of up to 2 percent among programs within ONDCP. 

Section 204 establishes reprogramming requirements for 

ONDCP. 

Section 205 rescinds unobligated balances from the Counterdrug 

Technology Assessment Center program. 
(45) 

TITLE III 

THE JUDICIARY 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Established under Article III of the Constitution, the judicial 

branch of Government is a separate but equal branch. The Federal 

judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United States Courts of 

Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims, and several other entities 

and programs. The organization of the judiciary, the district and 

circuit boundaries, the places of holding court, and the number of 

Federal judges are legislated by the Congress and signed into law 

by the President. 

The Committee’s recommended funding levels support the Federal judiciary’s role of providing equal justice under the law and include sufficient funds to support this critical mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of judges and support staff and the operation and security of our Nation’s courts. 

The judicial branch is subject to the same funding constraints 

facing the executive and legislative branches. It is imperative that 

the Federal judiciary devote its resources primarily to the retention 

of staff. Further, it is also important that the judiciary contain controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other expenses. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $73,921,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 75,551,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 74,819,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United States, 

one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United States. 

The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the Federal court 

system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,819,000 for 

the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs of operating 

the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building and grounds. 

The recommendation is $898,000 above the fiscal year 2011 funding level and consistent with the budget re-estimate. As requested, 

funding is provided for 12 new police officers. 
46 

CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $8,159,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 8,504,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 8,159,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Care of the Building and Grounds, for expenditure by the Architect of the Capitol, provides for the structural and mechanical care 

of the United States Supreme Court Building and Grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical, electrical, and electronic equipment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,159,000 for 

personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court building 

and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of the Capitol. 

The recommendation is the same as the fiscal year 2011 funding 

level and $345,000 below the budget request. 

The Court shall continue to provide to the Committee detailed 

single-spaced quarterly reports on the Supreme Court modernization project, including descriptions; timeliness; milestones; and 

funding committed, obligated, and expended, as well as any unobligated balances of each major capital project. In addition, the report 

should include the identification, descriptions, and status of any 

contract claims. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $32,511,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 35,139,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 31,913,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was 

established on October 1, 1982 under Article III of the Constitution. The court was formed by the merger of the United States 

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate division of 

the United States Court of Claims. The court consists of 12 judges 

who are appointed by the President, with the advice and consent 

of the Senate. Judges are appointed to the court under Article III 

of the Constitution of the United States. 

The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a variety of 

subjects, including international trade, Government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from the United States Government, 

Federal personnel, and veterans’ benefits. Appeals to the court 

come from all Federal district courts, the United States Court of 

Federal Claims, the United States Court of International Trade, 

and the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. The court also 

takes appeals of certain administrative agencies’ decisions, including the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract Appeals, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the 

Trademark Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United 
47 

States International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of 

the United States Congress, and the Government Accountability 

Office Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewable by the court. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,913,000. 

The recommendation is $598,000 below the fiscal year 2011 funding level, and $3,226,000 below the budget request. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $21,447,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 22,891,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 20,968,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of International Trade, located in New 

York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions brought against the 

United States, its agencies and officers, and certain civil actions 

brought by the United States, arising out of import transactions 

and the administration and enforcement of the Federal customs 

and international trade laws. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,968,000. 

The recommendation is $479,000 below the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $1,923,000 below the budget request. 

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL

SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $5,004,221,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 5,236,166,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,970,646,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide total 

funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating costs of appellate, 

district, and bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and 

probation and pretrial services offices. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,970,646,000 

for salaries and expenses. The recommendation is $33,575,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $265,520,000 below 

the budget request. 
48 

The Committee is aware that the Judicial Conference has communicated to judges and court staff the need to identify ways to reduce operational and administrative costs, given the current fiscal 

climate. The Committee endorses these efforts and urges all courts 

to review all options in order to help contain costs. The Committee 

applauds the Court of International Trade, which historically has 

managed its budget well as evidenced by its minimal funding requests year after year. On the other hand, the budget for Defender 

Services, currently funded at more than $1,000,000,000, has grown 

significantly in recent years. While the services provided by this 

program are essential, this trend is not sustainable, given fiscal realities. 

Perimeter Security Pilot Project.—The Judiciary submitted its report evaluating the Judicial Perimeter Security Pilot Program on 

October 20, 2010, and a follow-up report on execution of the Judicial Perimeter Security Pilot Program on August 8, 2011. The evaluation report concluded that having unity of command, CSO 

guards at all posts, and national standards for security coverage resulted in significant security improvements at the pilot sites. The 

follow-up report described how a Judicial Perimeter Security Program could be implemented at additional primary courthouses. 

While a meritorious program, given budget constraints, further implementation would be feasible only if cost neutral. The Judiciary 

is encouraged to identify such opportunities. Section 306 authorizing the pilot is continued in order to allow the Judiciary to maintain the pilot at the seven existing locations and to allow for expansion of the pilot to new locations, if it can be done in a cost neutral 

manner. 

Capital Security Program.—Recognizing the impact of the Judiciary’s rental expenses on its ability to maintain support of critical 

court requirements, the Committee supports the work of the Judiciary in revising its long-range planning process for facility needs. 

Budgetary realities, as well as new space design criteria for courtroom sharing, will result in fewer new courthouses recommended 

by the Judicial Conference for funding in the future. 

Security deficiencies in existing courthouses still must be addressed and can be accomplished in most instances with considerably less funding than would be required for a new facility. Therefore, funding is included within the General Services Administration’s Federal Buildings Fund to establish a Judiciary Capital Security Program, which will address security deficiencies in existing 

buildings where physical, interior alterations are viable. The Judiciary and the GSA shall work collaboratively to assess the building 

conditions, viability of long-term use, and structural capacity for 

these stand-alone architectural solutions which may include: building additional corridors; adding or reconfiguring elevators; building 

visual barriers; moving air-intakes; and enlarging security screening areas. 

VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,775,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 5,011,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,775,000 
49 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 

(Public Law 99–660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is 

a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a perceived crisis in 

vaccine tort liability claims that threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines nationwide. The statute’s primary intention is the creation of a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism 

that ensures a no-fault compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by certain covered vaccines. This program protects 

the availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a substantial number of claims from the tort arena. 

Not only did this act create a special fund to pay judgments 

awarded under the act, but it also created the Office of Special 

Masters within the United States Court of Federal Claims to hear 

vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates that up to eight special 

masters may be appointed for this purpose. The special masters expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary for vaccine injury cases 

from a special fund set up under the Vaccine Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,775,000. The 

recommendation is the same as the fiscal year 2011 funding level 

and $236,000 below the budget request. 

DEFENDER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $1,025,693,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,098,745,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,034,182,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel 

guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18 

U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who 

cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint counsel 

from Federal public and community defender organizations or from 

a panel of private attorneys established by the court. The Defender 

Services program helps to maintain public confidence in the Nation’s commitment to equal justice under the law and ensures the 

successful operation of the constitutionally based adversary system 

of justice by which Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed 

rights are enforced. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,034,182,000. 

The recommendation is $8,489,000 above the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $64,563,000 below the budget request. This program 

is urged to scrutinize its costs and reduce expenses in the future. 

FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $52,305,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 59,727,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 59,000,000 
50 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances of 

grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and land 

commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily upon the 

volume and the length of jury trials demanded by parties to both 

civil and criminal actions and the number of grand juries being 

convened by the courts at the request of the United States Attorneys. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $59,000,000. The recommendation is $6,695,000 above the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $727,000 below the budget request. 

COURT SECURITY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $466,672,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 513,058,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 500,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983 and 

funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of protective 

guard services, and the procurement, installation, and maintenance 

of security systems and equipment for United States courthouses 

and other facilities housing Federal court operations, including 

building access control, inspection of mail and packages, directed 

security patrols, perimeter security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other similar activities as authorized by section 

1010 of the Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public 

Law 100–702). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $500,000,000. The recommendation is $33,328,000 above the fiscal year 2011 

funding level and $13,058,000 below the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $82,909,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 88,455,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 82,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts was 

created in 1939 by an act of Congress. It serves the Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies as well as applicable Federal 

statutes and regulations. The AO is the focal point for communica-
51 

tion and coordination within the Federal judiciary and with Congress, the executive branch, and the public on behalf of the judiciary. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $82,000,000. 

This recommendation is $909,000 below the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $6,455,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $27,273,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 29,029,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 27,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC, improves the management of Federal judicial dockets and court administration through education for judges and staff, and research, 

evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts and the Judicial 

Conference. The Center’s responsibilities include educating judges 

and other judicial branch personnel about legal developments and 

efficient litigation management and court administration. Additionally, the Center also analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of 

the methods of best practice. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,000,000. 

The recommendation is $273,000 below the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $2,029,000 below the budget request. 

JUDICIAL RETIREMENT FUNDS

PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $90,361,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 103,768,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 103,768,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The funds in this account cover the estimated future benefit payments to be made to retired bankruptcy judges and magistrate 

judges, claims court judges, and spouses and dependent children of 

deceased judicial officers. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $103,768,000 for 

payments to the Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund and the Claims 

Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation is 

$13,407,000 above the fiscal year 2011 funding level and consistent 

with the budget request. 
52 

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $16,803,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 17,906,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Sentencing Commission establishes, reviews, 

and revises sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the 

Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also required 

to monitor the operation of the guidelines and to identify and report necessary changes to the Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,500,000. 

The recommendation is $303,000 below the fiscal year 2011 funding level and $1,406,000 below the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

The Committee recommends the following administrative provisions for the judiciary. 

Section 301 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the employment of experts and consultative services. 

Section 302 allows the judiciary, subject to the Committee’s reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the amount that may be 

transferred into any one appropriation. 

Section 303 limits official reception and representation expenses 

incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United States to no 

more than $11,000. 

Section 304 requires the Administrative Office to submit an annual financial plan for the judiciary within 90 days of enactment 

of this act. 

Section 305 grants the judicial branch the same tenant alteration 

authorities as the executive branch. 

Section 306 provides continued authority for a court security 

pilot program. 

Section 307 extends for 1 year the authorization of a temporary 

judgeship in Hawaii and a temporary judgeship in Kansas. 
(53) 

TITLE IV 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS

FEDERAL FUNDS

A total of $658,118,000 in Federal funds are estimated to be 

available to the District of Columbia government, the District of 

Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and other D.C. entities. This is 

$40,600,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$58,582,000 below the budget request. A total of $1,015,449,000 in 

Federal funds will be received by the District government from the 

various Federal grant programs, including Federal reimbursements 

from such programs as Medicaid and Medicare. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $35,030,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 35,100,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Resident Tuition Support program was created by the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–98), 

expanded through the District of Columbia College Access Improvement Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–157), and amended and reauthorized through Public Law 110–97. This program provides eligible college-bound District residents the opportunity to expand their 

higher education choices. 

Under the program, financial assistance is available to qualified 

District residents who attend public colleges outside of the District 

of Columbia, private postsecondary institutions in the District of 

Columbia, Maryland, or Virginia, or any historically black college 

or university. The private-school tuition grants are restricted to 

nonprofit institutions. Students who attend public schools receive 

assistance equal to the difference between the tuition paid by residents of the State in which the institution is located and the tuition charged to nonresident students, with an annual limit of 

$10,000 and a lifetime limit of $50,000. Private-school students receive a $2,500 maximum annual grant, with a lifetime limit of 

$12,500. 

Since its inception over a decade ago, the program has disbursed more than $265,000,000 through December 31, 2010 for the benefit 

of more than 16,265 District of Columbia residents, with grants 

averaging $6,449 per year. Sixty percent of the program grantees 

are the first in their families to attend college. Program participants have enrolled in more than 300 colleges and universities in 
54 

48 States. This has brought an infusion of the District’s students 

as well as Federal dollars to State university systems nationwide. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $30,000,000 for the resident tuition support [DC TAG] program, $5,030,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $5,100,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee understands that the program will 

have an estimated $12,819,000 in carryforward funds available in 

fiscal year 2012. 

The Committee urges the Office of the State Superintendent of 

Education to continue its efforts to improve the student retention, 

persistence, and college graduation rate of program participants. 

The Committee acknowledges the challenges facing the students 

who do enroll in college to reach graduation. Data reveal that 

among program grantees, many students interrupt their enrollment or drop out entirely on their path to a degree, and just 47 

percent graduate from college in 6 years. The Committee directs 

that the State Superintendent shall include, as a component of the 

fiscal year 2013 budget justification submission, an annual update 

of its efforts, including research findings, to enhance the retention, 

persistence, and graduation rates, including early awareness and 

readiness initiatives to promote academic college preparation, guidance, and other support mechanisms and partnerships. The Committee expects the program to work to improve its ability to meet 

its core premise of a full return on investment wherein every program participant earns a college degree. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY COSTS

IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $14,970,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 14,900,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Due to the fact that the District of Columbia is the seat of the 

Federal Government and headquarters of many international organizations, District police, fire, and emergency personnel have had 

to provide security for a number of events. As the need for the District of Columbia to provide security increases, overtime costs for 

personnel escalate and divert local police from neighborhood patrols. The complexity and costs associated with these events, including unique needs for crowd control, surveillance, and protection 

against unusual threats, are high and growing, and demand effective and efficient coordinated operations. The President has supported reimbursing the District for these costs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $14,900,000, 

for the District of Columbia for the costs of providing public safety 

at events related to the presence of the national capital in the District of Columbia, for the costs of providing support requested by 

the United States Secret Service Division in carrying out their protective duties under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Se-
55 

curity, and for the costs of providing support to respond to immediate and specific terrorist threats or attacks in the District of Columbia or surrounding jurisdictions. This is $70,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

In addition, the District may use any funds remaining from prior 

year appropriations under this heading. The District may use the 

payment to cover the costs of Executive transportation support including motorcades and helicopter landings. The Committee directs 

the District of Columbia to submit a detailed budget justification 

with its funding request for fiscal year 2013, including specific information about the anticipated costs related to the January 2013 

Presidential Inauguration. The Committee further directs the District of Columbia to submit, within 60 days of the end of fiscal year 

2012, a report to the House and the Senate Committees on Appropriations detailing the purposes and amounts expended using the 

funds, particularly noting any deviation from the original proposed 

spending. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $242,933,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 229,068,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 230,319,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI), the Federal 

Government is required to finance the District of Columbia Courts. 

This Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts funds the 

operations of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior 

Court, the Court System, and the Capital Improvement Program. 

Capital improvement projects include implementation of the updated Facilities Master Plan, with particular focus on expansion of 

the Moultrie Courthouse to address space shortfalls. By law, the 

annual budget includes estimates of the expenditures for the operations of the Courts prepared by the Joint Committee on Judicial 

Administration as well as the President’s recommendation for funding the Courts’ operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the District of 

Columbia Courts of $230,319,000, which is $12,614,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $1,251,000 above the President’s 

budget request. This amount includes $12,830,000 for the Court of 

Appeals, $111,687,000 for the Superior Court, $66,712,000 for the 

Court System, and $39,090,000 for capital improvements to courthouse facilities. 

The Committee recommendation for the District of Columbia Superior Court is $74,000 above the President’s recommended funding 

of $111,613,000 in order to address a top priority of the Court. This 

increase will support the Fathering Court Initiative to help fathers, 

particularly those reentering the community following incarceration, to sustain employment in order to meet their financial obligations to and establish healthy parental relationships with their 

children. 
56 

The Committee recommendation for the District of Columbia 

Court System is $192,000 above the President’s recommended 

funding of $66,520,000 and will permit the Court System to support the enforcement of court orders by enhancing the collection of 

fines and fees. 

The Committee recommendation for capital improvements provides $985,000 above the President’s recommendation of 

$38,105,000 to support continued implementation of the Facilities 

Master Plan, particularly the Moultrie Courthouse Addition (C 

Street Expansion), improved physical safety through perimeter security enhancements and lighting and signage upgrades, and infrastructure upgrades and maintenance. The Committee acknowledges 

that steady progress on the Facilities Master Plan should provide 

a cost-effective path to address deficiencies in the Courts’ space 

needs. In addition to the recommended funding, the Committee includes new language as requested by the Courts under the Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts account to permit transfer of funds for capital improvements to courthouse facilities. 

The Committee supports the Courts’ request to maintain the current level of funds available for its official reception and representation purposes. These resources enable the Courts to meet various 

community outreach responsibilities including supporting legal 

education in the District of Columbia as the home of six law 

schools; work with the D.C. Bar committees; and host the significant number of international guests who visit the D.C. Courts to 

learn about legal systems in democratic societies. The Committee 

acknowledges that the current amount of the Courts’ reception and 

representation funds is commensurate with small Federal agencies 

and considerably less than the comparative representation funds 

available to other District officials. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR DEFENDER SERVICES IN DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA COURTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $54,890,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 55,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 55,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District of Columbia Courts appoint and compensate attorneys to represent persons who are financially unable to obtain such 

representation. The Defender Services programs provide counsel 

for indigent persons who are charged with criminal offenses, for 

family proceedings involving child abuse, neglect, and termination 

of parental rights, and for guardianship proceedings for protection 

of mentally incapacitated individuals and minors whose parents 

are deceased. 

In addition to legal representation, these programs provide indigent persons with services such as transcripts of court proceedings, 

expert witness testimony, foreign and sign language interpretation, 

and investigations and genetic testing. 
57 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $55,000,000 

for Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts. This is 

$110,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as 

the budget request. 

The Committee includes new language permitting the transfer of 

up to $10,000,000 to the District of Columbia Courts for capital improvements of courthouse facilities. 

To promote access to justice and ensure that high-quality legal 

representation is available to the indigent in the District of Columbia Courts, in fiscal year 2009, Congress financed an hourly rate 

increase for attorneys to $90 per hour. Increased funding provided 

in fiscal year 2010 permitted the adjusted compensation rate to be 

fully instituted. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER

SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $211,983,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 216,846,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 212,983,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA] 

for the District of Columbia is an independent Federal agency created by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI). CSOSA acquired the operational responsibilities for the former District agencies in charge of probation and parole, and houses the Pretrial 

Services Agency within its framework. The mission of CSOSA is to 

increase public safety, prevent crime, reduce recidivism, and support the fair administration of justice in close collaboration with 

the community. The CSOSA appropriation supports the Community Supervision Program which monitors or supervises approximately 16,200 offenders on a daily basis and the Pretrial Services 

Agency [PSA] which supervised 17,077 defendants during fiscal 

year 2010 and monitors approximately 7,000 defendants at any 

given time. In fiscal year 2010, the PSA placed more than 1,607 defendants into sanctions-based substance abuse treatment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $212,983,000, 

which is $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$3,863,000 below the budget request. Of this amount, $59,435,000 

is designated for the Pretrial Services Agency and $153,548,000 is 

designated for the Community Supervision Program. The Committee notes that $1,000,000 of the resources recommended for the 

Pretrial Services Agency will support planning, design, and relocation of the Pretrial Services Agency Forensic Toxicology and Drug 

Testing Laboratory. 

The Committee is supportive of CSOSA’s efforts to successfully 

return ex-offenders to their communities. For a number of years, 

CSOSA has worked with grassroots, nonprofit providers of transitional housing, including faith-based organizations, that offer coun-
58 

seling, mentoring, and life skills training to men and women returning home from prison. The Committee notes that this is a 

model program for the Nation. 

The Committee is encouraged that the Community Supervision 

Program reduced caseloads in the general supervision unit from 44 

per officer in fiscal year 2009 to 40 to per officer in fiscal year 2010, 

a significant improvement over the 100:1 average ratios prior to 

the Agency’s inception. The Committee acknowledges that funding 

for CSOSA for offender contract treatment, including substance 

abuse, halfway-back residential sanctions, mental health and sex 

offender assessments, and transitional housing is constrained. 

The Committee appreciates the efforts of CSOSA management to 

identify savings and other efficiencies through targeted cutbacks 

and strategic reorganization as the agency fulfills its critical mission and addresses high priority public safety needs amid Government-wide fiscal constraints. 

The Committee commends the collaborative efforts of the Community Supervision Program to continue to partner with the District of Columbia Government, the United States Parole Commission, and the Bureau of Prisons to implement the Secure Residential Treatment Program pilot. This program aims to provide a secure, residential substance abuse treatment intervention/sanction 

alternative to high-risk, chronic substance abusing and criminally 

involved male D.C. code offenders in lieu of revoking them to Bureau of Prisons custody. The Committee encourages CSOSA to keep 

the Committee regularly informed of how well this program is 

meeting its goals of increasing offenders’ chances of successful community reintegration and breaking the cycle of recidivism. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $37,241,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 41,486,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 37,241,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of Columbia, 

an independent organization established by a District of Columbia 

statute (16 D.C. Code 2–1601–1608), has a distinct mission to provide and promote quality legal representation services within the 

District of Columbia justice system. PDS provides legal representation to indigent adults and children facing loss of liberty and provides support in the form of training, consultation, and legal reference services to members of the local bar appointed as counsel 

in criminal, juvenile, and mental health cases involving indigent 

individuals. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia of $37,241,000, which 

is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $4,245,000 

below the budget request. 

The Committee provides authority in section 818 of the bill for 

the PDS to obtain professional liability insurance for its attorneys, 
59 

staff, and board members. The Committee understands that the 

cost for such coverage can be met within the funding provided. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND

SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $11,476,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 25,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Approximately one-third of the District is served by a combined 

sewer system, constructed by the Federal Government in 1890, in 

which both sanitary waste and storm water flow through the same 

pipes. When the collection system or the Blue Plains treatment 

plant reach capacity, typically during periods of heavy rainfall, the 

system is designed to overflow the excess water. This mixture of 

sewage and storm water runoff is discharged to the Anacostia and 

Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek, and tributary waters between 60 and 

75 times each year. Under a judicial consent decree entered on 

March 23, 2005, the Water and Sewer Authority is undertaking a 

20-year, $2,200,000,000 sewer construction program to reduce combined sewer overflows [CSO]. The Clean Rivers Project includes 

deep underground storage tunnels, side tunnels to reduce flooding, 

pump station rehabilitation, and the elimination of over a dozen 

CSO outfalls along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers and Rock 

Creek. When completed in 2025, this project is expected to vastly 

improve water quality and significantly reduce debris in our Nation’s capital waterways as well as improve the health of the 

Chesapeake Bay. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $15,000,000, to be matched by at least $15,000,000 provided by the Water and 

Sewer Authority, to continue implementation of the Long-Term 

Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan. This is an increase of 

$3,524,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$10,000,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING

COUNCIL

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $1,796,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,800,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for the District of Columbia [CJCC] is the primary forum in which District of Columbia 

criminal justice agencies can identify and address interagency coordination issues. Its mission is to address coordination difficulties 

among District of Columbia criminal justice agencies and address 

criminal justice issues, such as illegal drugs, juvenile justice, halfway houses, information technology, and identification of arrestees. 

The CJCC was originally established pursuant to a memorandum 

of agreement in May 1998 and operates as an independent working 
60 

group to foster cooperation among the more than a dozen Federal 

and local governmental agencies which have law enforcement responsibility in our Nation’s capital. As part of a local enactment in 

August 2001, the CJCC was established as an independent agency 

within the District of Columbia. 

The CJCC maintains the Justice Integrated Information System 

[JUSTIS] using technology that allows for the seamless sharing of 

information at critical decision points throughout the justice system. JUSTIS connects Federal agencies, the District government, 

and court information systems, so that criminal activity can be easily monitored across an array of participating agencies. Agencies 

currently using JUSTIS include the Metropolitan Police Department, the D.C. Department of Corrections, D.C. Superior Court, the 

U.S. Park Police, the U.S. Capitol Police, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, the Pretrial Services Agency, CSOSA, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, 

and the D.C. and Maryland Public Defenders Service. No other system provides this range of access to Federal and local information 

in the District. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,800,000 to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council [CJCC]. This is $4,000 

above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

Among the array of activities that the recommended Federal payment will support during fiscal year 2012 are enhancing the 

JUSTIS information system’s report development, review, and approval capabilities; supporting the GunStat initiative; improved 

sharing of information on mental health and substance abuse to redirect persons to necessary support services; supporting record 

management, court-based release, court processing and papering 

reforms; developing clear business processes to help reduce the 

number of outstanding warrants; and providing a comprehensive 

approach to truancy prevention. 

The Committee directs the CJCC to submit annual performance 

measures in an annual report to accompany the fiscal year 2013 

budget justification, which should also describe progress made on 

individual CJCC initiatives. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $499,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure provides 

support to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and Superior 

Court through reviewing and investigating allegations of judicial 

misconduct. The Judicial Nomination Commission recommends 

candidates to the President of the United States for nomination to 

judicial vacancies in these courts. In accordance with the National 

Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 

1997 (Public Law 105–33), the Federal Government is responsible 
61 

for financing of the District of Columbia Courts, including the operations of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, 

the Court System, and the Capital Improvement Program. Although independent of the Courts by design, these two Commissions provide important functions within the judicial branch of 

local government in the District of Columbia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $500,000 as a Federal payment for the judicial commissions, of which $295,000 is designated for the Judicial Nomination Commission and $205,000 is designated for the 

Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure. This amount is 

$1,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the 

budget request. The Committee continues to support the rationale 

of recognizing these commissions as local judicial branch agencies 

for which Federal support for the operations is necessary. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $77,545,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 67,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 60,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Committee continues its commitment to improving educational opportunities for the children of the District of Columbia. 

For the past 7 fiscal years, Congress has supported a three-sector 

funding arrangement to provide Federal resources for the District 

of Columbia Public Schools, public charter schools, and for a scholarship program for low-income students to attend private schools. 

For the last 4 years the District has charted a new management 

course for the District’s troubled public school system in response 

to Public Law 110–33, which vested authority over the school superintendent, operating budget, and capital program in the Mayor 

beginning in 2007. The Committee acknowledges the daunting 

challenges this undertaking presents, given that District of Columbia public school students have chronically performed well below 

national averages in reading and mathematics. The Committee 

commends the progress that has been made to streamline bureaucracy, recruit new principals, expand course offerings available to 

students, expand pre-K classrooms, complete major renovations, 

and raise math and reading test scores. Last year marked the first 

time in 41 years that enrollment increased in District of Columbia 

public schools. For the ensuing school year, 47,000 students are enrolled. 

Public charter schools in the District of Columbia have grown 

considerably since the first two opened in 1996 and served 160 students. In school year 2010–2011, 52 tuition-free, autonomous public 

charter schools on 93 campuses operated in the District, enrolling 

29,366 students in every ward of the city, and serving nearly 40 

percent of all District of Columbia public school students. The District of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–134), 

one of the strongest charter school laws in the Nation, guarantees 

charter school autonomy from the District of Columbia Public 

Schools and from the District government and mandates uniform 
62 

per student funding of all public school students, both traditional 

and charter. 

Congress established the private school scholarship (voucher) 

program as a 5-year pilot in 2003. In April 2011, the Opportunity 

Scholarship Program was reauthorized for 5 years through enactment of Public Law 112–10, division C. The intent of this program 

is to help increase the District of Columbia’s capacity to provide 

parents, particularly low-income parents whose children attend 

low-performing schools, more options for quality education. In 

school year 2010–2011, 1,017 students participated in the program 

and were enrolled at 41 nonpublic schools. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $60,000,000, 

which is $17,545,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$7,000,000 below the budget request. These funds are allocated as 

follows: $20,000,000 for the District of Columbia Public Schools to 

improve public school education, $20,000,000 to expand quality 

charter schools and $20,000,000 for the Secretary of Education for 

private school scholarships under Public Law 112–10, division C. 

The Committee directs the District of Columbia Public Schools to 

submit a detailed spending plan outlining specific activities no 

later than 60 days after enactment of this act and that this spending plan should contain a particular emphasis on initiatives to improve the recruitment and retention of a high-quality teacher and 

principal workforce in District public schools. 

The District has 11,000 special needs students for whom the District must provide or secure educational services. As part of the increased Federal funds provided for the District of Columbia Public 

Schools for fiscal year 2012, the Committee expects the District to 

make substantial progress in achieving compliance with the 2006 

Federal court-ordered consent decree, eliminating inadequacies in 

treatment and support for special needs students, and establishing 

more inclusive learning environments for these students within the 

District of Columbia Public Schools system. 

With respect to the recommended Federal payment for fiscal year 

2012 for public charter schools, the Committee directs the District 

of Columbia Public Charter School Board to submit to Congress, 

through the Office of the State Superintendent of Education 

[OSSE], a detailed spending plan outlining specific activities no 

later than 60 days after enactment of this act. This spending plan 

should particularly emphasize enhancing the academic quality of 

existing charter schools, expanding the capacity of high-performing 

charter schools, and executing a robust performance management 

system to help identify low-performing schools and close them. The 

Committee expects that funding provided for charter schools will be 

used in accordance with the plan submitted. 

Over the years, public charter schools have moved into and revitalized former DCPS school buildings that otherwise would have 

been developed into condominiums or used for other commercial 

purposes. These buildings, including several historic structures, 

often long-abandoned and severely blighting neighborhoods, have 

been converted to public charter schools. 
63 

The Committee directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia to 

submit to the Committees on Appropriations, as part of the fiscal 

year 2013 Federal payment budget justification materials, a detailed fiscal year 2013–2017 public education facilities plan that 

will ensure public charter school access to surplus or underutilized 

DCPS space. 

Finally, the Committee reminds the government of the District 

of Columbia that students in public charter schools are to have access to the same publicly funded services that are offered to students in traditional public schools. These include school nurses, 

School Resource Officers, crossing guards, and mental health and 

other wrap-around services. 

The Committee believes that any school enrolling a scholarship 

participant under the Opportunity Scholarship Program should satisfy certain minimum reasonable expectations as an educational 

setting. The Committee directs the Secretary of Education to independently assess on an annual basis that participating schools are 

in full compliance with the statutory requirements of section 

3007(a)(4) of Public Law 112–10, division C relating to valid certificates of occupancy, school accreditation, site inspections, financial 

stability, fiscal management controls, and teacher qualifications. 

The Committee directs the Secretary to take prompt action to remedy any determination of noncompliance, and to submit to the 

Committee an annual report summarizing the results of the assessment. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE D.C. NATIONAL GUARD

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $375,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 375,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The fiscal 2012 budget request seeks a Federal payment of 

$2,000,000 for the D.C. National Guard’s D.C. Government Operations. The D.C. National Guard is a Federal, rather than a local, 

entity and responds to orders of the President of the United States 

who is the Commander-in-Chief of the D.C. National Guard pursuant to law [District of Columbia Official Code § 49–409 and Executive Order No. 11485 (October 1, 1969)]. Unlike a Governor of a 

State, the Mayor is not authorized to deploy the National Guard 

under any circumstances. The District of Columbia National Guard 

is specifically trained to support law enforcement during critical 

missions, such as demonstrations, Presidential inaugurations and 

funerals, and emergency services for weather-related contingencies. 

The D.C. Air Guard patrols the skies over the District on roundthe-clock alert. However, residency restrictions preclude a significant number of Guard members from eligibility for tuition assistance programs, which has severely hampered recruitment and retention efforts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $375,000 for 

the D.C. National Guard designated for the Major General David 

F. Wherley, Jr. District of Columbia National Guard Retention and 
64 

College Access Program, a tuition assistance program for nonresident District of Columbia National Guard members. This 

amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$1,625,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $9,980,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under the Housing First Initiative, the District of Columbia has 

begun to transform the delivery of homeless services from an approach that simply meets the survival needs of individuals with 

blankets and shelter to a system designed to move chronically 

homeless individuals to permanent supportive housing with tightly 

linked support services. In the two most recent fiscal years, Congress provided special Federal payments totaling $26,980,000 to 

help boost the local intensive case management and scattered-site 

housing program through support for the costs of rent, utilities, 

and case management and respond to the particularly acute incidence of homelessness among veterans. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The fiscal year 2012 budget did not request and the Committee 

does not recommend a Federal payment for this program. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE ST. ELIZABETHS

HOSPITAL CAMPUS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $18,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

St. Elizabeths, established by Congress in 1855 as the Government Hospital for the Insane and officially renamed as St. Elizabeths Hospital in 1916, is presently divided into two campuses. The 

West Campus, owned by the Federal Government and under the 

custody and control of the General Services Administration, will be 

the new headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security. 

The East Campus, owned by the District of Columbia, is still in use 

as a mental health facility. The fiscal year 2012 budget request 

seeks a new Federal payment of $18,000,000 to support various redevelopment planning activities on the East Campus to stimulate 

economic and community revitalization in tandem with the transformation of the West Campus property. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee acknowledges the importance of this development 

effort, but is unable to support the request for a new special Federal payment at this time. 
65 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR HIV/AIDS PREVENTION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District of Columbia is facing a daunting HIV epidemic. 

Based on the national HIV/AIDS case based reporting system, the 

District currently has the highest AIDS rate in the country, nearly 

twice as high as New York City and five times as high as Detroit. 

Estimates based on surveillance numbers suggest that between 3 

and 5 percent of the adult residents in the District are currently 

living with HIV or AIDS, and HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of 

premature mortality in the city. The fiscal year 2012 budget request seeks a new Federal payment to bolster existing prevention, 

care, and support services on a city-wide basis to reduce the incidence of HIV and AIDS in the District of Columbia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee acknowledges the serious situation but is unable 

to support a new special Federal payment at this time, and urges 

the District of Columbia to explore and exhaust other Federal 

grant options and private sources to augment local investments to 

support this program in fiscal year 2012. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR D.C. COMMISSION ON THE ARTS AND

HUMANITIES GRANTS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The budget requests a special Federal payment of $5,000,000 to 

fund competitively-awarded grants for non-profit fine and performing arts organizations based in and primarily serving the District of Columbia. This request relates to a proposal to significantly 

reduce funding for the National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs 

[NCACA] grants program and transfer administration of that program from the Commission on Fine Arts, a Federal entity funded 

under the Interior appropriation, to the District of Columbia Commission on Arts and the Humanities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee is unable to support the request for a new special 

Federal payment to the District of Columbia for grants for nonprofit fine and performing arts organizations in fiscal year 2012. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

The Committee recommends a total of $10,911,966,000 for the 

operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in the 

fiscal year 2011 budget submitted to the Congress by the government of the District of Columbia. Of the total, $6,208,646,000 is 

from local funds, $1,015,449,000 is from Federal grant funds, 

$2,040,504,000 is from other funds, and $25,677,000 is from private 

funds. The Committee further recommends an additional 
66 

$122,575,000 in appropriated Federal payments as set forth under 

this title. The Committee directs that any changes to the financial 

plan as submitted by the District must follow the reprogramming 

guidelines. 
(67) 

TITLE V 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $2,744,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 3,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Conference of the United States [ACUS] is 

an independent agency and advisory committee created to study 

administrative processes in order to recommend improvements to 

Congress and agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,900,000 for ACUS, $300,000 

below the budget request and $156,000 above the fiscal year 2011 

enacted level. 

CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $499,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 450,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation is an independent agency established by Congress in 1992 (Public Law 102– 

281) to encourage and support research, study, and labor designed 

to produce new discoveries in all fields of endeavor for the benefit 

of mankind. Its mission is accomplished through the sponsorship of 

national competitions designed to promote innovation in the fields 

of homeland security, life sciences, and education. Through its 

Frontiers of Discovery—Work in Progress and Discover the Future 

programs, the agency recognizes cutting edge innovations of worthy 

American scientists, student inventors, and exemplary teachers 

who inspire despite especially challenging educational environments or personal physical disabilities. 

Initial funding for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation was derived from the sale of three denominations of specially 

minted coins sold by the United States Mint from August 1992 

through June 1993. Revenues from the coin sales surcharges were 

deposited in the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Fund at the Department of the Treasury, and made available to the Foundation. 
68 

To address the fact that the coin sales revenues had been depleted, 

Congress authorized funding for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public 

Law 111–8). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation. This is $49,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $450,000 above the 

budget request. 

CIVILIAN PROPERTY REALIGNMENT BOARD

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $88,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The Civilian Property Realignment Board, as proposed by section 

735 of Government-wide General Provisions of the fiscal year 2012 

Budget Appendix, would be an independent agency that assists the 

President and Congress in identifying ways the Government can 

eliminate unneeded assets and downsize its real property inventory. The purpose of the Board would be to create a fair process 

that will result in the timely disposal and realignment of Federal 

real property. The goals of the Board would be to sell unneeded 

property, reduce the operating costs of the Government, support 

and incentivize agency co-location, and improve the sustainability 

of the Government’s operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Neither the Civilian Property Realignment Board nor the Civilian Property Realignment Act have been authorized by Congress. 

While certain elements of the Federal real property proposal may 

be appealing, other parts may have drawbacks, which Congress is 

in the process of reviewing. The Committee is unable to fund this 

proposed new Board at this time, noting the significant funding required, particularly at a time when the Committee’s ability to adequately fund existing agencies and long-standing programs—which 

have been vetted and which receive overwhelming support—is severely constrained. 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $202,270,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 308,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 240,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a). 

The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 

U.S.C. section 1, et seq. The 1974 Act brought under Federal regulation futures trading in all goods, articles, services, rights, and interests; commodity options trading; and leverage trading in gold 
69 

and silver bullion and coins; and otherwise strengthened the regulation of the commodity futures trading industry. It established a 

comprehensive regulatory structure to oversee the volatile futures 

trading complex. 

The CFTC is the sole Federal regulator responsible for overseeing the futures markets by encouraging competitiveness and efficiency, ensuring market integrity, and protecting market participants against manipulation, abusive trading practices, fraud, and 

other unscrupulous activities. Effective oversight by the CFTC enables the markets to better serve their designated functions of providing a price discovery mechanism and a means to offset price 

risk. 

Programs in support of the overall mission include market surveillance analysis and research; registration, audits, and contract 

markets; enforcement; reparations; proceedings; legal counsel; 

agency direction; and administrative support services. CFTC activities are carried out in Washington, DC and in regional offices located in Chicago, New York City, and Kansas City. 

The enacted 2008 farm bill (Public Law 110–246) reauthorized 

the CFTC and made several amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act to: 

—clarify the CFTC’s jurisdiction over retail financial contracts 

based on foreign currencies; 

—make the CFTC’s anti-fraud authority applicable to certain offexchange or over-the-counter derivatives contracts; 

—increase civil monetary and criminal penalties for violations; 

—permit cross-margining of accounts in security futures and options; and 

—establish CFTC regulation over certain exchange-like trading 

facilities that are currently exempt from most regulation. 

Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street and Consumer Protection Act 

(Public Law 111–203), the CFTC faces the daunting added responsibility of comprehensive oversight of the once-unregulated 

$300,000,000,000,000 over-the-counter U.S. derivatives market to 

protect and benefit end-users and the broader American public. 

This complex swaps market has a notional value of nearly eight 

times the size of that of the futures markets. 

New mandates for the CFTC include reviewing all swaps to determine whether the swap is exempt from the mandatory clearance 

requirement; requiring real-time reporting for all swaps; adopting 

rules for imposing capital and margin requirements on all noncleared swaps; exercising dual regulatory authority, in conjunction 

with the SEC, over mixed swaps; promulgating rules defining the 

universe of swaps that can be executed on a swap execution facility; and exercising backstop enforcement authority if prudential 

regulators do not act after notification of a perceived violation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $240,000,000 for 

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is $37,730,000 

above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $68,000,000 below the 

budget request. The Committee supports the need for increased resources for the CFTC above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level to 

satisfy its substantially broadened regulatory workload and to en-
70 

sure appropriate oversight of the futures markets, which are growing steadily in volume and new users, and rapidly evolving in their 

complexity and diversity. In addition to this recommended funding, 

the Committee directs the CFTC to use funds available within the 

Customer Protection Fund to establish an office and hire personnel 

for the necessary and incidental expenses of carrying out whistleblower incentive claims management and administering a customer 

education program. 

The Committee directs the CFTC to submit, within 30 days of 

enactment, a detailed spending plan for the allocation of the funds 

made available, displayed by discrete program, project, and activity, including staffing projections, specifying both FTEs and contractors, and planned investments in information technology. 

The Committee underscores the crucial need for the CFTC to 

make mission-critical investments in technology to sort through the 

millions of pieces of information generated daily by markets. The 

CFTC’s responsibilities to integrate both swap and futures markets 

and perform required analysis and oversight requires a complete 

overhaul of the current systems and a greater attention to automating surveillance and market risk analysis. The amount and detail of trade data collected and analyzed at the CFTC is expanding 

with its new authority over swaps markets and can only be managed by completely automating the collection and analysis of market data. 

The Committee is pleased that the CFTC is taking steps to improve the transparency of market data to better inform market participants and the public. 

The Committee acknowledges the significant progress that the 

CFTC has achieved in the past year in publishing and eliciting important public comment on proposed rules. The Committee is concerned that until the CFTC completes its rulemaking process to 

bring the over-the-counter derivatives markets onto transparent exchanges or swap execution facilities and under agency oversight, 

the public remains unprotected from a risk of another financial crisis. 

The Committee stresses that with the enactment of Public Law 

111–203, it is all the more critical for the CFTC, in collaboration 

with the SEC, to ensure optimum harmonization in executing the 

respective oversight responsibilities of each agency with respect to 

over-the-counter derivative products. The Committee expects the 

CFTC and the SEC to limit, to the greatest extent possible, inconsistent regulation of similar products and entities that could lead 

to opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. The Committee continues 

to support the use of funds to support the Joint SEC–CFTC Advisory Committee. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $114,788,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 122,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 114,500,000 
71 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Consumer Product Safety Commission [CPSC] is an independent regulatory agency that was established on May 14, 1973, 

and is responsible for protecting the public against unreasonable 

risks of injury from consumer products; assisting consumers to 

evaluate the comparative safety of consumer products; developing 

uniform safety standards for consumer products and minimizing 

conflicting State and local regulations; and promoting research and 

investigation into the causes and prevention of product-related 

deaths, illnesses, and injuries. 

In carrying out its mandate, the CPSC establishes mandatory 

product safety standards, where appropriate, to reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from consumer products; helps 

industry develop voluntary safety standards; bans unsafe products 

if it finds that a safety standard is not feasible; monitors recalls of 

defective products; informs and educates consumers about product 

hazards; conducts research and develops test methods; collects and 

publishes injury and hazard data; and promotes uniform product 

regulations by governmental units. 

On August 14, 2008, Congress reauthorized the Commission by 

enacting the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 

[CPSIA] (Public Law 110–314). CPSIA represents the most substantial change in the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s authorities since the creation of the Commission. Among other things, 

it enhances the Commission’s recall authority, streamlines the 

rulemaking process, provides for the creation of a new searchable 

database of consumer product complaints, and requires product certification. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $114,500,000 for the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, which is $288,000 below the fiscal 

year 2011 funding level and $7,500,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee is encouraged by the implementation of the Consumer Product Safety Information Database as authorized by the 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act [CPSIA] which will aid 

in more quickly detecting hazardous or potentially hazardous or 

unsafe products. Since its launch in March of this year, the database has provided consumers with the type of transparency envisioned in CPSIA. SaferProducts.gov has posted more than 2,700 

searchable reports, many of which include incidents of injury and 

even death. The concerns that industry has been predicting, such 

as the idea that the database would result in widespread misinformation that would needlessly malign innocent companies, have 

not materialized. Moreover, the recent enactment of a new law 

(Public Law 112–28) revising provisions in CPSIA has provided industry with additional safeguards that maximize the database’s accuracy. Every effort will be made by CPSC to include in all incident 

reports either a model number, serial number, or photograph of the 

consumer product in question, and the Commission will have additional time to verify the accuracy of those reports that are contested. With a bipartisan majority’s approval of this legislation, industry’s concerns have been addressed and opposition to the data-
72 

base should be negligible. Moreover, the Government Accountability Office [GAO] is currently reviewing the database as required in Public Law 112–10 and a longer GAO study as required 

by CPSIA is underway, and those reports should be completed 

prior to further legislative action regarding the database. In sum, 

SaferProducts.gov has been shown to be quite successful in its first 

6 months, even resulting so far in a recall of a children’s product 

in July that was demonstrated to have caused serious laceration injuries to children. 

The Committee is appreciative of the monthly drywall reports 

provided by the Commission during the past year and for fiscal 

year 2012 requires that these reports be provided on a quarterly 

basis instead, although the Commission should update the Committee of notable developments immediately, should they occur outside the quarterly reporting schedule. 

From 2001–2008, 2,691 incidents associated with playground 

equipment were reported to the CPSC, 40 of which were deaths investigated by CPSC. The most recent report is from October 2009. 

CPSC is encouraged to collect and report statistics pertaining to 

playground injuries and deaths annually, if possible. 

CPSC estimates that table saws used by hobbyists, shop class 

students, and other consumers amputate an average of 10 fingers 

per day. The Committee is supportive of CPSC’s actions and 

progress with regard to table saws, including the possibility of 

issuing a standard relating to table saw safety. 

Currently, CPSC has no means to compel the production of information relating to a product defect from a foreign manufacturer. 

The Commission must rely on the manufacturer to provide this information voluntarily—or on the Commission’s ability to compel it 

from an importer or retailer located in, or with sufficient contacts 

to, the United States. This has been a major problem in some 

cases, such as the investigation of problem drywall imported from 

China, where manufacturers have openly refused to comply with 

Commission information requests. Therefore, a provision is included allowing CPSC to require foreign manufacturers, or a subset 

thereof, after notice and hearing, to register a U.S. agent for service of process involving Commission (but not private) information 

or document requests. This authority mirrors that of other consumer agencies. 

The Committee is aware that small, round, coin-shaped batteries, 

known as ‘‘button cell batteries’’ are increasingly present in consumer products, and pose a hazard—potentially fatal—to small 

children who ingest them. Between 2007 and 2009, more than 

3,400 button battery ingestion cases were reported to U.S. poison 

centers annually. The number of ingestions that result in serious 

injury or death have increased sevenfold since 1985 due to the 

higher voltage of newer batteries. Hundreds of children have been 

severely injured and six have died from these ingestions in the last 

2 years alone. If these batteries were securely enclosed in products 

(like the existing Federal safety rules that require toys that use 

batteries to have such compartments), with accompanying warning 

labels, this hazard could be greatly diminished. Accordingly, a provision has been included requiring CPSC to promulgate such a 

safety standard. 
73 

CPSC has identified window coverings with cords as one of the 

top five hidden hazards in the home. CPSC is aware of 120 fatalities and 113 serious injuries related to corded window blinds since 

1999. About once a month, a child between 7 months and 10 years 

old dies from window cord strangulation and another child suffers 

a near strangulation. In recent years, CPSC has recalled tens of 

millions of window coverings, including Roman shades, roller and 

roll-up blinds, vertical and horizontal blinds. A voluntary standard 

exists for window blinds but it has proven to be inadequate to 

eliminate the strangulation risk posed by corded window coverings. 

After a year of working on a voluntary standard, even with consumer participation, the draft standard is unacceptably weak and 

fails to eliminate the strangulation hazards posed by corded window coverings. Accordingly, a provision has been included requiring 

CPSC to promulgate a rule that eliminates the strangulation hazard caused by cords on window coverings. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY

COMMISSION

Section 501 is a provision permitting Consumer Product Safety 

Commission staff serving abroad to be eligible for travel, leave, and 

other benefits similar to those authorized for foreign service officers. 

Section 502 provides authority for the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission [CPSC] to compel the production of information relating to a product defect from a foreign manufacturer. 

Section 503 requires CPSC to promulgate a safety standard for 

button cell batteries. 

Section 504 requires a GAO study of the potential risks associated with new and emerging consumer products. 

Section 505 requires a GAO study on compliance of voluntary industry standards for consumer products. 

Section 506 is a provision requires CPSC to promulgate a rule 

eliminating the strangulation hazard caused by cords on window 

coverings. 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $16,267,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 13,716,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,750,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the 

Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA] (Public Law 107–252). 

Under HAVA, the EAC’s role is to promulgate voluntary State 

guidelines for election systems, develop a national certification program for voting equipment, and provide related guidance. The EAC 

is also charged with awarding grants to improve election administration and to enhance election equipment. 
74 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $14,750,000 for EAC’s administrative expenses, which is $1,517,000 less than the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $1,034,000 above the budget request. The Committee bill requires that $3,250,000 of these funds be transferred 

to the National Institute for Standards and Technology for technical assistance related to the development of voluntary State voting systems guidelines. 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $335,794,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1 354,181,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 354,181,000 

1The formal budget request specified an estimate of $358,801,000. The Federal Communications Commission subsequently notified the Committee that this estimate was erroneous and 

that the correct estimate is $354,181,000. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] is charged with 

regulating interstate and international communications by radio, 

television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC is also charged with 

promoting the safety of life and property through wire and radio 

communications. The mandate of the FCC under the Communications Act is to make available to all people of the United States a 

rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio communication service. The FCC performs five major functions to fulfill 

this charge: (1) spectrum allocation; (2) creating rules to promote 

fair competition and protect consumers where required by market 

conditions; (3) authorization of service; (4) enhancing public safety 

and homeland security; and (5) enforcement. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $354,181,000 for the 

salaries and expenses of the Federal Communications Commission 

[FCC], of which $354,181,000 is to be derived from the collection 

of fees. The recommendation is $18,387,000 above the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and equal to the budget request. 

The Committee understands the FCC is promulgating a rule to 

address compensation rates from the Universal Service Fund 

[USF]. The Committee recognizes the important service that local 

exchange carriers provide to rural America and encourages the 

Commission to maintain a reasonable intercarrier compensation 

system for rural local exchange carriers. 

The Committee has included language (sec. 510) to extend FCC’s 

exemption from the Anti-deficiency Act [ADA] until December 31, 

2013. 

The Committee has included language (sec. 511) that prohibits 

the FCC from enacting certain recommendations regarding universal service that were made to it by the Joint Board of FCC 

members and State utility commissioners. The recommendation 
75 

would limit universal support to one line. This would be harmful 

to small businesses, especially in rural areas, which need a second 

line for a fax or for other business purposes. 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $42,942,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 45,261,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 45,261,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation [FDIC] Office of Inspector General [OIG] conducts audits, investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the FDIC’s contribution to the stability of, and public confidence in, the Nation’s financial system. A 

separate appropriation more effectively ensures the OIG’s independence consistent with the Inspector General Act of 1978 and 

other legislation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $45,261,000 for the FDIC inspector 

general, the same as the budget request and $2,319,000 more than 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. Funds are to be derived by 

transfer from the Deposit Insurance Fund and the Federal Savings 

and Loan Insurance Corporation [FSLIC] resolution fund. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $66,367,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 67,014,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 66,367,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through the 

1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 

(Public Law 93–443). Consistent with its duty of executing our Nation’s Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of its mission 

of maintaining public faith in the integrity of the Federal campaign 

finance system, FEC conducts three major regulatory programs: (1) 

providing public disclosure of funds raised and spent to influence 

Federal elections; (2) enforcing compliance with restrictions on contributions and expenditures made to influence Federal elections; 

and (3) administering public financing of Presidential campaigns. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $66,367,000 for the Federal Election 

Commission, $647,000 less than the budget request and equal to 

the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 
76 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $24,723,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 26,440,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 24,723,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an independent 

administrative Federal agency created by title VII of the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–454) with a mission to 

carry out five statutory responsibilities in relation to the Federal 

workforce: (1) determining the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; (2) resolving complaints of unfair labor 

practices; (3) adjudicating exceptions to arbitrator’s awards; (4) adjudicating legal issues relating to the duty to bargain; and (5) resolving impasses during negotiations. 

The FLRA’s authority is divided by law and by delegation among 

a three-member authority and an Office of General Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate confirmation; and 

the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which consists of seven parttime members appointed by the President. 

In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related interventions, 

training and facilitation of labor-management partnerships, and resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-management cooperation by 

providing training and assistance to labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes, facilitates the creation of partnerships, 

and trains the parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal Labor Relations Management statute. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,723,000 for 

the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is $1,717,000 

below the budget request and equal to the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level. 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $291,363,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 326,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 311,563,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of 

Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in the 

antitrust area include detection and elimination of illegal collusion, 

anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-firm conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC enforces consumer protection 

laws involving advertising, marketing, and financial practices; 

fights consumer fraud; and addresses privacy and identity protection concerns. 
77 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $311,563,000. The recommendation is $20,200,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level and $14,437,000 below the budget request. 

Of the amounts provided, $21,000,000 is derived from Do-NotCall fees and $149,000,000 is derived from Hart-Scott-Rodino permerger filing fees. Section 623 of the bill adjusts, for inflation, premerger filing fees. These fees have not been adjusted for inflation 

since 2001. Section 623 also establishes a new tier for merger 

transactions valued at over $1,000,000,000. The total amount of direct appropriations for this account is therefore $141,563,000. 

In addition to its headquarters building, the FTC is located in 

two satellite office buildings in Washington, DC. The recommendation includes $20,200,000 for the replacement of those satellite offices because the majority of the current space will no longer be 

available for occupancy after August 2012. 

The Committee continues to place a high priority on the FTC’s 

mission to protect consumers and preserve competition in the marketplace. The Committee is pleased that the FTC has effectively 

utilized resources provided in previous fiscal years to investigate 

fraud and misleading practices related to mortgage lending and 

other financial services, identity theft, data security, and 

healthcare and to preserve competition in the marketplace through 

education and enforcement of Federal laws related to anticompetitive practices. Over the past 3 years, the FTC saved consumers 

more than $1,700,000,000 in economic injury by stopping illegal 

practices in the marketplace, and, in 2010 alone, the FTC took action against mergers likely to harm competition in markets with a 

total of $22,500,000,000 in sales. The Committee directs the FTC 

to robustly continue such activities and has approved the following 

significant program increases in accordance with the budget request: 

The Committee makes the following findings: 

Do-Not-Call Initiative.—The recommendation includes funding 

for the FTC Do-Not-Call initiative and implementation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule [TSR], of which the entire amount is to be 

derived from the collection of fees. The Do-Not-Call initiative was 

launched pursuant to the FTC’s amended TSR to establish a national database of telephone numbers of consumers who choose not 

to receive telephone solicitations from telemarketers. The Do-NotCall initiative has received broad support from, and will provide 

significant benefits to, consumers from all corners of the United 

States. 

Gas and Diesel Prices.—The Committee continues to be concerned with the potential for market manipulation and anticompetitive behavior in the oil and natural gas industries. The FTC 

is encouraged to continue its investigations and other activities related to these concerns. The Committee directs the FTC to keep the 

Committee apprised of findings made regarding fuel prices, as well 

as other planned activities and investigations regarding the oil and 

gas industries. 

Payment Card Networks.—The Committee notes the important 

role that FTC has been assigned in enforcing the provisions of sec-
78 

tion 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act as they relate to payment card network companies. 

The FTC’s enforcement role is critical to ensuring that payment 

card network companies do not take steps to undermine the small 

issuer exemption or the pro-consumer benefits contained in section 

1075. The Committee directs FTC to provide a report 1 year after 

enactment of this act on steps that FTC has taken over the previous year to ensure compliance by payment card network companies with section 1075 of Dodd-Frank and regulations promulgated 

thereunder. This report should explain whether FTC has identified 

any evidence that payment card network companies have taken 

steps to diminish the ability of small banks and credit unions to 

successfully compete with large financial institutions in the debit 

card issuance market, and if any such steps have been taken by 

the card network companies in coordination or collusion with large 

financial institutions. 

Childhood Obesity.—The Committee remains concerned about 

childhood obesity and emphasizes that while a number of factors 

contribute to children’s poor diets and obesity, studies show that 

food marketing affects children’s food choices, food preferences, 

diets, and health. While food and marketing companies have begun 

to reformulate some foods and amend some marketing practices, 

the majority of child-targeted marketing continues to be for products of poor nutritional value. In 2009, consistent with the explanatory statement accompanying the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 

2009 (Public Law 111–8), an Interagency Working Group [IWG] 

was established to develop voluntary nutrition standards and marketing definitions for foods marketed to children. 

The Committee recognizes the IWG’s careful review of existing 

science, nutrition, and marketing standards as it developed the 

proposed voluntary marketing principles. The Committee encourages the IWG to thoroughly consider the comments submitted by 

stakeholders. The Committee further directs the IWG to submit the 

voluntary marketing principles in a final report to the Committee 

by December 15, 2011. 

FTC Headquarters Building.—The Committee is concerned about 

the cost to implement proposed legislation to transfer the FTC’s 

headquarters building to the National Gallery of Art [NGA]. The 

proposal would provide the NGA with additional space to expand 

its exhibitions, education, and administrative offices. The Committee is concerned that this transaction will result in taxpayers 

surrendering a valuable asset without any compensation. The 

building would have significant value if sold on the market due to 

its prime location and good working condition. The Committee is 

concerned that this transaction would be unprecedented; other 

NGA buildings were constructed with private funds, not paid for by 

the taxpayer. Furthermore, while the NGA has indicated it would 

raise private funds to renovate the building, Federal spending 

would continue to be required for maintenance and repair of the 

building. The Congressional Budget Office [CBO] reports, ‘‘Since 

the original buildings were donated to the NGA, all renovations 

and repairs to those facilities have been completed with appropriated funds.’’ 
79 

The Committee is concerned that such a proposal also would require the Federal Government to buy or lease replacement space 

for a new FTC headquarters, which would require additional Federal spending. The CBO reports that the most cost-effective approach to acquiring additional real estate for permanent Federal 

use is purchasing or constructing new buildings rather than entering into long-term leases. The CBO estimates that constructing a 

large enough facility to accommodate the entirety of the FTC would 

cost roughly $300,000,000. The Committee expects that a smaller 

space to accommodate only the current headquarters staff could 

cost the taxpayers a smaller but still significant amount of money. 

The Committee finds these costs difficult to contemplate, especially 

at a time when existing top priority projects have been deferred 

due to severely limited funds. The Committee is also concerned 

about the significant costs associated with this proposal. Among 

these costs are: (1) the significantly greater cost of 

commerciallyleased space for the FTC should a new space not be 

built for its use; (2) the cost of moving the FTC (which would recur 

every 10 to 15 years if the FTC is moved into commercially-leased 

space); and (3) the ongoing Federal costs associated with the NGA’s 

occupancy of the FTC headquarters building. Further, moving the 

FTC into existing Federal space (leased or owned) would require 

the Federal Government to find space for another Federal agency 

which could also impose significant additional costs on the Federal 

Government. 

Given the Committee’s concerns, section 623 of the bill precludes 

the conveyance of the FTC headquarters building unless the Federal Government receives fair market value for the property. The 

Committee also directs the FTC and the General Services Administration to keep the Committee fully and regularly apprised of the 

cost of proposals related to the headquarters building. 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Services Administration [GSA] was established by 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (Public Law 81–152) when Congress mandated the consolidation of the 

Federal Government’s real property and administrative services. 

GSA is organized into the Public Buildings Service, the Federal Acquisition Service, the Office of Government-wide Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

National Antenna Program.—In light of the need to promote 

small business access to broadband technologies, particularly in 

rural and other underserved areas, the Committee expects that the 

General Services Administration, not later than 90 days after enactment of this act, in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission, shall submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, a report detailing agency participation in 

the National Antenna Program, including the location and number 

of wireless towers deployed on Federal facilities. The Committee 

also expects the report to outline progress made in implementing 
80 

recommendations from the Federal Communications Commission 

March 2010 National Broadband Plan on fee structures for access 

to Federal rights-of-way, as well as developing one or more master 

contracts for all Federal property and buildings covering the placement of wireless towers. The report should contain recommendations on opportunities for the Federal Government to improve 

broadband or wireless technology on Federal buildings in rural or 

underserved areas. 

Automated External Defibrillators [AEDs] in Federal Facilities.— GSA shall submit a report on the GSA’s compliance with the most 

recent Guidelines for Public Access Defibrillation Programs in Federal Facilities as published in FMR Bulletin 2009–B2 regarding the 

deployment of AEDs in Federal facilities within 90 days of the enactment of this act. 

Use of Stairs.—Obesity levels have been increasing at alarming 

rates, with one-third of the population obese, and another one-third 

overweight and at risk of obesity. Lifestyle activities, such as choosing stairs over elevators, are increasingly being urged by public 

health experts to address this problem. These experts point to 

mounting evidence that small amounts of exercise accumulated 

throughout the day can provide significant health benefits. Research has found that men who climbed at least 20 floors per week 

had about a 20 percent lower risk of stroke and of death from all 

causes during the study period. Benefits for women are also likely 

to be significant. Even two flights of stairs climbed per day can 

lead to 6 pounds of weight loss over 1 year. Studies in shopping 

centers and train stations have shown that poster-prompts, placed 

between adjacent escalators and stairs, can significantly increase 

stair use. Such interventions have typically resulted in a 15 percent increase in the use of stairs. Encouraging employees to take 

the stairs is becoming a popular strategy at worksite wellness programs around the country. The Committee believes that the Federal Government should be a leader in encouraging workplace 

wellness. In addition, lessening the use of elevators by all will 

speed their movement for those who depend on them. 

The Committee believes that GSA has made some progress since 

the first effort to promote the use of stairs was initiated in the fiscal year 2006 appropriation bill; however, further effort is needed. 

The Committee directs that, to the greatest extent possible, GSA 

include in future GSA-owned and -leased buildings signage displayed: (1) next to all banks of elevators or on elevator doors in 

GSA buildings; (2) at the entrance to all nonemergency use public 

stairwells; and (3) at the base of escalators, indicating the location 

of and encouraging use of the stairs. In addition, the Committee directs the GSA to ensure that design of new buildings promote the 

use of stairs. In order to ascertain precisely how much progress has 

been made and how much remains, GSA is directed to provide 

quarterly reports on the percentage of Federal buildings with such 

signage as well as on actions undertaken with regard to the design 

of new facilities, with a view to increasing the likely use of stairs. 

Cloud Computing.—The Committee supports GSA’s cloud computing and data center consolidation activities and encourages the 

GSA to continue to assess and address the escalating costs, inefficiencies, and stove-piping related to the management of Federal 
81 

data. The Committee urges GSA to administer funding for the Office of Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies in joint consultation with OMB, in a manner that enables agencies to consolidate at least 800 data centers by 2015. The Committee expects 

GSA to use any funds for related data center consolidation to enhance ongoing Government best-practices in infrastructure migration activities, including the consolidation, standardization, and optimization of data centers. For instance, the Department of Homeland Security has testified to the Committee that it expects to save 

approximately $5,000,000,000 in taxpayer funds over the next 20 

years due to recent data center consolidation efforts. Building on 

current successes across the Government will allow GSA to better 

demonstrate and measure the cost-savings potential of such activities and thus encourage other agencies to adopt such best practices. 

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND—LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF

REVENUE

Limitation on availability of revenue: 

Limitation on availability, 2011 .................................................... $7,597,540,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 ....................... 9,508,511,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 8,144,967,000 

The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the following activities financed from rent charges: 

Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.—Space is acquired 

through the construction or purchase of facilities and prospectuslevel extensions to existing buildings. All costs directly attributable 

to site acquisition, construction, and the full range of design and 

construction services, and management and inspection of construction projects are funded under this activity. 

Repairs and Alterations.—Repairs and alterations of public buildings as well as associated design and construction services are 

funded under this activity. Protection of the Government’s investment, health and safety of building occupants, transfer of agencies 

from leased space, and cost effectiveness are the principal criteria 

used in establishing priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides 

for conversion of existing facilities and nonprospectus extensions. 

Installment Acquisition Payments.—Payments are made for liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover principal, interest, and other requirements on the debt incurred for construction 

of Federal buildings. 

Rental of Space.—Space is acquired through the leasing of buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S. Postal 

Service facilities. GSA provided 191 million square feet of rental 

space in fiscal year 2010. GSA expects to provide 198 million 

square feet of rental space in fiscal year 2011 and 201 million in 

fiscal year 2012. 

Building Operations.—Services are provided for Governmentowned and -leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and fuel, 

maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving, evaluation of 

new materials and equipment, and field supervision), and general 

management and administration of all real property related pro-
82 

grams including salaries and benefits paid from the Federal Buildings Fund. 

Other Programs.—When requested by Federal agencies, the Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and protection services 

which are in excess of those services provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation purposes, the balances of the 

Unconditional Gifts of Real, Personal, or Other Property Trust 

Fund have been combined with the Federal Buildings Fund. 

In fiscal year 2011, the Committee was forced to reduce Federal 

Building Fund program funding dramatically in order to help meet 

reduced spending targets. The Committee recognizes that this level 

cannot be sustained over time since Federal agencies and the 

Courts require adequate, safe, and appropriate space to conduct 

their important missions. Moreover, projects in the midst of construction and repair are especially adversely impacted when those 

efforts are disrupted, rendering these projects more expensive over 

time than necessary. 

The Committee is aware that the design-build project delivery 

method, which is conducted under one guaranteed contract, offers 

fast track aspects, cost savings, and decreased litigation claims. A 

study done by the Construction Industry Institute and Penn State 

University found that design-build is 6 percent lower in cost, 12 

percent faster in construction time, 33 percent faster in project 

completion, and higher quality in all measured categories. Therefore, the Committee encourages use of this method, when appropriate, in order to provide greater efficiency, lower life cycle costs, 

and expedite construction, repairs and alterations of Federal buildings. 

CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitation on availability, 2011 ........................................................... $82,000,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 .............................. 839,642,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 65,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The construction and acquisition fund shall be available for site, 

design, construction, management, and inspection costs for the construction of new Federal facilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $65,000,000 for construction and acquisition of facilities in fiscal year 2012. 

REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2011 ........................................................... $280,000,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 .............................. 868,902,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 280,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under this activity, the General Services Administration [GSA] 

executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations [R&A] of both 

Government-owned and -leased facilities under the control of GSA. 

The primary goal of this activity is to provide commercially equiva-
83 

lent space to tenant agencies. Safety, quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given primary consideration in carrying out 

this responsibility. 

R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and building 

managers. The work identified through these inspections is programmed in order of priority into the Inventory Reporting Information System and incorporated into a 5-year plan for accomplishment, based upon funding availability, urgency, and the volume of 

R&A work that GSA has the capability to execute annually. Since 

fiscal year 1995, design and construction services activities associated with repair and alteration projects have been funded in this 

account. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $280,000,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2012. 

The Committee has included $20,000,000 for a new judiciary capital security special emphasis program. This program is dedicated 

to improving physical security in buildings occupied by the judiciary in lieu of construction of brand new facilities, thereby providing 

cost savings and expedited delivery. Project priorities would be established collaboratively by the judiciary and the GSA. Funding 

provided through the judiciary capital security program will address the security deficiencies in existing buildings where physical, 

interior alterations are viable. The Committee expects the judiciary 

and the GSA to work collaboratively to assess the building conditions, viability of long-term use, and structural capacity for these 

stand-alone architectural solutions. Such solutions could include: 

constructing additional corridors, adding or reconfiguring elevators, 

building visual barriers, moving air-intakes, and enlarging security 

screening areas. A spending plan from GSA and the Judiciary is 

due to the Committee 90 days after enactment of this act. The plan 

shall also convey GSA’s intentions for funding of any other special 

emphasis programs. 

INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS

Limitation on availability, 2011 ........................................................... $135,540,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 .............................. 126,801,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 126,801,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enable GSA to enter 

into contractual arrangements for the construction of a backlog of 

approved but unfunded projects. This activity provides for the payment of interest to the Federal Financing Bank related to facilities 

acquired pursuant to the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 (40 

U.S.C. 592). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $126,801,000 for installment acquisition payments consistent with the budget request. 
84 

RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitation on availability, 2011 ........................................................... $4,830,000,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 .............................. 5,285,198,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,285,198,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except in cases where GSA has 

delegated its leasing authority. GSA’s policy is to lease privately 

owned buildings and land only when: (1) Federal space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated satisfactorily in existing Government-owned or -leased space; (2) leasing proves to be more efficient 

than the construction or alteration of a Federal building; (3) construction or alteration is not warranted because requirements in 

the community are insufficient or are indefinite in scope or duration; or (4) completion of a new Federal building within a reasonable time cannot be assured. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $5,285,198,000 for 

rental of space. The Committee recommendation is $455,198,000 

above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2011 ........................................................... $2,270,000,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2012 .............................. 2,387,968,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,387,968,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This activity provides for the operation of all Government-owned 

facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building services in 

GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do not require the 

lessor to furnish such services. Services included in building operations are cleaning, protection, maintenance, payments for utilities 

and fuel, grounds maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting services include various real property management and staff support activities such as space acquisition and assignment; the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations in order to provide better space utilization in existing buildings; onsite inspection of building services and operations accomplished by private contractors; and various highly specialized contract administration support functions. 

The space, operations, and services referred to above are furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment of rent. 

Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA also provides 

varying levels of above-standard services in agency headquarters 

facilities, including those occupied by the Executive Office of the 

President, such as the east and west wings of the White House. 
85 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,387,968,000 for 

building operations. This amount is $117,968,000 above the fiscal 

year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $66,488,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 105,140,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 61,750,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Government-wide Policy [OGP], working cooperatively with other agencies, provides the leadership needed to develop and evaluate policies associated with high performance green 

buildings and real property, acquisition policy, personal property, 

travel and transportation management, vehicles and aircraft, committee and regulations management, and management of Federal 

spending data. OGP collaborates with partner agencies and other 

stakeholders to improve public access to policy information and 

support data, and improve transparency in Government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $61,750,000 for 

Government-wide Policy. This amount is $4,738,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $43,390,000 below the budget request. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $69,882,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 70,022,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 70,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Operating Expenses supports a variety of operational activities 

which are not feasible or appropriate for a user fee arrangement. 

Major programs include the personal property utilization and donation activities of the Federal Acquisition Service; the real property 

utilization and disposal activities of the Public Buildings Service; 

the activities of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; and the 

Management and Administration activities, including support of 

Government-wide emergency response and recovery activities, and 

top-level agency-wide management, administration, and communications activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $70,000,000 for 

Operating Expenses. This amount is $118,000 above the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and $22,000 below the budget request. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $58,882,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 62,358,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 58,000,000 
86 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and investigative 

functions to identify and correct management and administrative 

deficiencies within the General Services Administration [GSA], 

which create conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, 

waste, and mismanagement. The audit function provides internal 

audit and contract audit services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and 

evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test internal 

control systems, and develop information to improve operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The investigative function 

provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal 

activities involving GSA programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,000,000 for 

the Office of Inspector General. This amount is $882,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $4,358,000 below the budget request. 

Of the requested increases, funding is provided for the IT 

workflow management tool and the IT server system replacement. 

INFORMATION AND ENGAGEMENT FOR CITIZENS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 1 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 2 ......................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. $39,084,000 

1 In fiscal year 2011, $7,984,000 was provided for the Electronic Government Fund and $34,116,000 for the Federal Citizen Services Fund. 2The budget proposed funding separately with a request of $34,000,000 for the Electronic Government Fund and $39,933,000 for the Federal Citizen Services Fund. 

The bill creates a new ‘‘Information and Engagement for Citizens’’ account by combining the ‘‘Electronic Government Fund’’ and 

‘‘Federal Citizen Services Fund’’. While these funds were created at 

different periods of time and developed different programs, they 

share a common objective—making it easier for citizens to understand and interact with their Government. The purpose of this new 

office is to provide electronic or other methods of providing access 

and understanding of Federal information, benefits, and services to 

citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,084,000, 

which is $39,084,000 more than fiscal year 2011 and $39,084,000 

more than the budget request. In fiscal year 2011, the ‘‘Electronic 

Government Fund’’ was appropriated $7,984,000 and the ‘‘Federal 

Citizen Services Fund’’ was appropriated $34,116,000. While all 

program funding is provided to the Federal Citizen Services Fund, 

funding is intended for those purposes as well as for electronic government activities. The Committee expects the funds provided for 

these activities, combined with efficiency gains and resource 
87 

prioritization, will result in increased delivery of information to the 

public and in the ease of transaction with the Government. 

All the income collected by the Office of Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies [OCSIT] in the form of reimbursements from 

Federal agencies, user fees for publications ordered by the public, 

payments from private entities for services rendered, and gifts from 

the public is available to the OCSIT without regard to fiscal year 

limitations, but is subject to an annual limitation of $90,000,000. 

Any revenues accruing in excess of this amount shall remain in the 

fund and are not available for expenditure except as authorized in 

appropriation acts. 

The Committee expects the Office of Management and Budget to 

submit a detailed expenditure plan prior to obligation of funds 

under this account. The plan should describe the projects selected, 

budget, timeline, objectives, and expected benefits and savings realized for each project. 

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $7,984,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 34,000,000 

Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... ........................... 

1Funding is included under the Information and Engagement for Citizens account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This program supports interagency ‘‘electronic government’’ or ‘‘egov’’ initiatives and projects that use the Internet or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses, and government 

agencies with simpler and more timely access to Federal information, benefits, services, and business opportunities. The program 

would also further the administration’s implementation of the Government Paperwork Elimination Act [GPEA] of 1998, which calls 

upon agencies to provide the public with optional use and acceptance of electronic information, services, and signatures, when practicable. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Funding for this program has been subsumed into the new Information and Engagement for Citizens program. 

ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $3,792,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 3,671,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,671,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides pensions for office staffs, and related 

expenses for former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, 

William Clinton, and George W. Bush, and for the postal franking 

privileges for the widows of former Presidents Ronald Reagan and 

Gerald Ford. 
88 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,671,000 for allowances and office 

staff for former Presidents, $121,000 below the fiscal year 2011 

funding level and the same as the budget request. 

Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee’s recommendation for fiscal year 2012 funding: 

FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Carter G.H. Bush Clinton G.W. Bush Widows Total 

Personnel Compensation .................................... 96 96 96 112 ................ 400 

Personnel Benefits .............................................. 2 64 109 102 ................ 277 

Benefits for Former Presidents (pensions) ........ 205 205 217 217 ................ 844 

Travel .................................................................. 2 56 5 60 ................ 123 

Rental Payments to GSA .................................... 106 171 440 392 ................ 1,109 

Communications: 

Telephone ................................................... 10 17 7 85 ................ 119 

Postage ...................................................... 15 13 14 20 14 76 

Printing ............................................................... 5 14 18 26 ................ 63 

Other Services .................................................... 65 130 34 177 ................ 406 

Supplies .............................................................. 5 15 2 40 ................ 62 

Equipment .......................................................... 7 63 36 86 ................ 192 

Total Obligations ................................... 518 844 978 1,317 14 3,671 

FEDERAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE INITIATIVES FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $16,900,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides support for inter-agency initiatives 

and projects that will improve: (1) the ability of civilian agencies 

to assess the capacity and capability of the acquisition workforce 

necessary to develop and appropriately manage acquisitions; (2) the 

capacity, capability, and effectiveness of the civilian agency acquisition workforce to improve acquisition management; and (3) agencies’ abilities to achieve the optimal mix of public and private sector resources to support agency operations. The activities supported 

through this fund are intended to foster and promote the development of the acquisition workforce and support the responsibilities 

provided for in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

While the Committee recognizes the important goals of the initiative, due to funding constraints, the Committee is unable to fund 

this initiative. 

FEDERAL CITIZEN SERVICES FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $34,116,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 39,933,000 

Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... ........................... 

1Funding is included under the Information and Engagement for Citizens account. 
89 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Citizen Services Fund provides for the salaries and 

expenses of the Office of Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies [OCSIT]. OCSIT develops new ways for citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media to easily obtain information and services from the Government on the Web, via email, in 

print, and over the telephone. OCSIT leads several interagency 

groups to share best practices and develop strategies for improving 

the way Government provides services to the American public. 

OCSIT provides information and services to the public primarily 

through USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov, the official Web portal of 

the U.S. Government. OCSIT also operates pueblo.gsa.gov, 

consumeraction.gov and consumidor.gov, webcontent.gov, and 

kids.gov Web sites. OCSIT provides direct telephone (1–800–FED– 

INFO), e-mail and online assistance to citizens through the National Contact Center, and offers comprehensive and cost-effective 

contact center solutions to customer Federal agencies through the 

USA Services program. OCSIT also coordinates the publication and 

distribution of information through the Government Printing Office’s Public Documents Distribution Center in Pueblo, Colorado. 

The Federal Citizen Services [FCS] Fund is financed from annual 

appropriations to pay for the salaries and expenses of OCSIT staff. 

Reimbursements from Federal agencies pay for the direct costs of 

information services OCSIT provides on their behalf. The FCS 

Fund also receives funding from user fees for publications ordered 

by the public, payments from private entities for services rendered, 

and gifts from the public. All income is available without regard to 

fiscal year limitations, but is subject to an annual aggregate expenditure limit as set forth in appropriation acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

(RESCISSION)

Funding for this program has been subsumed into new Information and Engagement for Citizens office. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Section 520 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of passenger motor vehicles. 

Section 521 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the Federal 

buildings fund to meet program requirements. 

Section 522 requires that the fiscal year 2012 budget request 

meet certain standards. 

Section 523 provides that no funds may be used to increase the 

amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any other service usually provided, to any 

agency which does not pay the requested rate. 

Section 524 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay 

small claims less than $250,000 made against the Government. 

Section 525 provides that certain lease agreements must conform 

to an approved prospectus. 
90 

Section 526 clarifies the authorized purposes of the Acquisition 

Workforce Training Fund. 

Section 527 provides for a land conveyance in San Joaquin County, California. Section 528 rescinds $4,600,000 in unobligated balances from 

Policy and Operations. 

Section 529 requires a report from the Administrator about programs, projects, or activities that are funded by appropriations to 

GSA but are not under the control or direction of the Administrator. Examples include, but are not limited to: the GSA Regulatory Information Service Center, the Federal Real Property Profile database, and various current and former Electronic Government projects. The report shall provide a description of each program, identify the organization approving management decisions 

and allocating funds, and the amount of GSA funds obligated by 

each program in fiscal years 2005 through 2011 by GSA appropriation account. 

HARRY S TRUMAN SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $748,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 700,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation is an independent 

agency established by Congress in 1975 (Public Law 93–642) to encourage exceptional college students to pursue careers in public 

service through the Truman Scholarship program. The Truman 

Scholarship is a merit-based award available to college juniors who 

plan to pursue careers in Government or elsewhere in public service. Truman Scholars receive up to $30,000 for graduate or professional school, participate in leadership development activities, and 

have special opportunities for internships and employment with 

the Federal Government. 

The Foundation Trust Fund was established with a one-time 

$30,000,000 appropriation in 1976. The authorizing legislation directed that this endowment be invested solely in U.S. Treasury Securities, the interest from which has funded the Foundation’s operating budget. With the decline in interest rates, the Foundation 

has experienced a significant decline in Federal financial support. 

From fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2010, despite having cut expenditures by 27 percent, annual trust fund revenue has declined 

68 percent. The Foundation anticipates a budget deficit of 

$1,400,000 without the requested appropriations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $700,000 for the 

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation. This amount is $48,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $700,000 above the 

budget request. The appropriation is provided to offset the decline 

in trust fund revenues, to increase direct financial support to scholars, to ensure compliance with Government audit reporting re-
91 

quirements, and to invest in technology and financial development 

activities. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $40,258,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 42,116,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 40,258,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB] was established by 

the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent 

quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merit systems 

against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices 

and to ensure adequate protection for employees against abuses by 

agency management. 

MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based civil 

service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case basis 

through hearing and deciding employee appeals and on a systemic 

basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations of the Office 

of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting studies of the 

civil service and other merit systems. The intended results of 

MSPB’s efforts are to assure that personnel actions taken against 

employees are processed within the law and that actions taken by 

OPM and other agencies support and enhance Federal merit principles. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,258,000 for 

the Merit Systems Protection Board. This is equal to the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and a decrease of $1,858,000 to the budget request. The Committee makes available not more than $2,345,000 

for adjudicating retirement appeals through an appropriation from 

the trust fund consistent with past practice. 

MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL FOUNDATION

MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL TRUST FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $2,495,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 2,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,200,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall and Stewart 

L. Udall Trust Fund is invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the 

investments are used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. 

Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation. The Foundation awards 

scholarships, fellowships, and grants, and funds activities of the 

Udall Center. 
92 

The Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation also supports training programs for professionals in health care policy and 

public policy, such as the Native Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, 

based at the University of Arizona, provides Native Americans with 

leadership and management training, and analyzes policies relevant to tribes. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,200,000 for 

the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund. This amount 

is $295,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and equal to 

the budget request. The Committee includes language to allow up 

to 60 percent of the appropriation to be used for the expenses of 

the Native Nations Institute. 

ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $3,792,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 3,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,792,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is a 

Federal program established by Public Law 105–156 to assist parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and public lands 

conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart 

L. Udall Foundation and serves as an impartial, nonpartisan institution providing professional expertise, services, and resources to 

all parties involved in such disputes. The Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem solving is appropriate for 

specific environmental conflicts, how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion, and whether a third-party facilitator or 

mediator might be helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts 

to reach consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and mediators with 

substantial experience in environmental conflict resolution and can 

help parties in selecting an appropriate neutral professional. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,792,000 for 

the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This amount is equal 

to the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and is a decrease of $8,000 to 

the budget request. 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 

the national recordkeeper, managing the Government’s archives 

and records, and operating the Presidential libraries. NARA is an 

independent agency created by statute in 1934 and tasked with the 

unique mission to identify, access, protect, preserve, and make 

available for use the important documents and records of all three 

branches of the Federal Government. NARA administers the Information Security Oversight Office, is the publisher of the Federal 

Register, and makes grants for historical documentation through 
93 

the National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

[NHPRC]. In addition, NARA is charged with additional responsibilities including mediating Freedom of Information Act disputes 

and coordinating controlled unclassified information. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $339,090,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 403,742,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 378,845,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for basic operations dealing with management of the Federal Government’s archives and records, operation 

of Presidential libraries, review for declassification of classified security information, and other duties. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $378,845,000 for operating expenses 

of the National Archives and Records Administration for fiscal year 

2012. This amount is $39,755,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $24,897,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation supports initiatives to 

strengthen NARA’s record management leadership role; address archival storage needs; continue to develop, build, and expand the IT 

infrastructure to conduct the business of the National Declassification Center established in Executive Order 13526; and improve research room holdings protection. 

As requested, beginning in fiscal year 2012, the Operating Expenses account will also include resources for the operations and 

maintenance of the Electronic Records Archive, previously funded 

as a segregated account for purposes of the system development 

phase designated to cease as of the end of fiscal year 2011. 

The Committee notes that security of NARA’s collections and 

holdings has been identified as a material weakness by the Archivist and cited as a management challenge by the Inspector General. The Committee directs and expects NARA to institute and enforce effective inventory controls and adequate levels of security 

within its facilities to reduce the risk of loss, damage, or destruction of irreplaceable historic documents and artifacts. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $4,241,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 4,100,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,100,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The mission of the Office of Inspector General [OIG] is to ensure 

that NARA safeguards and preserves the records of our Government while providing the American people with access to the essential documentation of their rights and the actions of their Government. The OIG accomplishes this by combating fraud, waste, and 

abuse through high-quality objective audits and investigations covering all aspects of agency operations at 45 facilities nationwide. 
94 

The OIG also serves as an independent, internal advocate for the 

economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of NARA and its operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,100,000 for the Office of Inspector General [OIG]. This amount is $141,000 below the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee supports a distinct account for the OIG in order to clearly 

identify the resources necessary to staff and operate the expanding 

mission-critical oversight and accountability functions performed by 

the OIG to ensure responsible NARA stewardship over public 

records. The Committee acknowledges that as the missions of 

NARA expand, including the establishment of the George W. Bush 

Presidential Library, the implementation of the Office of Government Information Services, and the start-up of the Controlled Unclassified Information Office, the OIG’s audit and investigative responsibilities respectively grow. 

ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $71,856,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Since 2001, NARA has been developing an Electronic Records Archives [ERA] that will permit management of records electronically 

and ensure the preservation of and access to Government electronic 

records. With the rapid changes in technology today, the formats 

in which records are stored become obsolete within a few years, 

making records inaccessible even if they are preserved intact with 

the most modern technology. ERA will preserve electronic records 

generated in a manner that enables requesters to access them on 

computer systems now and in the future. 

In August 2010, OMB placed the ERA program on its list of 26 

high-risk Federal IT projects citing lack of detailed plans for the 

final two increments, low usage of the system, and a need for improved strategic planning, among other concerns. This ultimately 

led to a decision to halt further systems development at the end of 

fiscal year 2011. As a result, NARA will transition the ERA to ongoing operations and maintenance activities, incorporated within 

the Operating Expenses account. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee supports the budget request that incorporates 

ERA into the NARA Operating Expenses account and authorizes 

the transfer to the Operating Expenses account of all remaining 

unobligated balances of funds made available for ERA development 

in prior fiscal years under the Electronic Records Archive heading. 

The Committee appreciates the complexity of building a system 

to accommodate the extensive and rapidly expanding volume of 

electronic records of the Government in past, present, and future 

formats and maintaining that system to preserve and provide reliable access to records of historic and intrinsic value. 
95 

Over the past several years, the Committee has articulated its 

serious concerns, consistent with independent findings of the 

NARA Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office, about the sufficiency of ERA expenditure plans which hampered the Committee’s ability to assess how particular investments 

would achieve specific system functionality and advance attainment of developmental milestones toward an operational system. 

The ERA project was scrutinized in an intensive TechStat session led by the Federal Chief Information Officer last year to evaluate at-risk IT projects to identify ways to fix performance, accelerate deliverables, and maximize efficiency and accountability. As 

a result, NARA and OMB mutually decided to discontinue the contractual developmental component at the close of fiscal year 2011. 

This will allow NARA to focus its attention on promoting Federal 

agency use of the current system’s functionalities rather than making further investments in building a system that encountered cost 

increases, schedule slippage, and strategic management challenges. 

The Committee believes that providing reliable access to electronic records far into the future, regardless of advancements in 

technology, is of utmost importance. The Committee strongly urges 

NARA, as it operates and maintains the ERA, to ensure effective 

and efficient preservation, appraisal, scheduling, and routine transfer of electronic records by Federal agencies and to make efforts to 

accelerate user adoption of the ERA system a top priority. 

REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $11,824,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 9,659,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,659,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the repair, alteration, and improvement 

of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will better enable NARA to 

maintain its facilities in proper condition for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees, and also maintain the structural 

integrity of the buildings. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $9,659,000 for the repairs and restoration account. This amount is $2,165,000 below the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee is pleased to fully support the request, which restores funds 

for base requirements. 

The Committee supports removal of the restrictions on 

$6,000,000 provided under Public Law 111–8 and $341,000 provided under Public Law 108–199 to fully fund base Repairs and 

Restoration requirements. This will permit NARA to devote unobligated balances remaining from the now-completed construction of 

John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum improvements 

to other capital endeavors, particularly the top priority National 

Archives Experience Phase II project. It will also allow NARA to 

apply cost savings remaining from the Military Personnel Records 

Center requirements study funded in fiscal year 2004 to advancing 
96 

critical facility repair, alteration, and improvement projects as outlined in the NARA Capital Improvements Plan. 

The Committee appreciates NARA’s submission of an update of 

its comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire infrastructure of Presidential libraries and records facilities, as part of 

the fiscal year 2012 budget submission and urges NARA to include 

an appropriate level of funding for repair of valuable historic Presidential libraries in the fiscal year 2013 budget request. 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION

GRANTS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $6,986,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 

records that document American history. Administered within the 

National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps 

State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal records, 

helps publish the papers of major figures in American history, and 

helps archivists and records managers improve their techniques, 

training, and ability to serve a range of information users. Since 

1964, the NHPRC has awarded $207,000,000 to fund over 4,900 

projects in all 50 States to connect Americans with the primary 

source materials of our history, culture, and democracy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This amount 

is $1,986,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

The Committee supports the central role the NHPRC program 

plays in the preservation and dissemination of the Nation’s documentary heritage and its success in leveraging private sector contributions. 

The Committee notes that the funding provided will enable 

NARA, through the NHPRC, to undertake a variety of initiatives, 

including advancing archives preservation, access, and digitization 

projects within the interlocking repositories of historic records and 

hidden collections; ensuring public access to some of the most important historical resources that are maintained outside of Federal 

repositories; and digitizing nationally significant historic records 

collections to facilitate round-the-clock Internet availability. 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

CENTRAL LIQUIDITY FACILITY

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit Union 
97 

Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95–630). The CLF is a 

mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by the National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by its member credit unions. 

The purpose of the CLF is to improve the general financial stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal and emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings, support consumer 

and mortgage lending, and provide basic financial resources to all 

segments of the economy. To become eligible for CLF services, credit unions invest in the capital stock of the CLF, and the facility 

uses the proceeds of such investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds to meet the liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary sources of funds for the CLF are stock subscriptions from 

credit unions and borrowings. 

The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount 

of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed capital 

stock and surplus. 

Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for funds 

attributable to emergency outflows from managerial difficulties or 

local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical changes in such areas as 

agriculture, education, and retail business. Loans can also be made 

to offset protracted credit problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends that lending through the CLF be 

limited to the maximum level provided for by section 307(a)(4)(A) 

of the Federal Credit Union Act. This limitation provides the 

NCUA maximum flexibility to assist with credit unions’ financial 

liquidity during the economic downturn. The Committee also recommends the budget request of limiting administrative expenses 

for the CLF to $1,250,000 in fiscal year 2012. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $1,247,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,247,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 

[CDRLF] was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 

‘‘low-income’’ credit unions in providing basic financial services to 

low-income communities. Low-interest loans and deposits are made 

available to assist these credit unions. Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, although shorter repayment periods may 

be considered. Technical assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income credit unions for improving operations as well 

as addressing safety and soundness issues. Credit unions use TAG 

funds for specific initiatives, including taxpayer assistance, financial education, home ownership initiatives, and training assistance. 
98 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,247,000 for technical assistance 

grants to community development credit unions. This funding level 

is $753,000 below the budget request and equal to the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level. The Committee expects the CDRLF to continue 

making loans from available funds derived from repaid loans and 

interest earned on previous loans to designated credit unions. 

The Committee supports NCUA’s outreach efforts to underserved 

rural and urban communities across America through technical assistance grants provided within CDRLF. The Committee encourages NCUA to continue its efforts to provide financial education, 

particularly regarding consumer credit and home mortgages, and to 

provide alternatives to predatory lending services through targeted 

technical assistance grants and support. 

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $13,972,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 13,664,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,664,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–521). The OGE is charged by law 

to provide overall direction of executive branch policies designed to 

prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high ethical standards for 

executive branch employers. The OGE carries out these responsibilities by promulgating and maintaining enforceable standards of 

ethical conduct for nearly 4 million civilian employees and uniformed service members in more than 130 executive branch agencies and the White House; overseeing a financial disclosure system 

that reaches 28,000 public and over 325,000 confidential filers; providing direct education and training products to 5,700 ethics officials; conducting outreach to the general public, the private sector, 

and civil society; and sharing good practices with and providing 

technical assistance to State, local, and foreign governments and 

international organizations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,664,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the OGE in fiscal year 2012. This amount 

is $308,000 below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

Funds provided will enable the OGE to fulfill its core mission 

programs and its lead role in strengthening ethical culture within 

the executive branch, preventing conflicts of interest, and promoting good governance. The OGE has designed three budget priorities to support these goals. 

First, the OGE is advancing initiatives to modernize Government 

ethics laws, regulations, and programs, including fully imple-
99 

menting Executive Order 13490 and enhancing oversight of contractor ethics. 

Second, the OGE is harnessing technology to promote transparency, training, and oversight, of agency ethics programs, including initiating an electronic financial disclosure system for the more 

than 1,400 public and confidential financial disclosure filers whose 

reports OGE reviews and certifies, planning for and procuring a 

new agency Web site, replacing its deteriorating financial disclosure tracking system, and developing an information management 

system to manage requests for advice from executive branch ethics 

officials. 

Third, the OGE is working to promote continuity and succession 

planning in ethics programs, through four specific leadership initiatives, including preparing the executive branch ethics community 

for an anticipated increase in volume of financial disclosure filings 

by presidential nominees incident to the 2012 election; acquainting 

senior Government employees with the importance and scope of the 

executive branch ethics program; emphasizing continuity and succession planning as a major national training theme; and developing curriculum leading to an ethics official certification program. 

Experience has shown that public financial disclosure by nominees 

to Senate-confirmed Presidential appointments is a steady and uninterrupted process throughout an administration and that the 

OGE’s transition workload responsibilities are ongoing. 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $97,774,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 100,027,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 97,774,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by 

Public Law 95–454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, enacted 

on October 13, 1978. OPM is responsible for management of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit civil service 

system. Although individual agencies are largely responsible for 

personnel operations, OPM provides a Government-wide framework 

for human resources policy, advises and assists agencies (often on 

a reimbursable basis) with workforce planning and personnel matters, and ensures that agency operations are consistent with requirements of law on issues such as veterans preference and merit 

system compliance. OPM oversees examination of applicants for 

employment in the competitive service; issues regulations and policies on recruitment, hiring, classification and pay, training, and 

other aspects of personnel management; and manages the process 

for personnel security and background checks for suitability and 

national security clearances. OPM is also responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits, and life insurance programs affecting most Federal employees, retired Federal employees, and their families and survivors. 
100 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a general fund appropriation of 

$97,774,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel 

Management. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 level 

and $2,253,000 below the budget request. 

The recommendation includes the requested funding for the Enterprise Human Resources Integration project, the Human Resources Line of Business project, and the workforce acquisition initiative. 

The Committee understands the importance of timely and effective implementation of the Office of Personnel Management’s responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act, including the development of the multi-state health plans, support of the Federal Preexisting Condition Insurance Plan, and the implementation of the 

requirement to allow tribal governments to participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits and the Federal Employee Group 

Life Insurance programs. 

Retirement Processing.—The Committee is aware of efforts to address the backlog of retirement claims at OPM, including the hiring of 40 FTE during fiscal year 2011. As of May 2011, an employee filing for retirement receives an interim payment of 95 percent of the estimated annuity. The average case is processed fully 

in 117 days, with the maximum length of processing at 141 days 

for those cases involving a disability, court order, service credit, or 

survivor benefit. The Committee is supportive of efforts to expedite 

the backlog of claims and requests that OPM inform the Committee 

of developments as they occur. 

Retirement Modernization.—Modernization of the retirement 

records of Federal employees remains a high priority for the Committee. The Committee understands that work planned for fiscal 

year 2011 includes: modernizing critical calculator and retirement 

systems; automating manual paper-based retirement system 

through electronic data collection and applications; implementing 

automated tools to improve retirement case processing; and imaging incoming paper retirement records. The Committee appreciates 

receiving the quarterly reports and notes the importance of receiving status update briefings from OPM as developments and milestones occur and future plans are determined. 

Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and Nursing 

Shortage.—In April 2010, OPM provided a report to Congress on 

nursing faculty and the Intergovernmental Personnel Act [IPA] Mobility Program, along with findings and recommendations. The 

Committee is pleased with OPM’s initial efforts regarding the 

nurse and nurse faculty shortage, including the research conducted, the forum held, the recommendations provided, and the 

recognition that these efforts are a first step of a larger effort 

which OPM is leading. The Committee endorses the recommendations in the report and anticipates regular, 6-month updates on 

next steps, such as conducting additional forums, increasing program awareness, implementing efforts to use IPA to address the 

shortage, developing partnerships with accredited schools of nursing, and conducting outreach to academic institutions and key 
101 

stakeholders on possible solutions, collecting and tracking data, as 

well as other specific recommendations outlined in the report. 

Inappropriate Use of Temporary Hiring Authority.—The Committee is aware that continuous and sustained inappropriate use of 

temporary hiring authority by Federal agencies occurs and that 

this remains unresolved. These problems date back to the early 

1990s and were reported on by the Office of Personnel Management and the Merit Systems Protection Board (‘‘Temporary Federal 

Employment: In Search of Flexibility and Fairness,’’ Sept. 1994) 

and again in 2002 by the Government Accountability Office (GAO– 

02–296). The Committee directs OPM to report on options and recommendations to remedy the inequity no later than 90 days after 

enactment of this act. The report should include identification of 

agencies and types of positions where continuous and sustained inappropriate use of temporary hiring authority is occurring. Options 

to provide competitive status to employees performing regular and 

recurring work of a permanent nature under a series of temporary 

appointments should be explored and actions that can be taken to 

ensure that Federal agencies use appropriate hiring authorities in 

the future should be outlined in the report. 

Wellness.—In fiscal year 2010, the Committee provided 

$5,000,000 as requested in the budget, to conduct pilot programs 

which would serve as evaluation mechanisms for effective strategies to improve Federal employee health through targeted interventions in areas such as smoking cessation, disease management, prevention, and risk assessment. The purpose was to design a comprehensive policy to improve the health and wellness of Federal 

employees, leading to cost savings for all healthcare. OPM has been 

participating in the first pilot program, along with its neighbors, 

the General Services Administration and the Department of the Interior. The Committee directs OPM to report on the progress of this 

demonstration project, including measurements and outcomes within 90 days of enactment of this act. 

Consolidated Business Information System [CBIS].—The Committee is aware that the effort to replace the legacy financial system and manage OPM’s trust funds has encountered defects in the 

hardware and software. This multi-year initiative began with an 

initial estimate of $141,000,000, now revised downward to 

$97,000,000. The Committee directs that OPM provide quarterly 

updates, reporting on milestone developments as well as any further problems, until the CBIS project is fully operational and problem-free. 

LIMITATION

(TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... $112,516,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 132,523,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 112,516,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust funds 

of the Office of Personnel Management to cover administrative ex-
102 

penses for the retirement and insurance programs, including the 

cost of automating the retirement recordkeeping systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $112,516,000, which 

is the same as the fiscal year 2011 level and $20,007,000 less than 

the budget request. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $3,142,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 3,804,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,142,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Inspector General is charged with establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office of Personnel Management’s activities which prevent and detect fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency’s programs. Contract audits provide 

professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting 

and financial matters regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations, including 

financial statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide 

detailed technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits review the operations of health and life insurance carriers, 

healthcare providers, and insurance subscribers. The investigative 

function provides for the detection and investigation of improper 

and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

Administrative sanctions debar from participation in the health insurance program those healthcare providers whose conduct may 

pose a threat to the financial integrity of the program itself or to 

the well-being of insurance program enrollees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,142,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in fiscal 

year 2012. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level and $662,000 less than the budget request. 

(LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2011 ..................................................................................... $21,174,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 21,559,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 21,174,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 

trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General activities 

totaling $21,174,000 for fiscal year 2012. This amount is the same 

as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level, and $385,000 below the budget request. 
103 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEES HEALTH

BENEFITS

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $10,467,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 10,862,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 10,862,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation covers the Government’s share of the cost of 

health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal Employees 

Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal Employees 

Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$10,862,000,000 for Government payments for annuitants, employees health benefits. 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEE LIFE

INSURANCE

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $50,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 52,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 52,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Public Law 96–427, the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance 

Act of 1980, requires that all employees under the age of 65 who 

separate from the Federal Government for purposes of retirement 

on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make contributions toward 

their basic life insurance coverage after retirement until they reach 

the age of 65. These retirees will contribute two-thirds of the cost 

of the basic life insurance premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute one-third of the cost of the premium for retirees’ basic coverage. OPM, acting as the payroll office on behalf of 

Federal retirees, has requested, and the Committee has provided, 

the funding necessary to make the required Government contribution associated with annuitants’ post-retirement life insurance coverage. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$52,000,000 for the Government payment for annuitants, employee 

life insurance. 

PAYMENT TO CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $10,076,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 9,979,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,979,000,000 
104 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The civil service retirement and disability fund was established 

in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The fund covers the 

operation of the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal 

Employees’ Retirement System. 

This appropriation provides for the Government’s share of retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military service, and survivor 

annuities to eligible former spouses of some annuitants who did not 

elect survivor coverage. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$9,979,000,000 for payment to the civil service retirement and disability fund. 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $18,458,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 19,486,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 18,972,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] provides a safe channel 

for Federal employees to report waste, fraud, abuse, and threats to 

public health and safety. 

The OSC was first established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 

until 1989, it operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm of the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]. In 

1989, Congress enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act (Public 

Law 101–12), which made OSC an independent agency within the 

executive branch. In 1994, the Uniformed Services Employment 

and Reemployment Rights Act [USERRA] (Public Law 103–353) became law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in connection with military service, prohibited discrimination against 

them because of that service, and gave OSC new authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal agencies. 

The OSC continues to experience significant increases in its caseload. Overall, in fiscal year 2010, the OSC saw more than 8,270 instances of requests for assistance or action sought by Federal employees or other persons, marking an increase of 11 percent over 

the prior year. In fiscal year 2010, the OSC’s intake of cases totaled 

3,950 new matters. This was an increase of 6 percent over the 

number of cases received in fiscal year 2009. Of the new matters 

received by OSC in 2010, 66 percent of the cases were prohibited 

personnel practice complaints. 

The OSC also received 526 new Hatch Act complaints in 2010, 

representing a 6 percent increase from 2009. The OSC issued 4,320 

Hatch Act advisory opinions (including verbal and written advisory 

opinions) to persons who sought advice in 2010, an uptick of 15 

percent over the number issued in 2009. In addition, the OSC’s 
105 

Disclosure Unit’s whistleblower caseload increased to 961 cases in 

2010, up over 32 percent from the 724 cases in 2009 which itself 

was a 37 percent boost over 2008. During fiscal year 2010, the Disclosure Unit referred matters to agency heads for their review a 

total of 24 times. 

The OSC is also tasked with new USERRA case responsibilities 

pursuant to the Veterans’ Benefits Act of 2010 (Public Law 111– 

275) that directed a 3-year demonstration project involving the 

OSC and the Department of Labor designed to assess and compare 

agencies’ performance in investigating and resolving claims against 

Federal executive agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,972,000 for 

the OSC. This amount is $514,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $514,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee acknowledges that the OSC continues to experience dramatic growth in its caseload, as a result of heightened 

awareness of the Hatch Act, a more vigorous focus on complaints 

under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment 

Rights Act, and actions under the Whistleblower Protection Act. 

Moreover, the Committee is concerned that the OSC needs an increase of two additional staff in the USERRA Unit in order to ensure that the new pilot demonstration program authorized in 2010 

can be minimally viable. The Committee notes that the OSC budget request seeks only one new FTE for the USERRA Enforcement 

and Prosecution Program in addition to the three FTE currently on 

board. During the first Demonstration Project from 2005–2007, the 

OSC had 8–10 attorneys and investigators in the USERRA Unit, 

and staffing is now at 4. The Committee believes it is vital that the 

OSC have sufficient resources, and provides an additional amount 

above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level to help the OSC succeed 

in its work to ensure high-corrective action rates for impacted veterans, prevent serious delays and backlogs in case processing, and 

expeditiously remedy USERRA violations. 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $14,304,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 14,450,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,304,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent agency 

that has exercised regulatory oversight over the United States 

Postal Service since its creation by the Postal Reorganization Act 

of 1970. For over three decades, that oversight consisted primarily 

of conducting public, on-the-record hearings concerning proposed 

rates, mail classification, and major service changes, and recommended decisions for action to the Postal Service Board of Governors. 
106 

The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law 

109–435) assigned significant new responsibilities to the Commission. These enhanced authorities include providing regulatory oversight of the pricing of Postal Service products and services, ensuring Postal Service transparency and accountability, consulting on 

delivery service standards and performance measures, consulting 

on international postal policies, preventing cross-subsidization or 

other anticompetitive postal practices, and serving as a forum to 

act on complaints with postal products and services. The Commission provides leadership and recommends policies that foster a robust and viable postal system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal 

Fund, of $14,304,000 for the Postal Regulatory Commission. This 

amount is the same as the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$146,000 below the budget request. The funds will support 74 FTEs 

and enable the Commission to meet its mission of ensuring transparency and accountability in postal operations, services, and finances. 

The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2012, the Commission 

will be engaged in assessing the value of the universal service obligation to the Nation and the Postal Service’s ability to continue to 

provide this service given its declining revenue; issuing an Annual 

Compliance Determination report assessing the Postal Service’s 

compliance with the ratemaking regulations and applicable laws; 

conducting a 5-year review of the contribution share of Competitive 

Products, conducting a 5-year review and making recommendations 

on the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act; continuing its 

active involvement in the Universal Postal Union [UPU], particularly in developing a modernized terminal dues system and promoting greater transparency and accountability; and pursuing special studies requested by the Postal Service, Congress, and as a result of Commission-initiated inquiries. 

PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $998,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,683,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Recommended by the July 22, 2004 report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/11 

Commission), the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 

[PCLOB] was originally established through the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108–458). 

The PCLOB was made a component of the White House Office 

within the Executive Office of the President. 

Under the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–53), the PCLOB was reconstituted as an independent agency within the executive branch. The 

dual mission of the PCLOB is to: 
107 

—analyze and review actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from terrorism, ensuring that the need for such 

actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil 

liberties; and 

—ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in 

the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and 

policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for the PCLOB. This amount is $2,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $683,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee strongly supports the mission of the PCLOB. The 

Committee notes that the former Board ceased operations on January 30, 2008 with the intention that a new, more independent 

Board would be instituted in its place. The Committee is seriously 

concerned that now, nearly 4 years later, the new PCLOB has not 

yet been reconstituted and staffed as required by Public Law 110– 

53. The Committee urges the administration to nominate qualified 

persons to the PCLOB as expeditiously as possible. The Committee 

urges the PCLOB, once it is reconstituted, to promptly provide a 

detailed budget justification to the Committee. 

RECOVERY ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $31,543,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 28,400,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (Recovery 

Board) was established by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) to ensure accountability and transparency in the expenditure of Recovery Act funds and to minimize 

fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The Recovery Board analyzes 

Recovery Act projects for further in-depth investigation or referral 

to Federal Inspectors General and operates a fraud hotline to allow 

individuals to report possible fraud, waste, and abuse. The Recovery Board also collects information from recipients of Recovery Act 

funds, compiles the information in a user-friendly format, and posts 

the information on its public Web site, Recovery.gov. 

Through fiscal year 2011, the expenses of the Recovery Board 

were funded by a Recovery Act appropriation. These funds are exhausted and new funding is required to continue the Recovery 

Board’s responsibilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $28,400,000. The recommendation is 

$28,400,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level because the 

Recovery Board was operating using prior year balances during 

that year. The recommendation is $3,143,000 below the budget request due to the availability of unspent balances. 
108 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $1,185,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 1,407,483,130 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,407,483,130 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is an independent agency responsible for administering many of the Nation’s 

laws regulating the areas of securities and finance. 

The mission of the SEC is to administer and enforce Federal securities laws in order to protect investors, maintain fair, honest, 

and efficient markets, and promote capital formation. This includes 

ensuring full disclosure of financial information, regulating the Nation’s securities markets, and preventing and policing fraud and 

malpractice in the securities and financial markets. The strength 

of the American economy and our Nation’s financial markets is dependent upon investors’ confidence in the financial disclosures and 

statements released by publicly traded companies. 

The SEC, as the investor’s advocate, is responsible for overseeing 

approximately 35,000 entities, including 11,800 investment advisers, 9,500 public companies, 4,200 mutual funds, and 5,400 brokerdealers with 175,000 branch offices. The SEC also oversees 600 

transfer agents, 12 national securities exchanges, 10 clearing agencies, 10 nationally recognized statistical ratings organizations, as 

well as the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Municipal Securities 

Rulemaking Board, and other self-regulatory organizations. 

The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) (Public Law 111–203) 

added significantly to SEC’s responsibilities, including bringing 

transparency and accountability to over-the-counter derivatives 

market; registering and overseeing hedge fund and private equity 

advisers; enhanced supervision of nationally recognized statistical 

rating organizations and clearing agencies; heightened regulation 

of asset-backed securities; and creation of a new whistleblower program. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total budget (obligational) authority of $1,407,483,130 for the salaries and expenses of the SEC, to 

be fully derived from $1,407,483,130 in new fee collections. This 

total funding level is $222,483,130 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

Enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act altered the budgetary treatment of SEC fee receipts. For fiscal year 2012 and beyond, transaction fees receipts are to be treated as offsetting collections equal 

to the amount of the appropriation. This represents a wholesale 

transformation of how fee receipts have been historically available. 

In addition, the law established a ‘‘SEC Reserve Fund’’ designated 

for necessary functions as determined by the SEC and drawn from 

registration fee receipts permitting the SEC to draw up to 

$50,000,000 per year, not to exceed a cumulative balance of 
109 

$100,000,000 in a single year or annual spending in excess of 

$100,000,000. The Committee reminds the SEC of its obligation to 

notify Congress of the date, amount, and purpose of any obligation 

from the Fund within 10 days of such obligation. 

The Committee directs the SEC to submit, within 30 days of enactment, a detailed spending plan for the allocation of appropriated 

funds displayed by discrete program, project and activity, including 

staffing projections, specifying both FTEs and contractors, and 

planned investments in information technology. 

The Committee’s recommended funding increase is expected to 

allow the SEC to more aggressively police the securities markets 

through examinations and enforcement actions, strengthen SEC’s 

examination responsibilities, enhance risk-based oversight of the 

investment management industry, expand inspections of credit rating agencies and permit SEC to conduct more comprehensive examinations, reach a broader universe of the entities it regulates, 

and improve its ability to uncover and prosecute fraud. 

In addition, the recommended increase supports urgent, critical 

investments in information technology upgrades so that SEC staff 

are equipped with cutting edge automation support tools to enhance their ability to promptly handle tips, complaints, and referrals as well as to better identify emerging risks using improved 

surveillance tools. The Committee expects the SEC to implement 

key controls to effectively safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, 

and availability of its financial and sensitive information and systems. 

The Committee strongly believes that fair and orderly markets 

are essential to restore public confidence in and bolster the integrity of our capital markets. The Committee emphasizes that with 

this significant recommended funding increase comes a concomitant responsibility on the part of the SEC to aggressively safeguard 

the investing public. The SEC must be vigilant in its enforcement 

of securities laws, and failures to properly investigate and take appropriate action will not be condoned. 

The Committee is highly concerned about a spate of audit and 

investigative reports issued by the SEC Inspector General in recent 

years revealing significant disturbing findings of waste or misuse 

of Government funds, inadequate management oversight of contracts and procurement, excessive costs and inefficiencies in real 

estate leasing and configuration of staff offices, and incidents of 

employee misconduct. Furthermore, the Committee notes with concern emerging reports concerning a serious lapse in preservation 

and retention of archival materials. It is imperative that the SEC 

use scarce Government resources wisely. These situations distract 

the SEC management from devoting full attention to its mission of 

protecting investors and maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient 

markets, particularly in tumultuous economic times. The Committee expects SEC management to continue to place a high priority on and invest sufficient resources in implementing and 

promptly completing corrective actions identified by the inspector 

general to ameliorate the problems identified to prevent recurrence. 

As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the findings and recommendations of a comprehensive independent study of the SEC’s 

organizational structure, personnel and resources, technology and 
110 

resources, and the agency’s relationship with self-regulatory organizations were released in March 2011. The Committee understands that in response to the issuance of the Boston Consulting 

Group’s report, the SEC has instituted several internal working 

groups to address the recommendations. The Committee directs the 

SEC to submit to the Committee, within 90 days of enactment, a 

report summarizing the status of the internal assessments, describing actions taken and planned to institute administrative reforms, 

and identifying particular changes necessitating legislative action. 

The Committee stresses that with the enactment of the DoddFrank Act, it is all the more critical for the SEC, in collaboration 

with the CFTC, to ensure optimum harmonization in executing the 

respective oversight responsibilities of each agency with respect to 

over-the-counter derivative products. The Committee expects the 

SEC and the CFTC to limit, to the greatest extent possible, inconsistent regulation of similar products and entities that could lead 

to opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. The Committee continues 

to support the use of funds to support the Joint SEC–CFTC Advisory Committee. 

The Committee remains concerned that American investors may 

be unwittingly investing in companies or organizations with ties to 

countries that sponsor terrorism or are linked to human rights violations. The Committee believes that a company’s association with 

sponsors of terrorism and human rights abuses, no matter how 

large or small, can have a materially adverse result on a public 

company’s operations, financial condition, earnings, and stock 

prices, all of which can negatively affect the value of an investment. Investors and consumers also have a reasonable right to 

know what activities their investments or purchases may be directly or indirectly supporting. 

In order to protect American investors’ savings and to disclose 

these business relationships to investors, an Office of Global Security Risk was established within the Division of Corporation Finance. The Committee notes that under the Dodd-Frank Act, public 

companies are required to provide disclosure to the SEC in matters 

involving conflict minerals, extractive industries, and mining safety 

matters. The Committee understands that the SEC will be implementing the requirements, as directed, in the coming months. The 

Committee expects the work of the Office to remain a high priority 

during fiscal year 2012 and directs the SEC to continue to submit 

quarterly reports on its activities. 

The Committee is concerned that current SEC regulations leave 

broad discretion to companies to decide if disclosure of their activities is required with respect to business interests in or with a state 

sponsor of terrorism. Companies are only required to make disclosures in cases where the companies judges the information is ‘‘material’’ to investors or is necessary to ensure a required statement 

is not misleading. In November 2007, the SEC issued a concept release seeking comment about whether to develop a new mechanism 

to facilitate greater access to companies’ disclosures concerning 

their business activities in or with state sponsors of terrorism. The 

comment period ended on January 22, 2008 and the SEC has taken 

no action since that time. 
111 

The Committee believes that business conducted by a publicly 

traded company that could subject such company to sanctions 

should be considered material and disclosed. Therefore, the Committee directs the Commission to issue final rules that require each 

issuer to disclose activities that may subject it to sanctions under 

section 5 of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996. 

Similarly, the human rights and sexual violence problems plaguing mineral rich Democratic Republic of Congo are long standing 

and well known. Industries using key minerals from this region 

have been aware of the problem and a number have already taken 

laudable steps to ensure their sourcing of minerals avoids fueling 

further violence. The Committee expects the clear congressional intent of section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act to be implemented in 

a timely manner. 

The Committee directs the SEC to submit a report to the Committee, within 90 days of enactment, documenting the quality of 

public company reporting, under the February 8, 2010 interpretive 

guidance on climate change disclosure obligations under Federal 

securities laws and regulations, on material physical and 

infrastructural risks, compliance with State, regional, Federal and 

international laws and policies addressing emissions, and business 

opportunities. The SEC is directed to include in the report a full 

description of its own initiatives to carry out the guidance, their efficacy, and the efforts it will implement in fiscal year 2012. 

Access to financial education, resources, services, and protections 

promotes better informed decisionmaking about investing and saving for long-term financial security. The Committee applauds the 

Office of Investor Education and Advocacy [OEIA] for its attention 

to and consideration of the views and interests of retail investors. 

The Committee encourages the OEIA to continue efforts, including 

financial literacy and education initiatives, to protect and advance 

the interests of retail investors. 

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $24,226,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 24,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 23,984,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Selective Service System is an independent Federal agency, 

operating with permanent authorization under the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). The agency is not part 

of the Department of Defense, but its basic mission is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces adequate to ensure 

the security of the United States during a time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have relied on volunteers to 

fill military manpower requirements. However, the Selective Service System remains the primary vehicle by which personnel will be 

brought into the military if Congress and the President should authorize a return to the draft. 

In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law (Public 

Law 100–180) to develop plans for a post-mobilization healthcare 
112 

personnel delivery system capable of providing the necessary critically skilled healthcare personnel to the Armed Forces in time of 

emergency. An automated system capable of handling mass registration and inductions is now complete, together with necessary 

draft legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype forms 

and letters, and other products. These products will be available 

should the need arise. The development of supplemental standby 

products, such as a compliance system for healthcare personnel, 

continues using very limited existing resources. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,984,000 for 

the Selective Service System. This amount is $242,000 below the 

fiscal year 2011 enacted level and $516,000 below the budget request. 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $729,738,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 985,439,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 955,387,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $955,387,000 for the 

Small Business Administration [SBA]. The recommendation is 

$225,649,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$30,052,000 below the budget request. The recommendation includes $167,300,000 for the Disaster Loans Program Account designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 111– 

25. Funding is distributed among the SBA appropriation accounts 

as described below. 

The Committee has been frustrated that recent SBA congressional justifications have been unnecessarily complicated. The 

Committee directs SBA to revise the format of the congressional 

justification for fiscal year 2013 so that the budget detail provided 

ties directly to enacted and requested appropriated amounts and 

information on SBA programs is accessible via an index. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $432,571,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 427,296,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 404,202,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $404,202,000 for salaries and expenses of the SBA. The recommendation is $28,369,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and is $23,094,000 below 

the budget request. 

Noncredit Business Assistance Programs.—Within the amounts 

made available under this heading, the Committee recommendation provides $165,730,000 for the SBA non-credit business assistance programs. The recommendation is $5,480,000 above the budget request and $19,249,000 below the 2011 enacted level. 

The Committee recommendations for non-credit business assistance, by program, are displayed in the following table: 
113 

NON-CREDIT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2011 enacted Fiscal year 2012 

budget estimate 

Committee recommendation 

Small Business Development Centers ....................................................... 112,774 103,000 112,774 

Drug-free Workplace Grants ...................................................................... 998 ........................ ........................

SCORE ........................................................................................................ 6,986 7,000 6,986 

Women’s Business Centers ........................................................................ 13,972 14,000 13,972 

Women’s Business Council ........................................................................ 998 1,900 998 

Microloan Technical Assistance ................................................................. 21,956 10,000 21,956 

Veterans Programs ..................................................................................... 2,495 2,500 2,500 

PRIME ......................................................................................................... 7,984 ........................ ........................

Native American Outreach ......................................................................... 1,248 1,250 1,248 

7(j) Technical Assistance .......................................................................... 3,393 3,100 3,100 

HUBZone ..................................................................................................... 2,196 2,500 2,196 

Entrepreneurial Development Initiative ..................................................... 9,980 12,000 ........................

Emerging Leaders ...................................................................................... ........................ 3,000 ........................

Total, Non-credit Business Assistance Programs ........................ 184,979 160,250 165,730 

The Committee directs that the amounts provided for SBA’s NonCredit Business Assistance Programs, as specified in the table 

above, shall be administered in the same manner as previous years 

and shall not be reduced, reallocated, or reprogrammed to provide 

additional funds for other programs, initiatives, or activities. 

The Committee continues to support the Small Business Develop- ment Center [SBDC] Program and recommends $112,774,000 for 

fiscal year 2012, equal to the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and 

$9,774,000 above the budget request. The SBDC network—which 

encompasses over 900 service centers across the Nation—provides 

management and technical assistance to an estimated 1.2 million 

small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs each year. As 

the economy struggles, SBDCs have reported a significant increase 

in demand for their expertise as businesses seek guidance on how 

to weather the economic downturn and as newly unemployed 

Americans look for advice on starting a small business as a new 

career path. Providing support for SBDCs is more critical than ever 

as our economy works to recover and grow. The Committee recommends $21,956,000 for grants to Microloan 

intermediaries under the Microloan program for marketing, management, and technical assistance provided to borrowers. An additional $3,678,000 is recommended under the heading ‘‘Business 

Loans Program Account’’ to support lending under the Microloan 

program. The Committee includes a provision that, for funding provided for fiscal year 2012, temporarily increases the maximum 

amount of grant funding eligibility for qualified Microloan intermediaries. This temporary condition will provide relief to Microloan 

intermediaries that are providing increased assistance to Microloan 

borrowers during the economic downturn. 

The Committee supports funding for veterans programs and vet- erans business outreach centers and provides $2,500,000 for veterans programs. When determining the allocation of the funding, 

the Committee strongly encourages SBA to consider centers with 

significant experience in conducting outreach to veterans. 

Operating Expenses.—Within the amounts made available under 

this heading, the Committee recommendation provides 

$238,472,000 for SBA’s operating expenses. The recommendation is 
114 

$9,120,000 below the 2011 enacted level to reflect the creation of 

a separate account for the Office of Advocacy; excluding that office, 

funding for operating expenses is equal to the 2011 enacted level. 

The recommendation is $28,574,000 below the budget request. 

Within the amounts recommended for SBA’s operating expenses, 

the Committee recommends $7,100,000 to continue the agency-wide 

effort to modernize SBA’s loan management and accounting systems. The Committee commends SBA’s decision to reformulate the 

planned modernization to reduce costs, shorten the time to completion, and reduce the risks associated with a long-term acquisition. 

SBA estimates that the costs under the new approach will total 

$43,000,000, a savings of $113,000,000 from the original budget of 

$156,000,000. The Committee is concerned, however, about continued risks related to the acquisition and directs SBA to identify an 

executive-level staffer who shall be dedicated to agency-wide management, coordination, and implementation of the new system. The 

Committee directs SBA to continue to report quarterly to the Committees on Appropriations summarizing the agency’s progress regarding the modernization effort and emphasizes the need for such 

reports to include plain language descriptions of the project in 

place of technical jargon. 

The Committee notes that section 1322 of the Small Business 

Jobs Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–240) requires prime contractors 

to utilize small business subcontractors included on Federal procurement bids unless such subcontractors are no longer in business 

or can no longer reasonably meet the requirements of the contract. 

The Committee directs SBA to submit a report within 180 days of 

enactment detailing the implementation of section 1322 and identifying further steps that can be taken to ensure that subcontractors 

listed on Federal procurement bids are included in work performed 

when appropriate. 

The Committee is concerned about instances where certain businesses are awarded small business prime contracts or subcontracts 

but a small business does not ultimately perform the work. The 

Committee urges SBA to work to ensure that only legitimate small 

business interests receive small business awards. The Committee 

directs SBA to submit a report within 180 days of enactment identifying administrative, legislative, and regulatory steps that could 

be taken to address the practice of pass-throughs as it relates to 

Federal small business contracting. 

The Committee notes that the small business timber sale setaside program is designed to serve many small rural communities 

and small timber mills. The Committee directs the Administrator 

to coordinate with the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management and provide a written report to the Committee within 60 

days of enactment detailing SBA’s current and planned activities 

related to communication with timber businesses in small rural 

communities. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $16,267,400 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 18,400,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,267,400 
115 

The Committee recommendation provides $16,267,400 for the Office of Inspector General. The recommendation is equal to the fiscal 

year 2011 enacted level and is $2,132,600 below the budget request. 

The Committee directs the Inspector General to continue routine 

analysis and reporting on SBA’s modernization of its loan management and accounting systems, including acquisition, contractor 

oversight, implementation, and progress regarding budget and 

schedule. 

OFFICE OF ADVOCACY

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 1 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... $9,120,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,120,000 

1Funding for the Office of Advocacy was included within funds provided under the heading 

‘‘Small Business Administration, Salaries and Expenses’’ for fiscal year 2011. 

The Committee recommendation provides $9,120,000 for the Office of Advocacy. In fiscal year 2011 and prior years, funding for 

the Office of Advocacy was provided within SBA’s Salaries and Expenses account. The Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Public Law 

111–240) required that the Office of Advocacy be funded through 

a separate appropriation. The Office of Advocacy, an independent 

office within SBA, solicits and represents the views, concerns, and 

interests of small businesses before Congress the White House, 

Federal agencies, Federal courts, and State policymakers. 

BUSINESS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $235,528,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 363,323,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 358,498,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $358,498,000. The recommendation is $122,970,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level and is $4,825,000 below the budget request due to carryover 

balances. 

The recommendation provides $147,958,000 for administrative 

expenses, which may be transferred to and merged with SBA salaries and expenses to cover the common overhead expenses associated with the business loans programs. 

The recommendation provides $3,678,000 for the Microloan direct 

loan program. An additional amount of $21,956,000 is recommended under the heading ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ for technical 

assistance grants to Microlending intermediaries. The Committee 

directs SBA to continue to conduct outreach to existing financial 

entities that may be well-suited to participate in the Microloan program so that the program can grow and expand access to microcapital across the country. SBA shall submit a written report to the 

Committee on Appropriations within 90 days of enactment summarizing the agency’s plans for expanding the reach of the Microloan 

program. 
116 

The recommendation provides $206,862,000 to subsidize the 7(a) 

and 504 guaranteed loan programs. For a typical year, estimated 

fees collected from lenders and borrowers fully offset estimated 

Government payments on losses under the 7(a) and 504 loan programs. However, the budget requests additional funding for fiscal 

year 2012 because fee collections are not expected to offset the cost 

to the Government for that year due to changes in assumptions related to the economic downturn. The recommended funding will 

allow SBA to continue operating the 7(a) and 504 loan programs 

in fiscal year 2012. The Committee expects both programs to return to typical operation when the economy recovers. 

Data Collection on Small Business Lending.—The Committee is 

concerned that limited collection of timely, relevant data on small 

business lending has made it difficult to quantify the impact of the 

economic crisis, and the impact of various responses to the crisis, 

on small business access to credit. Sources of information are often 

limited to anecdotal evidence and survey data, particularly with regard to the demand for credit. Additionally, with regard to the supply of credit, the majority of current business lending data reflects 

bank inventory but not new loan originations. 

The need for timely, robust data to reflect both credit supply and 

demand has been widely noted, including in the May 2010 Congressional Oversight Panel report titled ‘‘The Small Business Credit 

Crunch and the Impact of the TARP.’’ The Committee directs SBA, 

in coordination with the Federal Reserve, to submit a written report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment on the feasibility and benefits of enhanced data collection on small business 

lending, including but not limited to data on loan origination and 

loan size. 

DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $45,372,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 167,300,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 167,300,000 

The Committee recommends $167,300,000 for the administrative 

costs of the Disaster Loans program, $121,928,000 above the fiscal 

year 2011 enacted level. The recommendation is equal to the budget request. As always, SBA is urged to promptly notify the Committee of the status of disasters requiring loan assistance. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Section 520 continues a provision concerning transfer authority 

and availability of funds. 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $86,681,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 78,153,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 78,153,000 
117 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal Service 

in 1971 as an independent establishment of the executive branch 

of the United States Government. The Postal Service’s basic function and obligation is to provide postal services to bind the Nation 

together through the personal, educational, literary, and business 

correspondence of the people. Its mission is to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and render postal 

services to all communities. The Postal Service does not depend 

upon taxpayer subsidies through discretionary appropriations for 

its operations but generates nearly all of its more than 

$67,000,000,000 in annual gross revenue by charging users of the 

mail for the costs of postage, products, and services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends appropriations totaling $78,153,000 

for payment to the Postal Service Fund, a decrease of $8,528,000 

below the fiscal year 2011 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

This amount constitutes an advance appropriation for fiscal year 

2013 to compensate for revenue forgone on free mail for the blind 

and for overseas voters. The Postal Service will have $74,905,000 

available for fiscal year 2012 pursuant to section 1569 of Public 

Law 112–10, division B. 

The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would ensure 

that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind shall continue 

to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that none of the funds provided be 

used to consolidate or close small rural and other small post offices 

in fiscal year 2012. 

Fiscal Health.—The Committee remains concerned about the 

poor fiscal health of the Postal Service. Decline in mail volume as 

a result of the economic recession and the diversion of letters and 

bill remittances to electronic modes of transmission continue to 

have a staggering impact on the Postal Service, which released its 

most recent financial data on August 8, 2011. The Postal Service 

experienced net losses for the 9 months ending June 30, 2011, of 

$5,700,000,000 in 2011 compared to $5,400,000,000 in the same 

three quarter span of 2010. The Committee recognizes the need for 

aggressive actions to reduce costs and better align the Postal Service infrastructure in the face of reduced customer demand. 

Mail Delivery.—The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery 

is one of the most important services provided by the Federal Government to its citizens. Especially in rural and small-town America, this critical postal service is the linchpin that serves to bind 

the Nation together. 

Since fiscal year 1981, annual appropriations bills have each included language requiring 6-day per week postal delivery. The 

Postal Service has sought removal of this mandate to afford maximum delivery flexibility as an internal fiscal management tool. 

In response to the proposal, the Postal Regulatory Commission 

[PRC] conducted a fact-gathering evaluation, including hosting at 

least seven public field hearings, to solicit public input on the pros-
118 

pect of ending carrier street address delivery, collection at blue collection boxes, and most originating mail processing on Saturdays. 

In its advisory opinion issued in March 2011, the PRC opined that 

the Postal Service overestimated the annual net savings that might 

be realized from eliminating a delivery day. The PRC determined 

that eliminating one day’s delivery would cause approximately 25 

percent of First-Class and Priority mail to be delayed by 2 days 

and that the Postal Service did not evaluate the impact on customers who reside or conduct business in rural, remote, and noncontiguous areas. 

Postal Retail Network.—The Committee acknowledges that the 

Postal Service is undertaking significant reductions to its overhead, 

including the closure of postal retail facilities. Congress has given 

the Postal Service considerable discretion to decide how many post 

offices to erect and where to place them. The Committee notes that 

in fiscal year 2010, the Postal Service operated 31,871 retail facilities, nearly 26 percent fewer than the 43,112 operated in fiscal 

year 1970. 

Beginning in March 2011, the Postal Service began the process 

of closing as many as 2,000 post offices, in addition to nearly 500 

others slated to be closed starting at the end of last year. In addition, the Postal Service is reviewing another 16,000, effectively half 

of the Nation’s existing post offices, which are operating at a deficit. In July 2011, the Postal Service announced a proposal to review whether to continue to service at over 3,650 under-utilized 

post offices across the country. Because of the implications for nationwide mail service, the PRC is evaluating the overall process of 

the Postal Service on the July proposal and will issue an advisory 

opinion when it concludes its work. The Committee appreciates the 

Postal Service’s critical need to adjust its infrastructure, but emphasizes that it is imperative that the Postal Service strictly follow 

its discontinuance procedures and ensure open public participation 

for each facility under review. 

The Committee understands that the Postal Service has 

partnered with more than 63,000 locations such as supermarkets, 

drug stores, ATMs, and other retailers to sell postage and selected 

postal services. The online alternative at usps.com allows customers to conveniently access and obtain a diverse array of postal 

services, including tracking and confirmation, address changes, reservation and renewal of Post Office boxes, holding of mail, locating 

zip codes, obtaining shipping information, and purchasing and 

printing postage around the clock. In 2009, nearly 30 percent of 

postal retail transactions were conducted in locations other than a 

Post Office. The Committee strongly urges the Postal Service to 

continue to expand the co-location of postal services and other innovative approaches to serving communities, significantly grow its inventory of Automated Postal Centers for self-service access particularly in currently underserved areas, and widely disseminate information through national advertising promoting the benefits to postal customers of on-line and self-service options. 

Consolidating Area Mail Processing Facilities.—The Committee 

understands that as a way to reduce overhead expenses and 

achieve efficiency savings, the Postal Service is studying the economic feasibility of consolidating several area mail processing 
119 

[AMP] facilities where mail is canceled and sorted across the country. While the Committee acknowledges that it may be costly for 

the Postal Service to continue to operate all of these large plants 

in its network given declining mail volume, the Committee has serious concerns about the potential impact on mail delivery service, 

jobs, and the local economy of the affected communities of the proposed shuttering of these facilities. The Committee directs the 

Postal Service to suspend any consolidations, closings, or job reductions at area mail processing facilities that have not had the benefit of a full AMP study and those where previous Postal Service 

analyses have found that no significant cost savings or efficiencies 

would be gained by such action. The Committee directs the Postal 

Service to include an economic impact assessment in its analyses. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

(SALARIES AND EXPENSES)

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $243,908,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 244,397,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 241,468,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General 

[OIG] is an independent organization established in 1996 and 

charged with reporting to Congress on the overall efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of Postal Service programs and operations. 

The OIG plays a key role in maintaining the integrity and accountability of America’s postal service, its revenue and assets, and its 

employees. The OIG meets this responsibility by conducting and 

supervising objective and independent audits, investigations, and 

other reviews. In fiscal year 2010, the OIG efforts resulted in 378 

audits and evaluations being completed identifying potential monetary benefits of nearly $71,200,000,000, 3,983 completed investigative cases, 1,196 arrests and indictments, and 2,477 administrative 

actions referred. These actions resulted in about $2,000,000,000 in 

monetary recoveries and cost avoidance in workers’ compensation 

and contract fraud cost programs. As a result, the return-on-investment was $312.48, up from $46.41 in fiscal year 2009. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal 

Fund, of $241,468,000 for the United States Postal Service Office 

of Inspector General. This amount is $2,440,000 below the fiscal 

year 2011 funding level and $2,929,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee appreciates the efforts of the Inspector General to 

perform its exemplary audit and investigative work under severe 

spending constraints. 
120 

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2011 ............................................................................. $51,989,000 

Budget estimate, 2012 ........................................................................... 59,996,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 51,469,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the legislative branch established in 1969 under Article I of the Constitution of the United States. The Court was created to provide a national forum for the resolution of disputes between taxpayers and 

the Internal Revenue Service, resolve cases expeditiously while giving careful consideration to the merits of each matter, and ensure 

the uniform interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code. The matters over which the Court has jurisdiction are set forth in various 

sections of title 26 of the United States Code. 

The Court is composed of 19 judges, one of whom the judges elect 

as chief judge. Tax Court judges are appointed to 15-year terms by 

the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. In their 

judicial duties the judges are assisted by senior judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases, and by special trial 

judges, who hear small tax cases and certain regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge. 

The Court conducts trial sessions throughout the United States, 

including Hawaii and Alaska. Decisions by the Court are reviewable by the U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is granted, by 

the Supreme Court. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $51,469,000 for 

the U.S. Tax Court. This amount is $520,000 below the fiscal year 

2011 enacted level and $8,527,000 below the budget request. The 

Committee notes that the additional funding of $2,852,000 provided 

in section 1570 of Public Law 112–10, division B, was intended to 

help the Tax Court continue to comply with the Court Security Act 

of 2007 (Public Law 110–177) notably to address the costs for perimeter security improvements to the U.S. Tax Court headquarters. 

STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The Financial Services and General Government appropriation 

bill includes general provisions which govern both the activities of 

the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some cases, activities of 

agencies, programs, and general government activities that are not 

specifically covered by the bill. 

The bill contains a number of general provisions that have been 

carried in this bill for many years and which are routine in nature 

and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained under this 

section of the report. Those general provisions that deal with a single agency only are shown as administrative provisions immediately following that particular agency’s or department’s appropriation accounts in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill are 
121 

contained in title VI. General provisions that are Government-wide 

in scope are contained in title VII of this bill. General provisions 

applicable to the District of Columbia are contained in title VIII of 

this bill. 
(122) 

TITLE VI 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS ACT 

Section 601 continues the provision prohibiting pay and other expenses of non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this act. 

Section 602 continues the provision prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds unless 

expressly provided. 

Section 603 continues the provision limiting expenditures for any 

consulting service through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record and available for public inspection. 

Section 604 continues the provision prohibiting funds in this act 

from being transferred without express authority. 

Section 605 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to engage in activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat. 590). 

Section 606 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

unless the recipient agrees to comply with the Buy American Act. 

Section 607 continues the provision prohibiting funding for any 

person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American Act. 

Section 608 continues the provision authorizing the reprogramming of funds and specifies the reprogramming procedures for 

agencies funded by this act. 

Section 609 continues the provision ensuring that 50 percent of 

unobligated balances may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 610 continues the provision restricting the use of funds 

for the Executive Office of the President to request official background reports from the Federal Bureau of Investigation without 

the written consent of the individual who is the subject of the report. 

Section 611 continues the provision ensuring that the cost accounting standards shall not apply with respect to a contract under 

the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. 

Section 612 continues the provision referencing nonforeign area 

cost of living allowances. 

Section 613 continues the provision waiving restrictions on the 

purchase of nondomestic articles, materials, and supplies in the 

case of acquisition by the Federal Government of information technology. 

Section 614 continues a provision on the acceptance by agencies 

or commissions funded by this act, or by their officers or employees, 

of payment or reimbursement for travel, subsistence, or related expenses from any person or entity (or their representative) that engages in activities regulated by such agencies or commissions. 
123 

Section 615 continues a provision allowing the Public Company 

Accounting Oversight Board to obligate amounts collected from 

monetary penalties for the purpose of funding scholarships for accounting students, as authorized by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 

(Public Law 107–204). 

Section 616 is a provision rescinding $998,000 from unobligated 

balances of prior year appropriations made available for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. 

Section 617 continues a provision permitting the Securities and 

Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to fund a joint advisory committee to advise on emerging 

regulatory issues, notwithstanding section 708 of this act. 

Section 618 is a provision requiring the President to transmit 

proposed deficiency and supplemental appropriations requests to 

Congress on behalf of the judicial and legislative branches as is 

presently done for the executive branch. 

Section 619 is a provision permitting the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation to be a recipient of matching funds distributed 

by the Treasury from revenue from the sale of the Lincoln bicentennial coin. 

Section 620 continues a provision related to agricultural trade 

with Cuba. 

Section 621 is a provision relating to publication in the Federal 

Register of Help America Vote Act State plans. The provision allows publication of a reference to the State plans, rather than publication of the complete State plans, thereby, creating a significant 

cost savings. 

Section 622 is a provision that adjusts, for inflation, fees related 

to mergers. 

Section 623 is a new provision that would prohibit the conveyance of the headquarters building of the Federal Trade Commission 

(located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest, in the District of 

Columbia) to any entity unless it is in the best interest of the taxpayer. 

Section 624 is a new provision related to sales of agricultural and 

medical goods to Cuba. 
(124) 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—GOVERNMENT-WIDE 

DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS

Section 701 continues the provision requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free 

from the illegal use of controlled substances. 

Section 702 modifies the provision setting specific limits on the 

cost of passenger vehicles purchased by the Federal Government 

with exceptions for police, heavy duty, electric hybrid, and clean 

fuels vehicles adding a new exception for commercial vehicles that 

operate on emerging motor vehicle technology. 

Section 703 continues the provision allowing funds made available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters allowances 

and cost-of-living allowances. 

Section 704 continues the provision prohibiting the government, 

with certain specified exceptions, from employing non-U.S. citizens 

whose posts of duty would be in the continental United States. 

Section 705 continues the provision ensuring that agencies will 

have authority to pay the General Services Administration for 

space renovation and other services. 

Section 706 continues the provision allowing agencies to use receipts from the sale of materials for acquisition, waste reduction 

and prevention, environmental management programs, and other 

Federal employee programs. 

Section 707 continues the provision providing that funds for administrative expenses may be used to pay rent and other service 

costs in the District of Columbia. 

Section 708 continues the provision precluding interagency financing of groups absent prior statutory approval. 

Section 709 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance 

with the applicable law of the United States. 

Section 710 continues the provision limiting the pay increases of 

certain prevailing rate employees. 

Section 711 continues the provision limiting the amount that can 

be used for redecoration of offices under certain circumstances. 

Section 712 continues the provision that permits interagency 

funding of national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications initiatives, which benefit multiple Federal departments, agencies, and entities. 

Section 713 continues the provision requiring agencies to certify 

that a schedule C appointment was not created solely or primarily 

to detail the employee to the White House. 

Section 714 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to prevent Federal employees from communicating with Congress 
125 

or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against employees for 

such communication. 

Section 715 continues the provision prohibiting Federal training 

not directly related to the performance of official duties. 

Section 716 continues and updates the provision prohibiting the 

expenditure of funds for the implementation of agreements in certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are included in 

the policies. 

Section 717 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to support or 

defeat legislation pending before Congress. 

Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds by an agency to provide home addresses of Federal 

employees to labor organizations, absent employee authorization or 

court order. 

Section 719 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds to provide nonpublic information such as mailing or 

telephone lists to any person or organization outside of the Government without approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 720 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes within the 

United States not authorized by Congress. 

Section 721 continues the provision directing agencies’ employees 

to use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties. 

Section 722 continues the provision authorizing the use of current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board administrative costs. 

Section 723 continues the provision authorizing breastfeeding at 

any location in a Federal building or on Federal property. 

Section 724 continues the provision permitting interagency funding of the National Science and Technology Council, and requiring 

an OMB report on the budget and resources of the Council. 

Section 725 continues the provision requiring identification of the 

Federal agencies providing Federal funds and the amount provided 

for all proposals, solicitations, grant applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other publications related to the distribution of funding to a State. 

Section 726 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to monitor personal information relating to the use of Federal 

Internet sites. 

Section 727 continues the provision regarding contraceptive coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. 

Section 728 continues the provision recognizing the U.S. AntiDoping Agency as the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan 

American, and Paralympic sports in the United States. 

Section 729 continues the provision allowing departments and 

agencies to use official travel funds to participate in the fractional 

aircraft ownership pilot programs. 

Section 730 continues the provision prohibiting funds for implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to the legislative 

branch and placing certain limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional Fellowship program. 
126 

Section 731 continues the provision prohibiting the expenditure 

of funds for the acquisition of certain additional Federal law enforcement training facilities. 

Section 732 continues a provision prohibiting funds for E-Government initiatives sponsored by OMB prior to 15 days following submission of a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and receipt of the Committees’ approval to transfer funds. 

The section also prohibits funds for new e-government initiatives 

without the explicit approval of the Committees. 

Section 733 continues with modification the provision providing 

funding for the Midway Atoll Airfield. 

Section 734 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

to begin or announce a study or a public-private competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance of any function 

performed by civilian Federal employees pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 or any other administrative 

regulation, directive, or policy. 

Section 735 continues a provision that prohibits executive branch 

agencies from creating or funding prepackaged news stories that 

are broadcast or distributed in the United States unless specific notification conditions are met. 

Section 736 continues the provision prohibiting funds used in 

contravention of the Privacy Act, section 552a of title 5, United 

States Code or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

Section 737 continues the provision requiring agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual before issuing a Government travel charge card and prohibits agencies from issuing a Government travel charge card to individuals with an unsatisfactory 

credit history. 

Section 738 continues a provision requiring OMB to submit a 

crosscut budget report on Great Lakes restoration activities not 

later than 45 days after the submission of the budget of the President to Congress. 

Section 739 continues a provision prohibiting funds in this or any 

other act from being used for a Federal contract with inverted corporations, unless the contract preceded this act or the Secretary 

grants a waiver in the interest of national security. 

Section 740 prohibits the Office of Personnel Management or any 

other agency from using funds to implement regulations changing 

the competitive areas under reductions-in-force for Federal employees. 

Section 741 makes technical modifications to a provision enacted 

in fiscal year 2010 requiring agency compilation of inventories of 

service contracts. 

Section 742 directs OMB to issue guidance relating to the ban on 

direct conversion to contract performance of work performed by 

Federal employees, absent public-private competition. 

Section 743 requires agencies to remit to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund an amount equal to the Office of Personnel Management’s average unit cost of processing a retirement 

claim for the preceding fiscal year ($101.23 per retirement in fiscal 

year 2011) to be available to the Office of Personnel Management 

for the cost of processing retirements of employees who separate 
127 

under Voluntary Early Retirement Authority or who receive Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments. 

Section 744 prohibits certain personnel management constraints. 

Section 745 declares the inapplicability of these general provisions to title IV and title VIII. 
(128) 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Section 801 continues the provision that specifies that an appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall be considered as 

the maximum amount that may be expended for said purpose or 

object. 

Section 802 continues the provision that permits funds for travel 

and payment of dues. 

Section 803 continues the provision that appropriates funds for 

refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for paying settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia government. 

Section 804 continues the provision that prohibits the use of the 

appropriation for publicity or propaganda purposes, and permits 

the use of local funds for carrying out lobbying activity. 

Section 805 continues the provision that establishes notification 

requirements for certain reprogramming and transfer requirements 

with respect to funds and specifies a timeframe for approval and 

execution of requests to reprogram and transfer local funds. 

Section 806 continues the provision that restricts the use of 

funds only for the objects for which the appropriations were made. 

Section 807 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the 

offices of U.S. Senator or Representative under section 4(d) of the 

D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979. 

Section 808 continues the provision that restricts the use of official vehicles to official duties and not between a residence and 

workplace, except under certain circumstances. 

Section 809 continues the provision that prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the District of Columbia Attorney General or 

any other officer or entity of the District government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action which seeks to require 

Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 810 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds in this act to distribute, for the purpose of preventing 

the spread of blood borne pathogens, sterile needles or syringes in 

any location that has been determined by local public health officials or local law enforcement authorities to be inappropriate for 

such distribution. 

Section 811 continues the provision that includes a ‘‘conscience 

clause’’ on legislation that pertains to contraceptive coverage by 

health insurance plans. 

Section 812 modifies and makes permanent a provision that requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit annual reports on various indicators pertaining to the District of Columbia. 
129 

Section 813 continues the provision prohibiting use of Federal 

funds to change the legality of marijuana use. 

Section 814 restricts the use of Federal funds for abortion, with 

certain exceptions. 

Section 815 continues a provision requiring the submittal of a revised appropriated funds budget that reflects the total amount of 

the approved appropriation and realigns all budget data for personal services and other-than-personal-services with anticipated actual expenditures. 

Section 816 continues a provision requiring the submittal of a revised appropriated funds budget for the District of Columbia 

Schools that aligns the schools’ budgets to actual enrollment. 

Section 817 continues a provision authorizing the transfer of 

local funds to capital and enterprise funds. 

Section 818 is a new provision that permits the Public Defender 

Service for the District of Columbia to purchase professional liability insurance for its attorneys, staff, and board members. 

Section 819 is a new provision that modifies the frequency of 

management evaluations by the Government Accountability Office 

of the District of Columbia’s chartering authority for public charter 

schools. 

Section 820 continues the provision which limits references to 

‘‘this Act’’ as referring to only this title. 
(130) 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment to 

the House bill ‘‘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.’’ 

Items providing funding for fiscal year 2012 which lack authorization are as follows: 

Department of the Treasury 

Departmental Offices 

Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments 

Office of the Inspector General 

Inspector General for Tax Administration 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 

Financial Management Service 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 

Bureau of the Public Debt 

Community Development and Financial Institutions Fund 

Internal Revenue Service: 

Taxpayer Services 

Enforcement 

Operations Support 

Business Systems Modernization 

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration 

Executive Office of the President 

Office of Management and Budget 

ONDCP: Training for drug court professionals 

District of Columbia 

Federal Payment for the District of Columbia Water and Sewer 

Authority 

Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions 

Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard 

Independent Agencies 

Adminsitrative Conference of the United States 

Election Assistance Commission 

Federal Communications Commission 

Federal Election Commission 

Federal Trade Commission 

General Services Administration: 
131 

1Deposits into the Federal Buldings Fund are avilable for real property management and related activities in the amounts specified in annual appropriations laws, as provided by 40 U.S.C. 

592. 

Federal Buildings Fund 1

Merit Systems Protection Board 

National Archives and Records Administration, National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

National Credit Union Administration: Community Development 

Revolving Loan Fund 

Office of Government Ethics 

Office of Special Counsel 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on September 15, 2011, 

the Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill (S. 1573) 

making appropriations for financial services and general government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other 

purposes, provided that the bill be subject to amendment and that 

the bill be consistent with its spending allocations, by a recorded 

vote of 16–14, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Inouye Mr. Cochran 

Mr. Leahy Mr. McConnell 

Mr. Harkin Mr. Shelby 

Ms. Mikulski Mrs. Hutchison 

Mr. Kohl Mr. Alexander 

Mrs. Murray Ms. Collins 

Mrs. Feinstein Ms. Murkowski 

Mr. Durbin Mr. Graham 

Mr. Johnson (SD) Mr. Kirk 

Ms. Landrieu Mr. Coats 

Mr. Reed Mr. Blunt 

Mr. Lautenberg Mr. Moran 

Mr. Nelson Mr. Hoeven 

Mr. Pryor Mr. Johnson (WI) 

Mr. Tester 

Mr. Brown 

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.’’ 
132 

In compliance with this rule, the following changes in existing 

law proposed to be made by this 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 15—COMMERCE AND TRADE 

CHAPTER 1—MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF

TRADE

§ 18a. Premerger notification and waiting period 

(a) Filing 

* * * * * * * 

ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF FILING FEES

Pub. L. 101–162, title VI, § 605, Nov. 21, 1989, 103 Stat. 1031, 

as amended by Pub. L. 101–302, title II, May 25, 1990, 104 Stat. 

217; Pub. L. 102–395, title I, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1847; Pub. L. 

103–317, title I, Aug. 26, 1994, 108 Stat. 1739; Pub. L. 106–553, 

§ (a)(2) [title VI, § 630(b)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2762, 2762A– 

109, provided that: 

‘‘(a) Five working days after enactment of this Act [Nov. 21, 

1989] and thereafter, the Federal Trade Commission shall assess 

and collect filing fees established in subsection (b) which shall be 

paid by persons acquiring voting securities or assets who are required to file premerger notifications by the [sic] section 7A of the 

Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 18a) and the regulations promulgated thereunder. For purposes of said Act, no notification shall be considered 

filed until payment of the fee required by this section. Fees collected pursuant to this section shall be divided evenly between and 

credited to the appropriations, Federal Trade Commission, ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ and Department of Justice, ‘‘Salaries and Expenses, Antitrust Division’’: Provided, That fees in excess of 

$40,000,000 in fiscal year 1990 shall be deposited to the credit of 

the Treasury of the United States: Provided further, That fees 

made available to the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust 

Division herein shall remain available until expended. 

‘‘(b) øThe filing fees¿ Subject to subsection (c), the filing fees referred to in subsection (a) are— 

‘‘(1) ø$45,000¿ $60,000 if the aggregate total amount determined under section 7A(a)(2) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 

18a(a)(2)) is less than $100,000,000 (as adjusted and published 

for each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 2004, in the 

same manner as provided in section 8(a)(5) of the Clayton Act 

(15 U.S.C. 19(a)(5)) to reflect the percentage change in the 

gross national product for such fiscal year compared to the 

gross national product for the year ending September 30, 

2003); 

‘‘(2) ø$125,000¿ $160,000 if the aggregate total amount determined under section 7A(a)(2) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 

18a(a)(2)) is not less than $100,000,000 (as so adjusted and 
133 

published) but less than $500,000,000 (as so adjusted and published); øand¿ 

‘‘(3) ø$280,000¿ $360,000 if the aggregate total amount determined under section 7A(a)(2) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 

18a(a)(2)) is not less than $500,000,000 (as so adjusted and 

published)ø.¿ but less than $1,000,000,000 (as so adjusted and 

published); and’’ 

‘‘(4) $500,000 if the aggregate total amount determined 

under section 7A(a)(2) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 18a(a)(2)) 

is not less than $1,000,000,000 (as so adjusted and published). 

‘‘(c) For fiscal year 2013, and each fiscal year thereafter, the 

Federal Trade Commission shall publish in the Federal Register 

and increase the amount of each filing fee under subsection (b) in 

the same manner and on the same dates as provided under section 

8(a)(5) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 19(a)(5)) to reflect the percentage change in the gross national product for the fiscal year as compared to the gross national product for fiscal year 2011, except that 

the Federal Trade Commission— 

‘‘(1) shall round any increase in a filing fee under this subsection to the nearest $5,000; 

‘‘(2) shall not increase filing fees under this subsection if 

the increase in the gross national product is less than 1 percent; 

and 

‘‘(3) shall not decrease filing fees under this subsection.’’ 

§ 2053. Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(a) Establishment; Chairman 

* * * * * * * 

(g) Executive Director; officers and employees 

(1)(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(4) The appointment of any officer (other than a Commissioner) 

or employee of the Commission shall not be subject, directly or indirectly, to review or approval by any officer or entity within the 

Executive Office of the President. 

(5) The Chairman may provide to officers and employees of the 

Commission who are appointed or assigned by the Commission to 

serve abroad (as defined in section 102 of the Foreign Service Act 

of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3902)) travel, leave, and other benefits similar 

to those authorized for members of the Foreign Service of the United 

Service under chapter 9 of such Act (22 U.S.C. 4081 et seq.). 
134 

TITLE 31—MONEY AND FINANCE 

SUBTITLE II—THE BUDGET PROCESS 

CHAPTER 11—THE BUDGET AND FISCAL, BUDGET, AND PROGRAM

INFORMATION

§ 1107. Deficiency and supplemental appropriations 

The President may submit to Congress proposed deficiency and 

supplemental appropriations the President decides are necessary 

because of laws enacted after the submission of the budget or that 

are in the public interest. The President shall include the reasons 

for the submission of the proposed appropriations and the reasons 

the proposed appropriations were not included in the budget. When 

the total proposed appropriations would have required the President to make a recommendation under section 1105(c) of this title 

if they had been included in the budget, the President shall make 

a recommendation under that section. The President shall transmit 

promptly to Congress without change, proposed deficiency and supplemental appropriations submitted to the President by the legislative branch and the judicial branch. 

TO ENACT CERTAIN LAWS RELATING TO PUBLIC CONTRACTS AS TITLE 41, UNITED STATES CODE, ‘‘PUBLIC 

CONTRACTS’’, 2011, PUBLIC LAW 111–350 

SEC. 3. ENACTMENT OF TITLE 41, UNITED STATES CODE. 

Certain general and permanent laws of the United States, related to public contracts, are revised, codified, and enacted as title 

41, United States Code, ‘‘Public Contracts’’, as follows: 

TITLE 41—PUBLIC CONTRACTS 

Subtitle I—Federal Procurement Policy 

DIVISION B—OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY

Chapter 17—Agency Responsibilities and Procedures 

§ 1703. Acquisition workforce 

(a) DESCRIPTION.— 

* * * * * * * 

(i) TRAINING FUND.— 

(1) PURPOSES.— 

* * * * * * * 

(6) AMOUNTS NOT TO BE USED FOR OTHER PURPOSES.—The 

Administrator of General Services, through the Office of Federal Procurememt Policy, shall ensure that amounts collected 

øfor training¿ under this subsection are not used for a purpose 

other than the purpose specified in øparagraph (2)¿ subparagraphs (A) and (C) to (J) of section 1122(a)(5) of this title. 
135 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT 

(CODIFIED AT 15 U.S.C. §§ 2051–2089) (PUBLIC LAW 92–573; 86 STAT. 1207, OCT. 27, 

1972) 

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Consumer Product Safety Act.’’ 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 17. Imported products. 

Sec. 17A. Service of process. 

SEC. 17. IMPORTED PRODUCTS 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(h)(1) The Commission shall establish and maintain a permanent product surveillance program, in cooperation with other appropriate Federal agencies, for the purpose of carrying out the 

Commission’s responsibilities under this Act and the other Acts administered by the Commission and preventing the entry of unsafe 

consumer products into the commerce of the United States. 

(2) The Commission may provide to the agencies with which it 

is cooperating under paragraph (1) such information, data, violator 

lists, test results, and other support, guidance, and documents as 

may be necessary or helpful for such agencies to cooperate with the 

Commission to carry out the product surveillance program under 

paragraph (1). 

(3) The Commission shall periodically report to the appropriate 

Congressional committees the results of the surveillance program 

under paragraph (1). 

SEC. 17A. SERVICE OF PROCESS. 

(a) DESIGNATING AGENTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Commission may require a manufacturer, or class of manufacturers, offering a consumer product 

for import to designate an agent in the United States on whom 

service of notices and process in administrative and judicial 

proceedings may be made. 

(2) FILING.—The designation shall be in writing and filed 

with the Commission. 

(3) MODIFICATION.—The designation may be changed in the 

same way originally made. 

(b) SERVICE.— 

(1) PLACE OF SERVICE.—An agent may be served at the 

agent’s office or usual place of residence. 

(2) SERVICE ON AGENT IS SERVICE ON MANUFACTURER.— 

Service on the agent is deemed to be service on the manufacturer. 

(3) NO DESIGNATED AGENT.—If a manufacturer does not 

designate an agent, service may be made by posting the notice 

or process in the office of the Commission. 
136 

JUDICIAL IMPROVEMENTS ACT, 1990, PUBLIC LAW 101– 

650 

TITLE II—FEDERAL JUDGESHIPS 

SEC. 203. DISTRICT JUDGES FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) TEMPORARY JUDGESHIPS.—The President shall appoint, by 

and with the advice and consent of the Senate— 

* * * * * * * 

Except with respect to the district of Kansas, the western district 

of Michigan, the eastern district of Pennsylvania, the district of 

Hawaii, and the northern district of Ohio, the first vacancy in the 

office of district judge in each of the judicial districts named in this 

subsection, occurring 10 years or more after the confirmation date 

of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created by this 

subsection, shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the district of Kansas occurring ø20 years¿ 21 years 

or more after the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the 

temporary judgeship created for such district under this subsection, 

shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge 

in the western district of Michigan, occurring after December 1, 

1995, shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district 

judge in the eastern district of Pennsylvania, occurring 5 years or 

more after the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created for such district under this subsection, 

shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge 

in the northern district of Ohio occurring 19 years or more after 

the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the temporary 

judgeship created under this subsection shall not be filled. The first 

vacancy in the office of the district judge in the district of Hawaii 

occurring ø17 years¿ 18 years or more after the confirmation date 

of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created under 

this subsection shall not be filled. For districts named in this subsection for which multiple judgeships are created by this Act, the 

last of those judgeships filled shall be the judgeships created under 

this section. 

DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, 

THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCICES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998, PUBLIC LAW 105–119 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

SEC. 122. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to 

paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to establish, for a period of ø12 years¿ 14 years from date of enactment of 
137 

this provision, a personnel management demonstration project providing for the compensation and performance management of not 

more than a combined total of 950 employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering, intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 

Firearms. 

HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT, 2002, PUBLIC LAW 107–252 

TITLE II—COMMISSION 

Subtitle D—Election Assistance 

PART 1—REQUIREMENTS PAYMENTS 

SEC. 253. CONDITION FOR RECEIPT OF FUNDS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.— * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(d) TIMING FOR FILING OF CERTIFICATION.—A State may not 

file a statement of certification under subsection (a) until the expiration of the 45-day period (or, in the case of a fiscal year other 

than the first fiscal year for which a requirements payment is 

made to the State under this subtitle, the 30-day period) which begins on the date notice of the State plan under this subtitle is published in the Federal Register pursuant to section 255(b). 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 254. STATE PLAN. 

(a) IN GENERAL.— * * * 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(11) How the State will conduct ongoing management of 

the plan, except that the State may not make any material 

change in the administration of the plan unless notice of the 

change— 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(C) takes effect only after the expiration of the 30-day 

period which begins on the date notice of the change is 

published in the Federal Register in accordance with subparagraph (A). 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 255. PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT AND FILING OF PLAN; PUBLICATION BY COMMISSION. 

(a) IN GENERAL.— * * * 

(b) PUBLICATION OF PLAN BY COMMISSION.—After receiving the 

State plan of a State under this subtitle, the Commission shall 

cause to have the plan posted on the Commission’s website with a 

notice published in the Federal Register. 
138 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005, 

PUBLIC LAW 108–335 

TITLE III—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

SEC. 346. øBIENNIAL¿ EVALUATION OF CHARTER SCHOOL AUTHORIZING BOARDS. (a) øBiennial management¿ Management evaluation of the District of Columbia Chartering Authorities for the 

District of Columbia Public Charter Schools shall be conducted by 

the Comptroller General of the United øStates.¿ States every five 

years. 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(6) Actual budget expenditures for the preceding ø2¿ 5 fiscal years; 

ENSURING NEEDED HELP ARRIVES NEAR CALLERS 

EMPLOYING 911 ACT, 2004, PUBLIC LAW 108–494 

TITLE III—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

SEC. 302. APPLICATION OF CERTAIN TITLE 31 PROVISIONS TO UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—During the period beginning on the dateof 

enactment of this Act and ending on øDecember 31, 2011¿ December 31, 2013, section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 

31, United States Code, do not apply— 

* * * * * * * 

(b) POST-2005 FULFILLMENT OF PROTECTED OBLIGATIONS.—Section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, United States 

Code, do not apply after øDecember 31, 2011¿ December 31, 2013, to an expenditure or obligation described in subsection (a)(2) made 

or authorized during the period described in subsection (a). 

ABRAHAM LINCOLN COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT, 

PUBLIC LAW 109–285 

SEC. 7. SURCHARGES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—All sales of coins issued under this Act shall 

include a surcharge of $10 per coin. 

(b) DISTRIBUTION.—Subject to section 5134(f)(1), title 31, 

United States Code, all surcharges received by the Secretary from 

the sale of coins issued under this Act shall be promptly paid by 

the Secretary to the øAbraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission to 

further the work of the Commission¿ Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation for the purposes of commemorating the bicentennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, and fostering and promoting 

the awareness and study of the life of Abraham Lincoln. (c) AUDITS.—The øAbraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission¿ 

Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation shall be subject to the 
139 

audit requirements of section 5134(f)(2) of title 31, United States 

Code. 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010, PUBLIC 

LAW 111–117 

SEC. 743. (a) SERVICE CONTRACT INVENTORY REQUIREMENT.—(1) 

GUIDANCE.— * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) INVENTORY CONTENTS.—Not later than December 31, 2010, 

and annually thereafter, the head of each executive agency required to submit an inventory in accordance with the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–270; 31 

U.S.C. 501 note), other than the Department of Defense, shall submit to the Office of Management and Budget an annual inventory 

of service contracts awarded or extended through the exercise of an 

option, and task orders issued under any such contract, on or after 

April 1, 2010, for or on behalf of such agency. For each service contract, the entry for an inventory under this section shall include, 

for the preceding fiscal year, the following: 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(G) The number and work location of contractor and subcontractor employees, expressed as full-time equivalents for direct labor, compensated under the contract, using direct labor 

hours and associated cost date collected from contractors. 

* * * * * * * 

(e) REVIEW AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS.— * * * 

(1) * * * 

(2) ensure that— 

(A) * * * 

(B) øthe agency is giving special management attention to functions that are closely associated with inherently governmental functions¿ the contracts exclude to the 

maximum extent practicable functions that are closely associated with inherently governmental functions; 

* * * * * * * 

(g) SUBMISSION OF SERVICE CONTRACT INVENTORY BEFORE

PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning in fiscal year 2011, if an executive agency 

has not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget the inventory required under subsection (a)(3) for the prior fiscal year, 

the agency may not begin, plan for, or announce a study or public 

private competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance of any function performed by Federal employees pursuant to 

Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 or any other administrative regulation or directive until such time as the inventory is submitted for the prior fiscal year. 

(h) SUBMISSION OF REPORT ON ACTIONS TAKEN BEFORE PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION MAY OCCUR.—An executive agency may 

not begin, plan for, or announce a study or public-private competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance of any func-
140 

tion performed by Federal employees pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 or any other administrative regulation or directive until after that agency has submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget a report, pursuant to subsection (f), that 

includes actions taken to convert from contractor to Federal employee performance functions that are not inherently governmental, 

closely associated with governmental functions, critical, or should 

not otherwise be reserved for performance by Federal employees. 

This subsection shall take effect beginning with the report required 

under subsection (f) that is included as an attachment to the annual 

inventory due by December 31, 2011. 

ø(h)¿ (i) GAO REPORTS ON IMPLEMENTATION.— (1) REPORT ON GUIDANCE.—Not later than 120 days after 

submission of the report by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget required under subsection (a)(2), the 

Comptroller General of the United States shall report on the 

guidance issued and actions taken by the Director. The report 

shall be submitted to the Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives. 

(2) REPORTS ON INVENTORIES.— (A) INITIAL INVENTORY.—Not later than September 30, 

2011, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 

submit a report to the Committees named in the preceding 

paragraph on the initial implementation by executive 

agencies of the inventory requirement in subsection (a)(3) 

with respect to inventories required to be submitted by December 31, 2010. 

(B) SECOND INVENTORY.—Not later than September 

30, 2012, the Comptroller General shall submit a report to 

the same Committees on annual inventories required to be 

submitted by December 31, 2011. 

(3) PERIODIC BRIEFINGS.—The Comptroller General shall 

provide periodic briefings, as may be requested by the Committees, on matters related to implementation of this section. 

ø(i)¿ (j) EXECUTIVE AGENCY DEFINED.—In this section, the 

term ‘‘executive agency’’ has the meaning given the term in section 

4 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403). 
141 

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 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees of amounts in the budget resolution 

for 2012: Subcommittee on Financial Services and General 

Government: 

Mandatory ............................................................................ 21,455 21,455 21,450 1 21,450 

Discretionary ........................................................................ 21,731 21,898 25,920 1 25,890 

Security ....................................................................... .................... .................... NA NA 

Nonsecurity ................................................................. 21,731 21,898 NA NA 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2012 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 2 39,695 

2013 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 3,373 

2014 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 459 

2015 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 68 

2016 and future years ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 26 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2012 ......................................................................................... NA 659 NA 451 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

NA: Not applicable. 

Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster funding and in accordance with section 251(b)(2)(D) of the BBEDCA and section 106 of the Deficit Control Act of 2011, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $167,000,000 in budget authority plus associated outlays. 
142 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2011 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2012 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Departmental Offices 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 306,388 324,889 306,388 .......................... ¥18,501 Terrorism and financial intelligence .................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Department-wide systems and capital investments programs ........................................................................................... 3,992 .......................... .......................... ¥3,992 ..........................Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 29,641 29,855 29,641 .......................... ¥214 Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ............................................................................................................. 151,696 157,831 151,696 .......................... ¥6,135 Special Inspector General for TARP ..................................................................................................................................... 36,227 47,374 41,800 ∂5,573 ¥5,574 Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ............................................................................................................................... 110,788 84,297 110,788 .......................... ∂26,491 Treasury forfeiture fund (rescission) .................................................................................................................................... ¥400,000 ¥600,000 ¥750,000 ¥350,000 ¥150,000 

Total, Departmental Offices .................................................................................................................................... 238,732 44,246 ¥109,687 ¥348,419 ¥153,933 

Financial Management Service ............................................................................................................................................ 232,786 218,805 217,805 ¥14,981 ¥1,000 Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau ....................................................................................................................... 100,798 97,878 99,878 ¥920 ∂2,000 Bureau of the Public Debt ................................................................................................................................................... 174,635 165,635 165,635 ¥9,000 ..........................Community development financial institutions fund program account .............................................................................. 226,546 227,259 200,000 ¥26,546 ¥27,259 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 226,546 227,259 200,000 ¥26,546 ¥27,259 

Payment of government losses in shipment ....................................................................................................................... 2,000 2,000 2,000 .......................... ..........................

Total, Department of the Treasury, non-IRS .......................................................................................................... 975,497 755,823 575,631 ¥399,866 ¥180,192 

Internal Revenue Service 

Taxpayer services ................................................................................................................................................................. 2,274,272 2,345,133 2,195,522 ¥78,750 ¥149,611 Enforcement .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5,492,992 5,030,619 5,228,613 ¥264,379 ∂197,994 

Enhanced tax enforcement activities .......................................................................................................................... .......................... 936,000 .......................... .......................... ¥936,000 
143 

Subtotal .............................................................................................................................................................. 5,492,992 5,966,619 5,228,613 ¥264,379 ¥738,006 

Operations support ............................................................................................................................................................... 4,075,716 4,299,526 3,893,216 ¥182,500 ¥406,310 

Enhanced tax enforcement activities .......................................................................................................................... .......................... 321,000 .......................... .......................... ¥321,000 

Subtotal .............................................................................................................................................................. 4,075,716 4,620,526 3,893,216 ¥182,500 ¥727,310 

Business systems modernization ......................................................................................................................................... 263,369 333,600 330,210 ∂66,841 ¥3,390 Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration ........................................................................................................................ 15,481 18,029 15,481 .......................... ¥2,548 

Total, Internal Revenue Service .............................................................................................................................. 12,121,830 13,283,907 11,663,042 ¥458,788 ¥1,620,865 Total, title I, Department of the Treasury .............................................................................................................. 13,097,327 14,039,730 12,238,673 ¥858,654 ¥1,801,057 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (13,497,327 ) (14,639,730 ) (12,988,673 ) (¥508,654 ) (¥1,651,057 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥400,000 ) (¥600,000 ) (¥750,000 ) (¥350,000 ) (¥150,000 ) 

(Mandatory) ............................................................................................................................................................. (2,000 ) (2,000 ) (2,000 ) .......................... ..........................(Discretionary) ......................................................................................................................................................... (13,095,327 ) (14,037,730 ) (12,236,673 ) (¥858,654 ) (¥1,801,057 ) 

TITLE II—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

The White House 

Salaries and expenses (including Office of Policy Development) ....................................................................................... 58,435 58,374 57,851 ¥584 ¥523 

Compensation of the President ................................................................................................................................... 450 450 450 .......................... ..........................

Sec. 628 ............................................................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 58,885 58,824 58,301 ¥584 ¥523 

Executive Residence at the White House: 

Operating expenses ..................................................................................................................................................... 13,673 13,658 13,536 ¥137 ¥122 White House repair and restoration ............................................................................................................................ 2,001 1,000 990 ¥1,011 ¥10 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 15,674 14,658 14,526 ¥1,148 ¥132 

Council of Economic Advisers .............................................................................................................................................. 4,192 4,403 4,192 .......................... ¥211 National Security Counciland Homeland Security Council .................................................................................................. 13,048 13,074 13,048 .......................... ¥26 Office of Administration ....................................................................................................................................................... 115,049 115,848 114,908 ¥141 ¥940 

Total, The White House ........................................................................................................................................... 206,848 206,807 204,975 ¥1,873 ¥1,832 

Office of Management and Budget ..................................................................................................................................... 91,750 91,660 90,833 ¥917 ¥827 Government-wide management Councils ............................................................................................................................. (17,000 ) (20,000 ) (17,000 ) .......................... (¥3,000 ) 
144 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2011 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2012 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 27,084 23,413 26,125 ¥959 ∂2,712 

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥11,328 ¥11,328 ¥11,328 ..........................

High intensity drug trafficking areas program ................................................................................................................... 238,522 200,000 238,522 .......................... ∂38,522 Other Federal drug control programs .................................................................................................................................. 140,618 143,600 105,950 ¥34,668 ¥37,650 

Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy ......................................................................................................... 406,224 355,685 359,269 ¥46,955 ∂3,584 

Unanticipated needs ............................................................................................................................................................ 998 1,000 988 ¥10 ¥12 Partnership fund for program integrity innovation ............................................................................................................. .......................... 20,000 .......................... .......................... ¥20,000 

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... ¥5,000 .......................... .......................... ∂5,000 ..........................

Integrated, efficient and effective uses of information technology .................................................................................... .......................... 60,000 .......................... .......................... ¥60,000 Special Assistance to the President and Official Residence of the Vice President: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 4,549 4,328 4,328 ¥221 ..........................Operating expenses ..................................................................................................................................................... 326 307 307 ¥19 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 4,875 4,635 4,635 ¥240 ..........................Total, title II, Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the President ................................. 705,695 739,787 660,700 ¥44,995 ¥79,087 

(Mandatory) .................................................................................................................................................... (450 ) (450 ) (450 ) .......................... ..........................(Discretionary) ................................................................................................................................................ (705,245 ) (739,337 ) (660,250 ) (¥44,995 ) (¥79,087 ) 

TITLE III—THE JUDICIARY 

Supreme Court of the United States 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of justices ..................................................................................................................................................... 2,197 2,197 2,197 .......................... ..........................
145 

Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 71,724 73,354 72,622 ∂898 ¥732 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 73,921 75,551 74,819 ∂898 ¥732 

Care of the building and grounds ....................................................................................................................................... 8,159 8,504 8,159 .......................... ¥345 

Total, Supreme Court of the United States ............................................................................................................ 82,080 84,055 82,978 ∂898 ¥1,077 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ....................................................................................................................................................... 2,502 2,513 2,513 ∂11 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 30,009 32,626 29,400 ¥609 ¥3,226 

Total, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit .............................................................................. 32,511 35,139 31,913 ¥598 ¥3,226 

United States Court of International Trade 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,851 1,718 1,718 ¥133 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 19,596 21,173 19,250 ¥346 ¥1,923 

Total, U.S. Court of International Trade ................................................................................................................. 21,447 22,891 20,968 ¥479 ¥1,923 

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges ................................................................................................................. 332,565 327,707 327,707 ¥4,858 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 4,671,656 4,908,459 4,642,939 ¥28,717 ¥265,520 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 5,004,221 5,236,166 4,970,646 ¥33,575 ¥265,520 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund ............................................................................................................................ 4,775 5,011 4,775 .......................... ¥236 Defender services ................................................................................................................................................................. 1,025,693 1,098,745 1,034,182 ∂8,489 ¥64,563 Fees of jurors and commissioners ....................................................................................................................................... 52,305 59,727 59,000 ∂6,695 ¥727 Court security ....................................................................................................................................................................... 466,672 513,058 500,000 ∂33,328 ¥13,058 

Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ................................................................. 6,553,666 6,912,707 6,568,603 ∂14,937 ¥344,104 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 82,909 88,455 82,000 ¥909 ¥6,455 

Federal Judicial Center 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 27,273 29,029 27,000 ¥273 ¥2,029 
146 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2011 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2012 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Judicial Retirement Funds 

Payment to judiciary trust funds ......................................................................................................................................... 90,361 103,768 103,768 ∂13,407 ..........................

Sec. 628 ...................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

United States Sentencing Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 16,803 17,906 16,500 ¥303 ¥1,406 

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Total, title III, the Judiciary .................................................................................................................................... 6,907,050 7,293,950 6,933,730 ∂26,680 ¥360,220 

(Mandatory) .................................................................................................................................................... (429,476 ) (437,903 ) (437,903 ) (∂8,427 ) ..........................(Discretionary) ................................................................................................................................................ (6,477,574 ) (6,856,047 ) (6,495,827 ) (∂18,253 ) (¥360,220 ) 

TITLE IV—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL FUNDS 

Federal payment for resident tuition support ...................................................................................................................... 35,030 35,100 30,000 ¥5,030 ¥5,100 Federal payment for emergency planning and security costs in the District of Columbia ............................................... 14,970 14,900 14,900 ¥70 ..........................Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts .......................................................................................................... 242,933 229,068 230,319 ¥12,614 ∂1,251 Federal payment for defender services in the in District of Columbia Courts .................................................................. 54,890 55,000 55,000 ∂110 ..........................Federal payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia .......................... 211,983 216,846 212,983 ∂1,000 ¥3,863 Federal payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service .............................................................................. 37,241 41,486 37,241 .......................... ¥4,245 Federal payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority .......................................................................... 11,476 25,000 15,000 ∂3,524 ¥10,000 Federal payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council .......................................................................................... 1,796 1,800 1,800 ∂4 ..........................Federal payment for judicial commissions .......................................................................................................................... 499 500 500 ∂1 ..........................Federal payment for school improvement ............................................................................................................................ 77,545 67,000 60,000 ¥17,545 ¥7,000 Federal payment for the D.C. National Guard ..................................................................................................................... 375 2,000 375 .......................... ¥1,625 Federal payment for housing for the homeless ................................................................................................................... 9,980 .......................... .......................... ¥9,980 ..........................Federal payment for redevelopment of the St. Elizabeth’s Hospital campus ..................................................................... .......................... 18,000 .......................... .......................... ¥18,000 Federal payment for HIV/AIDS prevention ............................................................................................................................ .......................... 5,000 .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 
147 

Federal payment for D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities grants ...................................................................... .......................... 5,000 .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 

Total, Title IV, District of Columbia ....................................................................................................................... 698,718 716,700 658,118 ¥40,600 ¥58,582 

TITLE V—OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Administrative Conference of the United States ................................................................................................................. 2,744 3,200 2,900 ∂156 ¥300 Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation ..................................................................................................................... 499 .......................... 450 ¥49 ∂450 

Civilian Property Realignment Board 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 23,000 .......................... .......................... ¥23,000 Asset Proceeds and Space Management Fund .................................................................................................................... .......................... 65,000 .......................... .......................... ¥65,000 

Total, Civilian Property Realignment Board ........................................................................................................... .......................... 88,000 .......................... .......................... ¥88,000 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ............................................................................................................................ 202,270 308,000 240,000 ∂37,730 ¥68,000 

Financial regulatory reform contingent appropriations .............................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Total, Commodity Futures Trading Commission. .................................................................................................... 202,270 308,000 240,000 ∂37,730 ¥68,000 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ................................................................................................................................ 114,788 122,000 114,500 ¥288 ¥7,500 

Election Assistance Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 16,267 13,716 14,750 ¥1,517 ∂1,034 

Total, Election Assistance Commission .................................................................................................................. 16,267 13,716 14,750 ¥1,517 ∂1,034 

Federal Communications Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 335,794 358,801 354,181 ∂18,387 ¥4,620 Offsetting fee collections—current year ............................................................................................................................. ¥335,794 ¥358,801 ¥354,181 ¥18,387 ∂4,620 

Direct appropriation ................................................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General (by transfer) ............................................................. (42,942 ) (45,261 ) (45,261 ) (∂2,319 ) ..........................Federal Election Commission ............................................................................................................................................... 66,367 67,014 66,367 .......................... ¥647 Federal Labor Relations Authority ........................................................................................................................................ 24,723 26,440 24,723 .......................... ¥1,717 

Federal Trade Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 291,363 326,000 311,563 ∂20,200 ¥14,437 Offsetting fee collections—current year ............................................................................................................................. ¥96,000 ¥108,000 ¥149,000 ¥53,000 ¥41,000 
148 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2011 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2012 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Offsetting fee collections, telephone database ................................................................................................................... ¥21,000 ¥19,000 ¥21,000 .......................... ¥2,000 

Direct appropriation .................................................................................................................................................... 174,363 199,000 141,563 ¥32,800 ¥57,437 

General Services Administration 

Federal Buildings Fund 

Limitations on availability of revenue: 

Construction and acquisition of facilities .................................................................................................................. 82,000 839,642 65,000 ¥17,000 ¥774,642 Repairs and alterations .............................................................................................................................................. 280,000 868,902 280,000 .......................... ¥588,902 Installment acquisition payments ............................................................................................................................... 135,540 126,801 126,801 ¥8,739 ..........................Rental of space ........................................................................................................................................................... 4,830,000 5,285,198 5,285,198 ∂455,198 ..........................Building operations ..................................................................................................................................................... 2,270,000 2,387,968 2,387,968 ∂117,968 ..........................

Subtotal, Limitations on availability of revenue .................................................................................................... 7,597,540 9,508,511 8,144,967 ∂547,427 ¥1,363,544 

Repayment of debt ............................................................................................................................................................... 71,270 80,000 80,000 ∂8,730 ..........................Rental income to fund ......................................................................................................................................................... ¥8,871,000 ¥9,303,000 ¥9,303,000 ¥432,000 ..........................Rescission ............................................................................................................................................................................. ¥25,000 .......................... .......................... ∂25,000 ..........................

Total, Federal Buildings Fund ................................................................................................................................ ¥1,227,190 285,511 ¥1,078,033 ∂149,157 ¥1,363,544 

Government-wide policy ....................................................................................................................................................... 66,488 105,140 61,750 ¥4,738 ¥43,390 Operating expenses .............................................................................................................................................................. 69,882 70,022 70,000 ∂118 ¥22 Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 58,882 62,358 58,000 ¥882 ¥4,358 Electronic Government Fund ................................................................................................................................................ 7,984 34,000 .......................... ¥7,984 ¥34,000 Sources of information and engagement for citizens ......................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 39,084 ∂39,084 ∂39,084 Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents ............................................................................................................ 3,792 3,671 3,671 ¥121 ..........................Federal acquisition workforce initiatives fund .................................................................................................................... .......................... 16,900 .......................... .......................... ¥16,900 Federal Citizen Information Center Fund ............................................................................................................................. 34,116 39,933 .......................... ¥34,116 ¥39,933 
149 

Policy and operations (rescission) ....................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥4,600 ¥4,600 ¥4,600 

Total, General Services Administration .................................................................................................................. ¥986,046 617,535 ¥850,128 ∂135,918 ¥1,467,663 

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation ............................................................................................................................. 748 .......................... 700 ¥48 ∂700 

Merit Systems Protection Board 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 40,258 42,116 40,258 .......................... ¥1,858 Limitation on administrative expenses ................................................................................................................................ 2,574 2,345 2,345 ¥229 ..........................

Total, Merit Systems Protection Board ................................................................................................................... 42,832 44,461 42,603 ¥229 ¥1,858 

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation 

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund ................................................................................................................ 2,495 2,200 2,200 ¥295 ..........................Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund .............................................................................................................................. 3,792 3,800 3,792 .......................... ¥8 Morris K Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation ................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Total, Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation ........................................................................................ 6,287 6,000 5,992 ¥295 ¥8 

National Archives and Records Administration 

Operating expenses .............................................................................................................................................................. 339,090 403,742 378,845 ∂39,755 ¥24,897 

Reduction of debt ........................................................................................................................................................ ¥14,000 ¥15,000 ¥15,000 ¥1,000 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 325,090 388,742 363,845 ∂38,755 ¥24,897 

Office of the Inspector General ............................................................................................................................................ 4,241 4,100 4,100 ¥141 ..........................Electronic records archive .................................................................................................................................................... 71,856 .......................... .......................... ¥71,856 ..........................Repairs and restoration ....................................................................................................................................................... 11,824 9,659 9,659 ¥2,165 ..........................

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... ¥3,198 .......................... .......................... ∂3,198 ..........................

National Historical Publications and Records Commission: Grants program ..................................................................... 6,986 5,000 5,000 ¥1,986 ..........................

Total, National Archives and Records Admin ......................................................................................................... 416,799 407,501 382,604 ¥34,195 ¥24,897 

National Credit Union Administration 

Central liquidity facility: 

(Limitation on admin expenses, corporate funds) ...................................................................................................... (1,250 ) (1,250 ) (1,250 ) .......................... ..........................

Community development credit union revolving loan fund ................................................................................................. 1,247 2,000 1,247 .......................... ¥753 Office of Government Ethics ................................................................................................................................................ 13,972 13,664 13,664 ¥308 ..........................

Office of Personnel Management 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 97,774 100,027 97,774 .......................... ¥2,253 
150 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2011 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2012 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Limitation on administrative expenses ....................................................................................................................... 112,516 132,523 112,516 .......................... ¥20,007 

Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 3,142 3,804 3,142 .......................... ¥662 

Limitation on administrative expenses ....................................................................................................................... 21,174 21,559 21,174 .......................... ¥385 

Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits .................................................................................................. 10,467,000 10,862,000 10,862,000 ∂395,000 ..........................Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance ..................................................................................................... 50,000 52,000 52,000 ∂2,000 ..........................Payment to Civil Svc Retirement and Disability Fund ........................................................................................................ 10,076,000 9,979,000 9,979,000 ¥97,000 ..........................Sec. 628 ............................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Total, Office of Personnel Management ................................................................................................................. 20,827,606 21,150,913 21,127,606 ∂300,000 ¥23,307 

Mandatory ...................................................................................................................................................... (20,593,000 ) (20,893,000 ) (20,893,000 ) (∂300,000 ) ..........................Discretionary .................................................................................................................................................. (234,606 ) (257,913 ) (234,606 ) .......................... (¥23,307 ) 

Office of Special Counsel ..................................................................................................................................................... 18,458 19,486 18,972 ∂514 ¥514 Postal Regulatory Commission ............................................................................................................................................. 14,304 14,450 14,304 .......................... ¥146 Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ........................................................................................................................ 998 1,683 1,000 ∂2 ¥683 

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... ¥1,500 .......................... ¥998 ∂502 ¥998 

Recovery and Accountability Transparency Board ............................................................................................................... .......................... 31,543 28,400 ∂28,400 ¥3,143 Securities and Exchange Commission ................................................................................................................................. 1,185,000 1,407,483 1,407,483 ∂222,483 ..........................Selective Service System ...................................................................................................................................................... 24,226 24,500 23,984 ¥242 ¥516 

Small Business Administration 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 432,571 427,296 404,202 ¥28,369 ¥23,094 Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 16,267 18,400 16,267 .......................... ¥2,133 Office of Advocacy ................................................................................................................................................................ .......................... 9,120 9,120 ∂9,120 ..........................Business Loans Program Account: 

Direct loans subsidy .................................................................................................................................................... 2,994 3,765 3,678 ∂684 ¥87 Guaranteed loans subsidy ........................................................................................................................................... 79,840 211,600 206,862 ∂127,022 ¥4,738 Administrative expenses .............................................................................................................................................. 152,694 147,958 147,958 ¥4,736 ..........................
151 

Total, Business loans program account ................................................................................................................. 235,528 363,323 358,498 ∂122,970 ¥4,825 

Disaster Loans Program Account: 

Administrative expenses .............................................................................................................................................. 45,372 167,300 .......................... ¥45,372 ¥167,300 Disaster relief category ............................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 167,300 ∂167,300 ∂167,300 

Total, Small Business Administration .................................................................................................................... 729,738 985,439 955,387 ∂225,649 ¥30,052 

United States Postal Service 

Payment to the Postal Service Fund .................................................................................................................................... 11,776 .......................... .......................... ¥11,776 ..........................

Advance appropriations ............................................................................................................................................... 74,905 78,153 78,153 ∂3,248 ..........................

Total, Payment to the Postal Service Fund ............................................................................................................ 86,681 78,153 78,153 ¥8,528 ..........................

Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 243,908 244,397 241,468 ¥2,440 ¥2,929 

Total, United States Postal Service ........................................................................................................................ 330,589 322,550 319,621 ¥10,968 ¥2,929 

United States Tax Court ....................................................................................................................................................... 51,989 59,996 51,469 ¥520 ¥8,527 

Total, title V, Independent Agencies ...................................................................................................................... 23,279,268 25,936,574 24,149,163 ∂869,895 ¥1,787,411 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (23,234,061 ) (25,858,421 ) (23,909,308 ) (∂675,247 ) (¥1,949,113 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥29,698 ) .......................... (¥5,598 ) (∂24,100 ) (¥5,598 ) Disaster relief category .................................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... (167,300 ) (∂167,300 ) (∂167,300 ) Advances ........................................................................................................................................................ (74,905 ) (78,153 ) (78,153 ) (∂3,248 ) ..........................(by transfer) ................................................................................................................................................... (42,942 ) (45,261 ) (45,261 ) (∂2,319 ) ..........................

(Mandatory) ............................................................................................................................................................. (20,593,000 ) (20,893,000 ) (20,893,000 ) (∂300,000 ) ..........................(Discretionary) ......................................................................................................................................................... (2,686,268 ) (5,043,574 ) (3,256,163 ) (∂569,895 ) (¥1,787,411 ) 

TITLE VI—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Mandatory appropriations (Sec. 628) .................................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Grand total ........................................................................................................................................................................... 44,688,058 48,726,741 44,640,384 ¥47,674 ¥4,086,357 

Appropriations ............................................................................................................................................................. (45,047,851 ) (49,259,916 ) (45,161,857 ) (∂114,006 ) (¥4,098,059 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................................. (¥434,698 ) (¥611,328 ) (¥766,926 ) (¥332,228 ) (¥155,598 ) Disaster relief category ............................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... (167,300 ) (∂167,300 ) (∂167,300 ) Advances ..................................................................................................................................................................... (74,905 ) (78,153 ) (78,153 ) (∂3,248 ) ..........................(by transfer) ................................................................................................................................................................ (42,942 ) (45,261 ) (45,261 ) (∂2,319 ) ..........................

Æ