```

[Senate Report 111-221]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 464
111th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     111-221

======================================================================

 
   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2011
                                _______
                                

                 July 15, 2010.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

            Mr. Kohl, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 3606]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 3606) 
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, 
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2011

Total of bill as reported to the Senate.................$132,053,999,000
Amount of 2010 appropriations........................... 121,570,814,000
Amount of 2011 budget estimate.......................... 132,028,200,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2010 appropriations................................. +10,483,185,000
    2011 budget estimate................................     +25,799,000

                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Breakdown by Title...............................................     4
Summary of the Bill:
    Overview and Summary of the Bill.............................     5
    Reports to Congress..........................................     5
Title I:
    Agricultural Programs:
        Production, Processing, and Marketing:
            Office of the Secretary..............................     6
            Office of Tribal Relations...........................     7
            Healthy Food Financing Initiative....................     7
            Executive Operations.................................     7
            Office of the Chief Information Officer..............     9
            Office of the Chief Financial Officer................    10
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights...    10
            Office of Civil Rights...............................    11
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.    11
            Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
              Payments...........................................    12
            Hazardous Materials Management.......................    12
            Departmental Administration..........................    13
            Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
              Relations..........................................    13
            Office of Communications.............................    14
            Office of Inspector General..........................    14
            Office of the General Counsel........................    15
            Office of the Under Secretary for Research, 
              Education, and Economics...........................    15
            Economic Research Service............................    16
            National Agricultural Statistics Service.............    16
            Agricultural Research Service........................    17
            National Institute of Food and Agriculture...........    22
            Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
              Regulatory Programs................................    31
            Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service...........    32
            Agricultural Marketing Service.......................    37
            Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards 
              Administration.....................................    40
            Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety........    41
            Food Safety and Inspection Service...................    41
            Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
              Agricultural Services..............................    43
            Farm Service Agency..................................    44
            Risk Management Agency...............................    48
        Corporations:
            Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund..............    48
            Commodity Credit Corporation Fund....................    49
Title II:
    Conservation Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
          Environment............................................    51
        Office of Ecosystem Services and Markets.................    52
        Natural Resources Conservation Service...................    52
Title III:
    Rural Development Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development......    57
        Rural Housing Service....................................    58
        Rural Business--Cooperative Service......................    66
        Rural Energy for America Program.........................    70
        Rural Utilities Service..................................    71
Title IV:
    Domestic Food Programs:
        Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and 
          Consumer Services......................................    77
        Food and Nutrition Service...............................    77
Title V: Foreign Assistance and Related Programs: Foreign 
  Agricultural Service...........................................    85
Title VI:
    Related Agency and Food and Drug Administration:
        Food and Drug Administration.............................    90
        Independent Agency: Farm Credit Administration...........    98
Title VII: General Provisions....................................   100
Program, Project, and Activity...................................   103
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Sen- 
  ate............................................................   103
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   104
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   104
Budgetary Impact of Bill.........................................   106
Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items............   106
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................   117

                           BREAKDOWN BY TITLE

    The amounts of obligational authority for each of the seven 
titles are shown in the following table. A detailed tabulation, 
showing comparisons, appears at the end of this report. 
Recommendations for individual appropriation items, projects 
and activities are carried in this report under the appropriate 
item headings.

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2011 Committee
                                           2010          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs....         30,191,573         30,259,695
Title II: Conservation programs...          1,009,415          1,045,504
Title III: Rural economic and               2,934,309          2,767,584
 community development programs...
Title IV: Domestic food programs..         82,782,603         94,051,710
Title V: Foreign assistance and             2,089,499          2,129,010
 related programs.................
Title VI: Related agencies and              2,357,089          2,516,282
 Food and Drug Administration.....
Title VII: General provisions.....           -193,674           -715,786
Other appropriations                          400,000  .................
 (discretionary)..................
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, new budget                   121,570,814        132,053,999
       (obligational) authority...
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

    The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill 
provides funding for a wide array of Federal programs, mostly 
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]. These programs 
include agricultural research, education, and extension 
activities; natural resources conservation programs; farm 
income and support programs; marketing and inspection 
activities; domestic food assistance programs; rural housing, 
economic and community development, and telecommunication and 
electrification assistance; and various export and 
international activities of the USDA.
    The bill also provides funding for the Food and Drug 
Administration [FDA] and allows the use of collected fees for 
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
[FCA].
    Given the competing priorities that the Committee faces, 
the bill as reported provides the proper amount of emphasis on 
agricultural and rural development programs and on other 
programs and activities funded by the bill. It is within the 
subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2011.
    All accounts in the bill have been closely examined to 
ensure that an appropriate level of funding is provided to 
carry out the programs of USDA, FDA, and FCA. Details on each 
of the accounts, the funding level, and the Committee's 
justifications for the funding levels are included in the 
report. The Committee provides full pay costs, as requested by 
the President, for agencies under the jurisdiction of this 
subcommittee.
    The Committee has encouraged the consideration of grant and 
loan applications from various entities. The Committee expects 
the Department only to approve those applications judged 
meritorious when subjected to the established review process.

                          REPORTS TO CONGRESS

    The Committee has, throughout this report, requested 
agencies to provide studies and reports on various issues. The 
Committee utilizes these reports to evaluate program 
performance and make decisions on future appropriations. The 
Committee requests that all studies and reports be provided as 
one document per Department in an agreed upon format within 120 
days after the date of enactment, unless an alternative 
submission schedule is specifically stated in the report 
request.

                                TITLE I

                         AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

                        Office of the Secretary

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $5,285,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       5,936,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,338,000

    The Secretary of Agriculture, assisted by the Deputy 
Secretary, Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, Chief 
Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of 
their immediate staffs, directs and coordinates the work of the 
Department. This includes developing policy, maintaining 
relationships with agricultural organizations and others in the 
development of farm programs, and maintaining liaison with the 
Executive Office of the President and Members of Congress on 
all matters pertaining to agricultural policy.
    The general authority of the Secretary to supervise and 
control the work of the Department is contained in the Organic 
Act (7 U.S.C. 2201-2202). The delegation of regulatory 
functions to Department employees and authorization of 
appropriations to carry out these functions is contained in 7 
U.S.C. 450c-450g.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,338,000 for 
the Office of the Secretary.
    Animal Fighting.--The Committee is very concerned about 
reports of illegal animal fighting activities and directs the 
Secretary to work with relevant agencies on the most effective 
and proper means for investigating and enforcing laws and 
regulations regarding these activities.
    Global Food Security.--The Committee continues its strong 
support of work toward the goal of global food security. This 
bill includes a number of programs designed to assist in that 
effort including continuing last year's increased level of 
spending for the McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program and 
the flagship Public Law 480 program. In addition, the Committee 
includes $10,000,000 in this bill to allow the Secretary to 
utilize the expertise of USDA and associated organizations such 
as land grant universities, to assist in the establishment and 
growth of sustainable food systems in developing countries. The 
Committee believes that progress such as this will contribute 
greatly to reducing the threat of chronic and acute hunger and 
to improve both national and international security and 
stability.

                       OFFICE OF TRIBAL RELATIONS

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       1,025,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,010,000

    The Office of Tribal Relations will interact with USDA 
program agencies to understand pending actions that may affect 
Indian tribes. This interaction and programmatic knowledge will 
improve USDA's ability to conduct consultation activities, 
thereby better addressing the needs of USDA tribal constituents 
and improving relationships.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,010,000 for 
the Office of Tribal Relations.

                   HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE

Appropriations, 2010....................................................
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     $35,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,000,000

    The Healthy Food Financing Initiative will promote a range 
of interventions that expand access to nutritious foods, 
including developing and equipping grocery stores and other 
small businesses and retailers selling healthy food in 
communities that currently lack these options. This initiative 
will help reduce the number of food deserts over the next 
several years and will create new markets for farmers in an 
effort to revitalize distressed communities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,000,000 
for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative.
    The Committee recognizes the difficulty of obtaining 
nutritious food products in many communities, especially in 
rural communities where retail outlets may be located at a 
significant distance making access by rural residents 
problematic and expensive. The Committee provides a direct 
appropriation of $15,000,000 and also allows a reserve of up to 
$15,000,000 in available funds for a total amount of 
$30,000,000 for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative in fiscal 
year 2011. Because of the need to assist rural populations in 
access to nutritious food, and because rural business and 
community development (which will serve as the catalyst for 
better food access) is under the jurisdiction of the Department 
of Agriculture, these funds are to focus on improving product 
access in rural America. The Committee also expects this 
initiative to benefit farmers through the creation of new 
retail markets in rural and non-rural areas. The Secretary is 
directed to submit a report to the Committee by March 1, 2011 
on the approach and status of implementing this activity.

                          Executive Operations

    Executive operations were established as a result of the 
reorganization of the Department to provide a support team for 
USDA policy officials and selected departmentwide services. 
Activities under the executive operations include the Office of 
the Chief Economist, the National Appeals Division, the Office 
of Budget and Program Analysis, the Office of Homeland Security 
and the Office of Advocacy and Outreach.

                            CHIEF ECONOMIST

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $13,032,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      13,175,000
Committee recommendation................................      13,100,000

    The Office of the Chief Economist advises the Secretary of 
Agriculture on the economic implications of Department policies 
and programs. The Office serves as the single focal point for 
the Nation's economic intelligence and analysis, risk 
assessment, and cost-benefit analysis related to domestic and 
international food and agriculture issues, provides policy 
direction for renewable energy development, conducts analyses 
of climate change impacts on agriculture and forestry, and is 
responsible for coordination and review of all commodity and 
aggregate agricultural and food-related data used to develop 
outlook and situation material within the Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,100,000 
for the Office of the Chief Economist.

                       NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $15,254,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      15,424,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,424,000

    The National Appeals Division conducts administrative 
hearings and reviews of adverse program decisions made by the 
Rural Development mission area, the Farm Service Agency, the 
Risk Management Agency, and the Natural Resources Conservation 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,424,000 
for the National Appeals Division.

                 OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $9,436,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       9,547,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,547,000

    The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides 
direction and administration of the Department's budgetary 
functions including development, presentation, and execution of 
the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for 
program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program and 
resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries of 
pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental policy 
officials and agency program managers in the decisionmaking 
process; and provides departmentwide coordination for and 
participation in the presentation of budget-related matters to 
the committees of the Congress, the media, and interested 
public. The Office also provides departmentwide coordination of 
the preparation and processing of regulations and legislative 
programs and reports.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,547,000 for 
the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.

                      OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $1,859,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       1,876,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,876,000

    The Office of Homeland Security formulates emergency 
preparedness policies and objectives for the Department of 
Agriculture [USDA]. The Office directs and coordinates all of 
the Department's program activities that support USDA emergency 
programs and liaison functions with the Congress, the 
Department of Homeland Security, and other Federal departments 
and agencies involving homeland security, natural disasters, 
other emergencies, and agriculture-related international civil 
emergency planning and related activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,876,000 for 
the Office of Homeland Security.

                    OFFICE OF ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $1,700,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       7,009,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,709,000

    The purpose of the Office of Advocacy and Outreach is to 
increase the accessibility of USDA programs to underserved 
constituents. The Office would oversee the Office of Small 
Farms Coordination and the Advisory Committee for Beginning 
Farmers and Ranchers. In addition, the Office would coordinate 
the activities of various USDA programs and agencies that have 
as a mission purpose the provision of assistance to underserved 
constituents and would generally encourage and advocate for 
full participation by all Americans in USDA programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,709,000 for 
the Office of Advocacy and Outreach.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $61,579,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      63,719,000
Committee recommendation................................      63,719,000

    The Office of the Chief Information Officer was established 
in August 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), pursuant to the 
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which required the establishment of 
a Chief Information Officer for major Federal agencies. This 
office provides policy guidance, leadership, coordination, and 
direction to the Department's information management and 
information technology investment activities in support of USDA 
program delivery, and is the lead office in USDA e-gov efforts. 
The Office provides long-range planning guidance, implements 
measures to ensure that technology investments are economical 
and effective, coordinates interagency information resources 
management projects, and implements standards to promote 
information exchange and technical interoperability. In 
addition, the Office of the Chief Information Officer is 
responsible for certain activities financed under the 
Department's Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235). The Office 
also provides telecommunication and automated data processing 
[ADP] services to USDA agencies through the National 
Information Technology Center with locations in Fort Collins, 
Colorado, and Kansas City, Missouri. Direct ADP operational 
services are also provided to the Office of the General 
Counsel, Office of Communications, the Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer, and Executive Operations.
    On November 28, 2004, the information technology staffs of 
the Service Center Agencies [SCA] were converged into one IT 
organization within the office of the Chief Information 
Officer; this converged organization is named Information 
Technology Services and replaces a network of cross-agency 
teams used to coordinate IT infrastructure investment within 
the SCA and allows for unified management of the IT 
infrastructure.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,719,000 
for the Office of the Chief Information Officer. This amount 
includes an increase of $2,000,000 for cyber security, as 
requested.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $6,566,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       6,632,000
Committee recommendation................................       6,632,000

    The Office of the Chief Financial Officer is responsible 
for the dual roles of chief financial management policy officer 
and chief financial management advisor to the Secretary and 
mission area heads. The Office provides leadership for all 
financial management, accounting, travel, Federal assistance, 
and performance measurement activities within the Department. 
The Office is also responsible for the management and operation 
of the National Finance Center and the Departmental Working 
Capital Fund. In addition, the Office provides accounting and 
fiscal services to the Office of the Secretary, Departmental 
staff offices, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Office 
of Communications, and Executive Operations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,632,000 for 
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.

           Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         907,000
Committee recommendation................................         907,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights 
provides oversight of civil rights and related functions. This 
includes coordination of the administration of civil rights 
laws and regulations for employees of the Department of 
Agriculture and participants in programs of the Department, and 
ensuring compliance with civil rights laws.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $907,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.

                         Office of Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $23,922,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      24,133,000
Committee recommendation................................      24,133,000

    The Office of Civil Rights provides overall leadership 
responsibility for all departmentwide civil rights activities. 
These activities include employment opportunity as well as 
program non-discrimination policy development, analysis, 
coordination, and compliance. The Office is responsible for 
providing leadership in facilitating the fair and equitable 
treatment of Department of Agriculture [USDA] employees, and 
for monitoring program activities to ensure that all USDA 
programs are delivered in a non-discriminatory manner. The 
Office's outreach functions provide leadership, coordination, 
facilitation, and expertise to internal and external partners 
to ensure equal and timely access to USDA programs for all 
constituents, with emphasis on the underserved, through 
information sharing, technical assistance, and training.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,133,000 
for the Office of Civil Rights.

          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $806,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         828,000
Committee recommendation................................         814,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration 
directs and coordinates the work of the departmental management 
offices in carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress 
relating to real and personal property management, personnel 
management, ethics, and other general administrative functions. 
In addition, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Administration is responsible for certain activities financed 
under the Department's Working Capital Fund (7 U.S.C. 2235).

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $814,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $293,093,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     277,937,000
Committee recommendation................................     269,191,000

    Department headquarters presently operates in a four-
building Government-owned complex in downtown Washington, DC, 
and in leased buildings in the Metropolitan Washington, DC, 
area. Annual appropriations finance payments to the General 
Services Administration [GSA] for leased space and related 
services. Under this arrangement USDA operates, maintains, and 
repairs D.C. complex buildings, while GSA remains responsible 
for major nonrecurring repairs. GSA charges commercial rent 
rates pursuant to the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972, and 
agencies may review rate procedures and exercise rights to 
appeal. For the last several years the Department has 
implemented a strategic space plan to locate staff more 
efficiently, renovate its buildings, and eliminate safety 
hazards, particularly in the Agriculture South Building.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $269,191,000 
for Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments. 
The Committee recommendation includes increases of $300,000 for 
payments to the Department of Homeland Security, $3,400,000 for 
repair and maintenance priorities, and $5,600,000 for 
renovation of the South Building.
    The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
recommendations for this account as compared to the fiscal year 
2010 and budget request levels:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    2011 budget      Committee
                                                                   2010 enacted       request     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rental Payments.................................................         184,812         178,470         178,470
Building Operations.............................................          94,781          85,667          76,921
DHS Building Security...........................................          13,500          13,800          13,800
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................         293,093         277,937         269,191
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Hazardous Materials Management

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $5,125,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       5,139,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,139,000

    Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to meet 
the same standards regarding the storage and disposition of 
hazardous materials as private businesses. The Department is 
required to contain, clean up, monitor, and inspect for 
hazardous materials in areas under the Department's 
jurisdiction.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,139,000 for 
Hazardous Materials Management.

                      Departmental Administration

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $41,319,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      30,706,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,706,000

    Departmental Administration is comprised of activities that 
provide staff support to top policy officials and overall 
direction and coordination of administrative functions of the 
Department. These activities include departmentwide programs 
for human resource management, ethics, occupational safety and 
health management, real and personal property management, 
procurement, contracting, motor vehicle and aircraft 
management, supply management, emergency preparedness, small 
and disadvantaged business utilization, and the regulatory 
hearing and administrative proceedings conducted by the 
Administrative Law Judges and Judicial Officer.
    Departmental Administration is also responsible for 
representing USDA in the development of governmentwide policies 
and initiatives; and analyzing the impact of governmentwide 
trends and developing appropriate USDA principles, policies, 
and standards. In addition, Departmental Administration engages 
in strategic planning and evaluates programs to ensure USDA-
wide compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations 
pertaining to administrative matters for the Secretary and 
general officers of the Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,706,000 
for Departmental Administration.
    Acquisition Workforce.--The Committee recommends a general 
provision that provides $1,000,000 to improve the capacity and 
capabilities of the Department's acquisition workforce. If the 
Secretary intends to continue this effort in fiscal year 2012, 
the Committee strongly suggests that the budget request include 
information describing any evidence of deficiencies in the 
Department's current acquisition activities and detail the 
manner in which a specific appropriations request is 
calculated.

     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $3,968,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       4,081,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,008,000

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations maintains a liaison with the Congress and White House 
on legislative matters. It also provides for overall direction 
and coordination in the development and implementation of 
policies and procedures applicable to the Department's intra- 
and inter-governmental relations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,008,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations.
    The Committee allows these funds to be transferred to 
support congressional relations' activities at the agency 
level. Within 30 days from the enactment of this act, the 
Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on the allocation of these funds by USDA agency, 
along with an explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution 
of the funds as well as the staff years funded by these 
transfers.

                        Office of Communications

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $9,722,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       9,839,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,839,000

    The Office of Communications provides direction, 
leadership, and coordination in the development and delivery of 
useful information through all media to the public on USDA 
programs. The Office serves as the liaison between the 
Department and the many associations and organizations with an 
interest in USDA's mission areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,839,000 for 
the Office of Communications.

                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $88,725,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      90,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      89,744,000

    The Office of Inspector General was established October 12, 
1978, by the Inspector General Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-452). 
This act expanded and provided specific authorities for the 
activities of the Office of Inspector General which had 
previously been carried out under the general authorities of 
the Secretary of Agriculture.
    The Office is administered by an inspector general who 
reports directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. Functions and 
responsibilities of this Office include direction and control 
of audit and investigative activities within the Department, 
formulation of audit and investigative policies and procedures 
regarding Department programs and operations, and analysis and 
coordination of program-related audit and investigation 
activities performed by other Department agencies.
    The activities of this Office are designed to assure 
compliance with existing laws, policies, regulations, and 
programs of the Department's agencies, and to provide 
appropriate officials with the means for prompt corrective 
action where deviations have occurred. The scope of audit and 
investigative activities is large and includes administrative, 
program, and criminal matters. These activities are 
coordinated, when appropriate, with various audit and 
investigative agencies of the executive and legislative 
branches of the Government.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $89,744,000 
for the Office of Inspector General. In addition, the 
recommendation includes the fiscal year 2010 level for OIG to 
continue to address violations of section 26 of the Animal 
Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) and to coordinate with State and 
local law enforcement personnel in this effort.

                     Office of the General Counsel

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $43,551,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      45,654,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,104,000

    The Office of the General Counsel provides all legal 
advice, counsel, and services to the Secretary and to all 
agencies, offices, and corporations of the Department. The 
Office represents the Department in administrative proceedings; 
non-litigation debt collection proceedings; State water rights 
adjudications; proceedings before the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Maritime 
Administration, and International Trade Commission; and, in 
conjunction with the Department of Justice, in judicial 
proceedings and litigation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,104,000 
for the Office of the General Counsel.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         920,000
Committee recommendation................................         904,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, 
and Economics provides direction and coordination in carrying 
out the laws enacted by the Congress for food and agricultural 
research, education, extension, and economic and statistical 
information. The Office has oversight and management 
responsibilities for the Agricultural Research Service; 
National Institute of Food and Agriculture; Economic Research 
Service; and National Agricultural Statistics Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and 
Economics.
    Herbicide Resistance.--The Committee directs USDA to engage 
with farmers, land grant universities, State departments of 
agriculture, and the private sector to identify issues and to 
develop solutions related to herbicide resistance that are 
practicable, cost-effective, and minimize environmental 
impacts. The Chief Scientist shall provide the Committee with a 
report, which should include details on USDA's research on 
herbicide resistance to date, a future research agenda, and 
outreach efforts undertaken in carrying out this directive.

                       Economic Research Service

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $82,478,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      87,171,000
Committee recommendation................................      83,671,000

    The Economic Research Service [ERS] provides economic and 
other social science information and analysis for public and 
private decisions on agriculture, natural resources, food, and 
rural America. The information ERS produces is for use by the 
general public and to help the executive and legislative 
branches develop, administer, and evaluate agricultural and 
rural policies and programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $83,671,000 
for the ERS. The Committee recommendation includes increases of 
$1,500,000 to improve user access to statistical data provided 
by ERS; $1,000,000 for economic research on the access to 
affordable and nutritious food by low-income communities; 
$990,000 for data integrity measures; and assumes all savings 
proposed in the budget request. The Committee recommendation 
also includes $500,000 for continuation of the Organic 
Production and Market Data Initiative.

                National Agricultural Statistics Service

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $161,830,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     164,721,000
Committee recommendation................................     163,721,000

    The National Agricultural Statistics Service [NASS] 
administers the Department's program of collecting and 
publishing current national, State, and county agricultural 
statistics. These statistics provide accurate and timely 
projections of current agricultural production and measures of 
the economic and environmental welfare of the agricultural 
sector which are essential for making effective policy, 
production, and marketing decisions. NASS also furnishes 
statistical services to other USDA and Federal agencies in 
support of their missions, and provides consulting, technical 
assistance, and training to developing countries.
    NASS is also responsible for administration of the Census 
of Agriculture, which is taken every 5 years and provides 
comprehensive data on the agricultural economy including: data 
on the number of farms, land use, production expenses, farm 
product values, value of land and buildings, farm size and 
characteristics of farm operators, market value of agricultural 
production sold, acreage of major crops, inventory of livestock 
and poultry, and farm irrigation practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $163,721,000 
for the National Agricultural Statistics Service. The Committee 
recommendation includes increases of $4,000,000 to enhance the 
annual county estimates program; $500,000 to begin a 
comprehensive data series on organic production, handling and 
distribution; and $800,000 to enhance remote sensing 
activities. Included in this amount is $33,494,000 for the 
Census of Agriculture.
    Chemical Use Data Series.--The Committee believes that the 
Chemical Use Data Series provides timely, valuable information 
on fertilizer and chemical user data on major field crops and 
selected specialty crops, and is pleased that NASS is 
continuing the collection and analysis of chemical use data, as 
well as practices such as integrated pest management.

                     Agricultural Research Service

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010....................................  $1,179,639,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................   1,199,669,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,216,825,000

    The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for 
conducting basic, applied, and developmental research on: soil, 
water, and air sciences; plant and animal productivity; 
commodity conversion and delivery; human nutrition; and the 
integration of agricultural systems. The research applies to a 
wide range of goals; commodities; natural resources; fields of 
science; and geographic, climatic, and environmental 
conditions.
    ARS is also responsible for the Abraham Lincoln National 
Agricultural Library which provides agricultural information 
and library services through traditional library functions and 
modern electronic dissemination to agencies of the USDA, public 
and private organizations, and individuals.
    As the U.S. Department of Agriculture's in-house 
agricultural research unit, ARS has major responsibilities for 
conducting and leading the national agricultural research 
effort. It provides initiative and leadership in five areas: 
research on broad regional and national problems, research to 
support Federal action and regulatory agencies, expertise to 
meet national emergencies, research support for international 
programs, and scientific resources to the executive branch and 
Congress.
    The mission of ARS research is to develop new knowledge and 
technology which will ensure an abundance of high-quality 
agricultural commodities and products at reasonable prices to 
meet the increasing needs of an expanding economy and to 
provide for the continued improvement in the standard of living 
of all Americans. This mission focuses on the development of 
technical information and technical products which bear 
directly on the need to: (1) manage and use the Nation's soil, 
water, air, and climate resources, and improve the Nation's 
environment; (2) provide an adequate supply of agricultural 
products by observing practices that will maintain a 
sustainable and effective agriculture sector; (3) improve the 
nutrition and well-being of the American people; (4) improve 
living in rural America; and (5) strengthen the Nation's 
balance of payments.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,216,825,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research Service.
    The Committee recognizes the successful history of ARS, the 
premier in-house USDA research agency, and strongly supports 
ongoing research activities vital to protecting this Nation's 
food supply, environment, rural communities, and working toward 
energy independence. The Committee continues $13,286,000, for 
this purpose.
    The Committee recommendation does not include the 
President's budget proposal regarding laboratory closures, and 
expects research to continue at those locations. The Committee 
directs the Secretary to evaluate the agency's capital asset 
requirements for necessary coordination with ongoing and 
emerging research priorities. As part of this evaluation, ARS 
should provide opportunity for public comment in order to 
incorporate the priorities of all interested stakeholders, 
including ARS and other scientists, and users of ARS data.
    The Committee recommends the following increases, as 
requested in the budget: $6,130,000 for crop breeding and 
protection to enhance food production and security; $2,438,000 
for research on improved breeding strategies and germplasm, and 
animal protection to enhance food production and security; 
$3,751,000 for increased food safety research; $2,293,000 for 
research aimed at reducing world hunger, including $793,000 to 
strengthen high priority grain disease research at St. Paul, 
Minnesota; $675,000 for increased research on human nutrition; 
$5,000,000 for Regional Biofuels Feedstocks Research and 
Demonstration Centers; $1,625,000 for research on global 
climate change, including $1,293,000 at Auburn, Alabama, to 
increase the resilience of crops and production systems to the 
stresses of climate change and weather extremes, and $332,000 
at Oxford, Mississippi, for research on mitigating the effects 
of climate change through improved water management; $250,000 
for research on colony collapse disorder; and $500,000 on 
research regarding locally grown foods.
    Bioenergy and Sustainable Agriculture.--The Committee 
recognizes the constraints placed upon the National Program 
Initiatives of Bioenergy/Biomass and Production Systems for 
Sustainable Agriculture especially the availability and cost of 
energy, water, feed, fertilizer, and technology to control 
invasive pest species. The Committee provides $3,000,000 for 
research to mitigate these key constraints.
    Bioenergy Feedstock.--The Committee provides $500,000 to 
study new production practices and systems that can maximize 
yield of high quality feedstock.
    Cattle Production Systems.--The Committee provides an 
increase of $500,000 to develop management practices that 
improve the production efficiency of cattle grazing operations 
in temperate pastures.
    Childhood Health and Obesity.--The Committee is concerned 
about the high rates of obesity in this country, and the 
medical issues obesity brings, and believes that prevention of 
childhood obesity is an important step in reducing overall 
obesity rates. Therefore, the Committee includes an increase of 
$1,000,000 for research regarding what nutrients and dietary 
factors are needed to optimize infant and child development, 
and what infants should be fed to reduce childhood diseases and 
diseases they will experience later as adults.
    Diversified Rice Farming Techniques.--The Committee 
includes an increase of $400,000, as requested in the budget, 
for development of diversified rice farming techniques, as part 
of the overall increase provided for crop breeding and 
protection to enhance food production and security.
    Human Nutrition Research.--Of the funds provided to restore 
Human Nutrition Research, the Committee directs that $350,000 
go to Boston, MA; $300,000 go to Houston, TX; and $1,000,000 go 
to Kannapolis, NC.
    Infectious Livestock Diseases.--The Committee recognizes 
the need to continue research on infectious livestock diseases. 
The Committee provides $1,750,000 for expanded research on the 
emerging serotype of Bluetongue virus and zoonotic Rift Valley 
Fever virus to develop countermeasures and control insect 
vectors.
    Invasive Weeds Management.--The Committee is aware of 
problems associated with invasive weeds and rangeland 
degradation in the Western Great Basin. The Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $500,000 to provide 
solutions and management practices for controlling invasive 
species and restoring ecosystem structure and function.
    Peanut Genome Mapping.--The Committee provides $750,000 to 
map and sequence the peanut genome and to develop molecular 
markers to aid in marker-assisted variety development.
    Pear Genetics and Genomics.--The Committee directs the 
Agricultural Research Service to provide a report detailing 
specifically its year-by-year plans to locate and allocate 
resources including staff, facilities and equipment for pear 
genetics and genomics throughout the Agricultural Research 
Service. This report should also provide an estimate of how 
long it will take to meet the goals of the Pyrus plant 
improvement roadmap, including funding requirements necessary 
to meet the terms of that roadmap.
    Pulse Health Initiative.--The Committee recognizes the need 
to investigate the ability of pulse crops--dry beans, dry peas, 
lentils, and chickpeas--to provide solutions to critical health 
issues including but not limited to obesity, diabetes, 
cardiovascular disease, and cancer; and to increase the 
consumption of pulse crops by improving their functionality in 
baked goods and end use as a food and food ingredient through 
the study of milling, extrusion, extraction, and cooking 
properties. The Committee also recognizes the potential to 
improve the sustainability of agricultural rotations and reduce 
green house gas emissions by improving the nitrogen fixing 
abilities of pulse crops. The Committee recommends ARS provide 
adequate funding to establish the Pulse Health Initiative.
    Research Partnerships.--The Committee is aware of ARS 
efforts to accelerate the adoption of Federal agricultural 
research and technology innovations through Federal/private 
sector partnerships with Agricultural Technology Innovation 
Partnership intermediaries. The Committee provides $250,000 to 
establish one or more demonstration projects with the 
Mississippi Technology Alliance as a pilot for the 
commercialization of science-based agricultural technologies 
from Federal laboratories.
    Sugarcane.--The Committee supports efforts to enhance the 
competitiveness of U.S. sugarcane producers through the 
expansion of valuable non-sugar byproducts and the development 
of pest and disease protection for viable diversified 
agricultural crops and encourages ARS to provide additional 
funding for this purpose.
    Sustainable Natural Resource and Crop Management 
Practices.--The Committee recognizes the opportunity to improve 
the sustainability of farm operations through improvements in 
soil and water quality and diversification of farm products and 
income. Research is needed to develop natural resource and crop 
management practices to integrate trees and/or shrubs with 
crops/livestock at the interface of the urban and rural 
landscape. The Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 to 
accelerate efforts to develop land use systems and new 
conservation tools to support the long-term future of rural and 
urban working farms and landscapes.
    Upper Midwest Water Research.--The Committee is supportive 
of the ongoing research collaboration between ARS and the Great 
Lakes Water Institute and the Milwaukee Water Council regarding 
the production of yellow perch, whose populations have 
decreased significantly in recent years. The Committee believes 
that aquaculture research, specifically as it relates to the 
Great Lakes, should be increased, and that ARS should expand 
the work it is doing in collaboration with the Great Lakes 
Water Institute and the Milwaukee Water Council.
    The following is a list of congressionally designated 
projects:

   AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                         recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aquaculture Fisheries Center; Stuttgart, AR...........          $519,000
Biomass Crop Production; Brookings, SD................         1,250,000
Bioremediation Research; Beltsville, MD...............           111,000
Biotechnology Research and Development Center;                 3,500,000
 Headquarters.........................................
Computer Vision Engineer; Kearneysville, WV...........           400,000
Dairy Forage Research Center; Madison, WI.............         2,500,000
Dale Bumpers Small Farms Research Center; Booneville,          1,805,000
 AR...................................................
Diet Nutrition and Obesity Research; New Orleans, LA..           623,000
Endophyte Research; Booneville, AR....................           994,000
Forage Crop Stress Tolerance and Virus Disease                   200,000
 Management; Prosser, WA..............................
Formosan Subterranean Termites; New Orleans, LA.......         3,490,000
Human Nutrition Research; Boston, MA; Houston, TX;             1,650,000
 Kannapolis, NC.......................................
National Center for Agricultural Law; Beltsville, MD..           654,000
Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory; Mandan, ND.           543,000
Northwest Center for Small Fruits; Corvallis, OR......           275,000
Phytoestrogen Research; New Orleans, LA...............         1,750,000
Poultry Diseases; Beltsville, MD......................           408,000
Sorghum Research; Little Rock, AR.....................           135,000
Technology Transfer; Headquarters.....................           250,000
Water Management Research Laboratory; Brawley, CA.....           340,000
Water Use Reduction; Dawson, GA.......................         1,200,000
                                                       -----------------
      Total...........................................        22,597,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $70,873,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      44,000,000

    The ARS ``Buildings and Facilities'' account was 
established for the acquisition of land, construction, repair, 
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed 
equipment or facilities of, or used by, the Agricultural 
Research Service. Routine construction or replacement items 
continue to be funded under the limitations contained in the 
regular account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,000,000 
for buildings and facilities of the Agricultural Research 
Service.
    Modern research facilities are an important part of the 
ability of ARS to meet the objectives of its mission purpose, 
and the Committee recommends funding to ensure that 
modernization and upgrades of facilities are achieved.
    Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee is unable to 
recommend full funding to complete the construction of all 
ongoing projects. The following table summarizes the 
Committee's recommendations for Agricultural Research Service, 
Buildings and Facilities:

         AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                         recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Research Center; Beltsville, MD..........             3,000
Agricultural Research Center; Logan, UT...............             6,000
Agricultural Research Center; Pullman, WA.............             5,000
Animal Bioscience Facility; Bozeman, MT...............             3,000
Appalachian Fruit Laboratory; Kearneysville, WV.......             1,500
ARS Biotechnology Lab; Lorman, MS.....................             2,000
ARS Research and Development Center; Auburn, AL.......             6,000
ARS Waste Management Research Facility; Bowling Green,             5,000
 KY...................................................
Dairy Forage Agricultural Research Center; Prairie du              1,000
 Sac, WI..............................................
National Cold Water Marine Aquaculture Center; Orono,              1,500
 ME...................................................
Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center; Hilo, HI..             5,000
Sugarcane Research Laboratory; Houma, LA..............             1,000
Systems Biology Research Facility; Lincoln, NE........             4,000
                                                       -----------------
      Total...........................................            44,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ARS Agroforestry Research Center.--The Committee directs 
that funds appropriated to date for the National Plant and 
Genetics Security Center, Columbia, Missouri, be used to design 
and construct the ARS Agroforestry Research Center and a 
headhouse/greenhouse complex for plant physiology and genetics 
research. The Agroforestry Research Center shall be named the 
Dr. H.E. Gene Garrett Agroforestry Center.
    Bay Springs Research Facility Prospectus.--The Committee 
directs the agency to provide a prospectus on the construction 
of a research facility at Bay Springs, Mississippi. The 
prospectus shall, at a minimum, include the following 
information: the feasibility, requirements, and scope of the 
proposed project; details on the building size, cost, 
associated facilities, scientific capacity, and other 
requirements; and details on the existing and planned research 
program and associated resource requirements.
    San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Science Center.--The 
Committee is aware that there are funds remaining in the San 
Joaquin Valley Agricultural Science Center, Parlier, 
California, design and construction account and that the San 
Joaquin Valley Agricultural Science Center could benefit from 
the acquisition of additional land to support their research 
mission. The Committee directs ARS to use these remaining funds 
for site acquisition in support of the research mission at the 
San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Science Center.

               National Institute of Food and Agriculture

    Section 7511(f)(2) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy 
Act of 2008 amends the Department of Agriculture Reorganization 
Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6971) by establishing an agency to be 
known as the National Institute of Food and Agriculture [NIFA]. 
The Secretary transferred to NIFA, effective October 1, 2009, 
any and all other authorities administered by the Administrator 
of the Cooperative State, Research, Education and Extension 
Service. The mission is to work with university partners and 
customers to advance research, extension, and higher education 
in the food and agricultural sciences and related environmental 
and human sciences to benefit people, communities, and the 
Nation.

                   RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $788,243,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     838,729,000
Committee recommendation................................     780,720,000

    Research and Education programs administered by NIFA are 
USDA's principal entree to the university system of the United 
States for the purpose of conducting agricultural research and 
education programs as authorized by the Hatch Act of 1887, as 
amended (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative 
Forestry Act of 1962, as amended (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.); the 
Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act, as 
amended (7 U.S.C. 450i); the National Agricultural, Research, 
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 
U.S.C. 3101 et seq.); the Equity in Educational Land-Grant 
Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note); the Agricultural 
Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (Public 
Law 105-185), as amended; the Food, Agriculture, Conservation 
and Trade Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-624); the Farm Security 
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171); and the 
Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246). 
Through these authorities, USDA participates with State and 
other cooperators to encourage and assist the State 
institutions in the conduct of agricultural research and 
education through the State Agricultural Experiment Stations of 
the 50 States and the territories; by approved Schools of 
Forestry; the 1890 Land-Grant Institutions and Tuskegee 
University and West Virginia State University; 1994 Land-Grant 
Institutions; by Colleges of Veterinary Medicine; and other 
eligible institutions. The appropriated funds provide Federal 
support for research and education programs at these 
institutions.
    The research and education programs participate in a 
nationwide system of agricultural research program planning and 
coordination among the State institutions, U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, and the agricultural industry of America.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $780,720,000 
for research and education activities of the National Institute 
of Food and Agriculture.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for research and education activities:

     NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE [NIFA]--RESEARCH AND
                          EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hatch Act..............................................     $215,000,000
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Research Program.       29,000,000
Evans-Allen program (1890 Colleges, Tuskegee University       48,500,000
 and West Virginia State University)...................
Animal Health and Disease Research.....................        2,950,000
                                                        ================
Special Research Grants:
    Advanced Genetic Technologies (KY).................          650,000
    Advancing Biofuel Production (TX)..................          300,000
    Aegilops Cylindrica (Jointed Goatgrass/Biomass)              200,000
     (WA)..............................................
    Agricultural Diversification (HI)..................          153,000
    Agricultural Science (OH)..........................          450,000
    Air quality (TX, KS)...............................          300,000
    Animal Science Food Safety Consortium (AR, IA, KS).        1,000,000
    Aquaculture (LA)...................................          150,000
    Aquaculture (MS)...................................          337,000
    Avian Bioscience (DE)..............................          150,000
    Barley for Rural Development (ID, MT)..............          500,000
    Biodesign and Bioprocessing (VA)...................          211,000
    Bio Energy Production and Carbon Sequestration (TN)          500,000
    Biomass-based Energy Research (OK, MS).............          839,000
    Bioresource Land Use Planning Project (KY).........          671,000
    Cataloging Genes Associated with Drought and                 168,000
     Disease Resistance (NM)...........................
    Center for Food, Nutrition and Obesity (WV)........          550,000
    Center for One Medicine (IL).......................          500,000
    Center for Multi-Functional Prairie Agriculture              700,000
     (SD)..............................................
    Center for Rural Studies (VT)......................          350,000
    Childhood Obesity and Nutrition (VT)...............          250,000
    Cool season legume research (ID, ND, WA)...........          350,000
    Cotton Insect Management and Fiber Quality (GA)....          346,000
    Cranberry/Blueberry (MA)...........................          152,000
    Cranberry/Blueberry Disease & Breeding (NJ)........          522,000
    Crop Diversification and Biofuel Research and                525,000
     Education (KY)....................................
    Dairy and Meat Goat Research (TX)..................          200,000
    Dairy Farm Profitability (PA)......................          372,000
    Delta Revitalization Project (MS)..................          176,000
    Drought Mitigation (NE)............................          600,000
    Efficient irrigation (NM, TX)......................          575,000
    Emerald Ash Borer (OH).............................          522,000
    Environmentally Safe Products (VT).................          250,000
    Floriculture (HI)..................................          300,000
    Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute (IA,        1,213,000
     MO, NV)...........................................
    Food & Fuel Initiative (IA)........................          298,000
    Forages for Advancing Livestock Production (KY)....          473,000
    Fresh Produce Food Safety (CA).....................          750,000
    Genetically Enhanced Plants for Micro-nutrients and          797,000
     Genomics for Southern Crop Stress and Disease (MS)
    Global Change, UV-Monitoring.......................        1,750,000
    Grain Sorghum (KS).................................        1,250,000
    Grass Seed Cropping Systems for Sustainable                  142,000
     Agriculture (OR, WA)..............................
    Human Nutrition (LA)...............................          526,000
    Illinois Plant Breeding Center (IL)................          617,000
    Inland Marine Aquaculture (VA).....................          380,000
    Infectious Disease Research (CO)...................          617,000
    Institute for Food Science and Engineering (AR)....          500,000
    Integrated Economic, Environmental and Technical             188,000
     Analysis of Sustainable Biomass Energy Systems
     (IN)..............................................
    Leopold Center Hypoxia Project (IA)................          100,000
    Livestock & Dairy Policy (NY)......................          180,000
    Maple Research (VT)................................          165,000
    Midwest Center for Bioenergy Grasses (IN)..........          188,000
    Midwest Poultry Consortium (IA)....................          250,000
    Milk Safety (PA)...................................          780,000
    Minor Use Animal Drugs.............................          429,000
    National Beef Cattle Genetic Evaluation Consortium           655,000
     (CO, GA, NY)......................................
    National Center for Agricultural and Rural                   175,000
     Sustainability (AR)...............................
    National Center for Soybean Technology (MO)........          690,000
    Native Grassland and Sustainability (KS)...........        1,000,000
    Nematode Resistance Genetic Engineering (NM).......          199,000
    Nevada Arid Rangelands Initiative (NV).............          500,000
    New Century Farm (IA)..............................          350,000
    New Satellite and Computer-Based Technology for              654,000
     Agriculture (MS)..................................
    Organic Cropping (OR)..............................          142,000
    Organic Cropping (WA)..............................          264,000
    Pierce's Disease and Invasive Pest Research (CA)...        2,000,000
    Policy Analyses for a National Secure & Sustainable          200,000
     Food, Fiber, Forestry and Energy Program (TX).....
    Potato Research....................................        1,436,000
    Preharvest Food Safety (KS)........................          500,000
    Protein Utilization (IA)...........................          500,000
    Rangeland Ecosystems Dynamics (ID).................          300,000
    Renewable Energy and Products (ND).................        1,000,000
    Rural Policies Research Institute (IA).............          755,000
    Russian Wheat Aphid (CO)...........................          237,000
    Small Fruit Research (ID, OR, WA)..................          285,000
    Soil-Borne Disease Prevention in Irrigated                   178,000
     Agriculture (NM)..................................
    Southern Great Plains Dairy Consortium (NM)........          350,000
    Soybean Cyst Nematode (MO).........................          556,000
    Sustainable Engineered Materials from Renewable              237,000
     Resources (VA)....................................
    Sustainable Food and Bio-Energy Systems (MT).......          305,000
    Sustainable Production and Processing Research for           200,000
     Lowbush Specialty Crops (ME)......................
    Sustainable Wheat Production and Food Security (SD)          600,000
    Tillage, Silviculture, Waste Management (LA).......          180,000
    Tropical and Subtropical Research/T STAR (HI)......          800,000
    Virtual Plant Database Enhancement Project (MO)....          588,000
    Virus-free Wine Grape Cultivars (WA)...............          247,000
    Viticulture Consortium (CA)........................        1,000,000
    Water Conservation (KS)............................          600,000
    Wetland Plants (LA)................................          200,000
    Wheat Genetic Research (KS)........................        1,250,000
    Wildlife/Livestock Disease Research Partnership              300,000
     (WY)..............................................
    Wood Utilization (AK, ID, LA, ME, MI, MN, MS, NC,          4,841,000
     OR, WV)...........................................
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Special Research Grants...................       49,686,000
                                                        ================
Improved Pest Control:
    Expert IPM Decision Support System.................          156,000
    Integrated Pest Management.........................        2,415,000
    Minor Crop Pest Management, IR-4...................       12,180,000
    Pest Management Alternatives.......................        1,434,000
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Improved Pest Control.....................       16,185,000
                                                        ================
Critical Ag Materials Act of 1984......................        1,083,000
Aquaculture Centers, Section 1475......................        3,928,000
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education.........       15,000,000
1994 Institutions Research Program.....................        1,805,000
Supplemental and Alternative Crops, Section 1473 D.....          835,000
AFRI...................................................      310,074,000
Joe Skeen Institute for Rangeland Restoration (NM, TX,           983,000
 MT)...................................................
New Era Rural Technology Program.......................          875,000
Farm Business Management and Benchmarking Program......        1,500,000
Sun Grant Program......................................        2,250,000
Federal Administration:
    Ag-based Industrial Lubricants (IA)................          405,000
    Agriculture Development in the American Pacific              400,000
     (HI)..............................................
    Agriculture Technology Innovation, MD..............          150,000
    Agriculture Waste Utilization (WV).................          500,000
    Applied Agriculture and Environment Research (CA)..          350,000
    Biofuels Research (VT).............................          100,000
    Biotechnology Research (MS)........................          480,000
    Center for Dairy and Beef Excellence (PA)..........          340,000
    Clemson University Veterinary Institute (SC).......        1,000,000
    Converting Agricultural Waste to Energy (KS).......        2,000,000
    Cotton Research (TX)...............................          200,000
    Council for Agriculture Science and Technology (IA)          110,000
    Data Information System (REEIS)....................        2,704,000
    Development of Biobased Chemicals and Materials              125,000
     from Agriculture Raw Materials (MI)...............
    Electronic Grants Administration System............        2,136,000
    Ethnobotanicals (MD)...............................          500,000
    Farmland Preservation (OH).........................          152,000
    Florida Biomass to Biofuels Conversion Program,              285,000
     University of Central Florida.....................
    International Center for Food Technology                     450,000
     Development to Expand Markets (IL)................
    Kansas Advanced Biofuel Development................        2,000,000
    Kansas Center for Advanced Plant Design............        2,000,000
    Midwest Agribusiness Trade and Information Center             95,000
     MATRIC (IA).......................................
    Mississippi Valley State University................        1,002,000
    NE Center for Invasive Plants (CT, VT, ME).........          295,000
    Office of Extramural Programs......................          440,000
    Pay Costs..........................................        5,826,000
    Peer Panels........................................          397,000
    Polymer Research (KS)..............................        2,350,000
    Rural Systems (MS).................................          215,000
    Shrimp Aquaculture (MS)............................          300,000
    Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development Law            343,000
     Center (VT).......................................
    Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia (OH)..................          500,000
    Water Pollutants (WV)..............................          500,000
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Federal Administration....................       28,650,000
                                                        ================
Higher Education:
    Graduate Fellowships Grants........................        3,859,000
    Institution Challenge Grants.......................        5,654,000
    1890s Institution Capacity Building Grants.........       18,250,000
    Multicultural Scholars.............................        1,241,000
    Hispanic-Serving Institutions Education Grants             9,237,000
     Program...........................................
    Tribal Colleges Education Equity Grants Program....        3,342,000
    Secondary/2-Year Post Secondary....................          983,000
    Veterinary Medical Services Act....................        5,000,000
    Alaska Native-Serving and Native-Hawaiian-Serving          3,200,000
     Institutions......................................
    Resident Instruction Grants for Insular Areas......          900,000
    Distance Education Grants for Insular Areas........          750,000
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Higher Education Grants...................       52,416,000
                                                        ================
      Total, Research and Education....................      780,720,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $310,074,000 for the Agriculture and 
Food Research Initiative [AFRI]. The Committee notes that 
programs previously funded through the Integrated Activities 
account are eligible for funding under AFRI.
    Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
2008 specifies priority areas within the Agriculture and Food 
Research Initiative [AFRI], including an emphasis on 
conventional (classical) plant and animal breeding. The 
Committee strongly concurs with the intent of this section, and 
requests a report from the agency as to its plans for 
implementing the intent of this important conventional/
classical plant and animal breeding requirement.
    Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.--The Committee 
remains determined to see that quality research and enhanced 
human resources development in the agricultural and related 
sciences be a nationwide commitment. Therefore, the Committee 
continues its direction that not less than 10 percent of the 
competitive research grant funds be used for USDA's 
agricultural research enhancement awards program (including 
USDA-EPSCoR), in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 450i.
    Agriculture Policy Research.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,213,000 for the Food and Agriculture Policy 
Institute, of which $340,000 shall be used to conduct analysis 
of rangeland, cattle, and hay with the University of Nevada-
Reno. The Committee recommendation also includes $755,000 for 
the Rural Policies Research Institute.
    Alaska Native-serving and Native Hawaiian-serving 
Institutions Education Grants.--The Committee recommends 
$3,200,000 for grants to individual eligible institutions or 
consortia of eligible institutions in Alaska and in Hawaii, 
with grant funds to be awarded equally between Alaska and 
Hawaii to carry out the programs authorized in 7 U.S.C. 3242. 
The Committee directs the agency to fully comply with the use 
of grant funds as authorized.
    Alternative Crops.--The Committee recommends $850,000 for 
alternative crop research to continue and strengthen research 
efforts on canola. The Committee understands that the United 
States does not produce enough canola to meet its consumption 
needs and encourages the Department to seek stakeholder input 
and to provide funds in a manner that reaches those areas most 
likely to see expansions in canola production.
    Community Food Projects.--The Committee expects the 
Department of Agriculture to consider as fully eligible for 
Community Food Project [CFP] grants any program that encourages 
the effective use of community resources to combat hunger and 
the root causes of hunger through the recovery of donated food, 
distribution of meals to nonprofit organizations, and the 
training of unemployed and underemployed adults for careers in 
food service. The Committee considers such programs to meet the 
requisite eligibility standards for CFP grants in that they 
meet the food needs of low-income people, increase the self-
reliance of communities in providing their own food needs, and 
plan for long-term solutions to address such needs.
    Floriculture and Tropical and Subtropical Research.--The 
Committee provides funding to carry out floriculture research 
in Hawaii and expects priorities of this activity (as defined 
by industry stakeholders) to include the maintenance and 
improvement of germplasm of orchid, anthurium, and protea to 
derive and release new commercial varieties and continue 
research on disease resistance and insect control. The 
Committee also provides funding for tropical and subtropical 
research and supports the current mechanism of solicitation, 
recommendation and distribution of funds through the Pacific 
Basin and Caribbean Basin Administration Groups.
    Forestry and Related Natural Resource Research.--The 
Committee recognizes that forestry and related natural resource 
research were an integral part of the National Research 
Initiative, the predecessor program to the Agriculture and Food 
Research Initiative [AFRI]. As this program has grown, however, 
the allocation of AFRI funds by NIFA for research on forestry 
and related natural resource topics has fallen behind. In the 
future, the Committee directs the AFRI program administrator to 
put a greater emphasis on AFRI funding for forestry and natural 
resources topics with a goal of eventually providing at least 
10 percent of the total funds provided for AFRI for forestry 
and natural resources related research on topics including: 
woody plant systems, including large scale efforts to sequence 
the genome for several economically important tree species, 
technologies for enhanced pest and disease resistance, and 
increased tree growth rates; management of complex forest 
ecosystems, including issues of forest health, productivity, 
economic sustainability, and restoration; assessing alternative 
management strategies, with emphasis on risk analysis, 
geospatial analysis including landscape implications, 
consideration of ecological services, providing decision 
support systems; and development of nanotechnology and 
biorefining technologies for the forest products sector as 
critical to enhancing global competitiveness and energy 
security.
    National Center for Agricultural and Rural 
Sustainability.--The Committee provides $175,000 for the 
National Center for Agricultural and Rural Sustainability and 
encourages the ERS, NRCS, RMA, and NIFA to cooperate with the 
Center in establishing national sustainability standards, 
measures, and protocols.
    Special Research Grants.--The Committee recognizes the 
vital relationships between Federal research activities and 
land grant institutions and firmly supports the importance of 
congressionally recognized research priorities. The Special 
Research Grants program was authorized by the Congress to 
promote research among these partners in specific areas of need 
to meet emerging and long-term national and regional 
challenges.
    The Secretary is authorized to make grants to eligible 
institutions under 7 U.S.C. 450i(c), commonly referred to as 
Special Research Grants. These grants are authorized for the 
purpose of conducting research and related activities to 
facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of the 
food and agricultural sciences of the United States. The 
authorizing statute directs that these grants be provided 
through State-Federal partnerships to promote excellence of 
such activities on a regional or national level, to promote the 
development of regional research centers, and to generally 
support these activities among the States, the regions, and the 
Nation. In addition, the law requires that these grants can 
only be awarded if the proposed activity has undergone 
scientific peer review and that the grantee submit an annual 
report to the Secretary describing the results of the research 
or related activity and the merits of the results.
    Over the past few years, the Committee has made clear its 
intentions to employ a heightened level of scrutiny to grants 
awarded under 7 U.S.C. 450i(c). These indications have included 
requirements of detailed reports by grantees, in-depth 
explanations of prospective research objectives, and an 
understanding that grantees should not expect indefinite fiscal 
assistance from the Committee under this authority. In 
addition, the Committee has previously expressed concern that 
ongoing, long-term Federal commitments to specific research 
projects may reduce the opportunity to focus on emerging 
important research priorities and result in a less efficient 
Federal investment in agricultural and related research.
    For fiscal year 2011, the Committee continues its 
responsibility of expressing congressional interest and 
intervention in setting research priorities through the 
investment of Federal funds. As the Committee has expressed in 
previous years, specific problems require specific objectives 
and specific attention. Therefore, the individual research 
activities described in this report are intended to accomplish 
the objectives set forth in this report and are not intended to 
extend into ongoing, long-term, indefinite research endeavors. 
The Secretary is encouraged to work with grantees to ensure 
that research conducted with these funds is set to achieve 
specific objectives and to refrain from undertaking research of 
an indefinite nature. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
provide a report by March 1, 2011, regarding the status of 
grant awards for fiscal year 2011 and the specific objectives 
to be sought in each case.

              NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $11,880,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      11,880,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,880,000

    The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized 
by Public Law 103-382 provides an endowment for the 1994 land-
grant institutions (33 tribally controlled colleges). This 
program will enhance educational opportunity for Native 
Americans by building educational capacity at these 
institutions in the areas of student recruitment and retention, 
curricula development, faculty preparation, instruction 
delivery systems, and scientific instrumentation for teaching. 
Income funds are also available for facility renovation, 
repair, construction, and maintenance. On the termination of 
each fiscal year, the Secretary shall withdraw the income from 
the endowment fund for the fiscal year, and after making 
adjustments for the cost of administering the endowment fund, 
distribute the adjusted income as follows: 60 percent of the 
adjusted income from these funds shall be distributed among the 
1994 land-grant institutions on a pro rata basis, the 
proportionate share being based on the Indian student count; 
and 40 percent of the adjusted income shall be distributed in 
equal shares to the 1994 land-grant institutions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,880,000 
for the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund.

 HISPANIC-SERVING AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ENDOWMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2010....................................................
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     $10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

    Section 7129 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
2008, provides for the establishment of an endowment fund for 
the Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities 
[HSACU]. The Hispanic/Latino community is the fastest growing 
sector of the American population. This investment in the 
Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities is 
needed to ensure institutions can effectively compete for NIFA 
competitive grants.
    On the termination of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
withdraw the income from the endowment fund for the fiscal 
year, and after making adjustments for the cost of 
administering the endowment fund, shall distribute the adjusted 
income as follows: 60 percent of the adjusted income shall be 
distributed among the Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges 
and universities on a pro rata basis based on the Hispanic 
enrollment count of each institution; and 40 percent shall be 
distributed in equal shares to the Hispanic-serving 
agricultural colleges and universities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000 
for the Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities 
Endowment Fund.

                          EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $494,923,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     479,203,000
Committee recommendation................................     491,231,000

    Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
Lever Act of May 8, 1914, as amended. The Department of 
Agriculture is authorized to provide, through the land-grant 
colleges, cooperative extension work that consists of the 
development of practical applications of research knowledge and 
the giving of instruction and practical demonstrations of 
existing or improved practices or technologies in agriculture, 
uses of solar energy with respect to agriculture, home 
economics, related subjects, and to encourage the application 
of such information by demonstrations, publications, through 4-
H clubs, and other means to persons not in attendance or 
resident at the colleges.
    To fulfill the requirements of the Smith-Lever Act, State 
and county extension offices in each State, the District of 
Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa, the Northern Marianas, and Micronesia conduct 
educational programs to improve American agriculture and 
strengthen the Nation's families and communities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $491,231,000 
for extension activities of the National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for extension activities:

 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE [NIFA]--EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c)..................     $297,500,000
                                                        ================
Smith-Lever, Section 3d Programs:
    Food and Nutrition Education (EFNEP)...............       68,070,000
    Farm Safety........................................        4,863,000
    New Technologies for Ag Extension..................        1,750,000
    Pest Management....................................        9,938,000
    Children, Youth, and Families at Risk..............        8,412,000
    Youth Farm Safety Education and Certification......          486,000
    Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program......        3,500,000
    Sustainable Agriculture............................        5,000,000
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Section 3d Programs.......................      102,019,000
                                                        ================
1890 Colleges, Tuskegee University and West Virginia          42,677,000
 State University......................................
Rural Health and Safety Education......................        1,738,000
1890 Facilities (Sec. 1447)............................       19,770,000
Grants to Youth Serving Institutions...................        1,000,000
Renewable Resources Extension Act (RREA)...............        4,068,000
Extension Services at the 1994 Institutions............        5,321,000
Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database (FARAD).........        1,000,000
Women and Minorities in STEM Fields....................          400,000
                                                        ================
Federal Administration:
    Ag in the Classroom................................          553,000
    Childhood Farm Safety (IA).........................           75,000
    Conservation Technology Transfer (WI)..............          376,000
    Dairy Education (IA)...............................          175,000
    E-commerce (MS)....................................          231,000
    Efficient irrigation (NM, TX)......................          475,000
    Extension Specialist (MS)..........................          173,000
    Food Production Education (VT).....................          116,000
    General Administration, Including Pay Costs........        8,252,000
    Health Education Leadership (KY)...................          300,000
    Institute for Sustainable Agriculture (WI).........          400,000
    Invasive Phragmites Control and Outreach (MI)......          147,000
    Iowa Vitality Center...............................          250,000
    Maine Cattle Health Assurance Program..............          700,000
    National Center for Farm Safety (IA)...............          150,000
    Northeast Energy and Environmental Dairy System              305,000
     (PA)..............................................
    Nutrition Enhancement (WI).........................          950,000
    Ohio-Israel Agriculture Initiative.................          700,000
    Pilot Technology Transfer (MS, OK).................          209,000
    Potato Integrated Pest Management--Late Blight (ME)          450,000
    Range Improvement (NM).............................          200,000
    Urban Horticulture (WI)............................          376,000
    Urban Horticulture and Marketing (IL)..............          175,000
                                                        ----------------
      Total, Federal Administration....................       15,738,000
                                                        ================
      Total, Extension Activities......................      491,231,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $60,022,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      24,874,000
Committee recommendation................................      38,577,000

    Section 406, as amended, of the Agricultural Research, 
Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 authorizes an 
integrated research, education, and extension competitive 
grants program.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,577,000 
for integrated activities of the National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for integrated activities:

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE [NIFA]--INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 406 Legislative Authority:
    Water Quality.......................................     $12,649,000
    Methyl Bromide Transition Program...................       3,054,000
    Organic Transition Program..........................       5,000,000
                                                         ---------------
      Total, Section 406................................      20,703,000
                                                         ===============
International Science and Education Grants Program......       3,000,000
Critical Issues Program.................................         732,000
Regional Rural Development Centers Program..............       1,312,000
Homeland Security, Food and Agriculture Defense                9,830,000
 Initiative.............................................
Sustainable Agriculture Federal-State Matching Grant           3,000,000
 Program................................................
                                                         ---------------
      Total, Integrated Activities......................      38,577,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         920,000
Committee recommendation................................         904,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out laws enacted by the Congress with respect to the 
Department's marketing, grading, and standardization activities 
related to grain; competitive marketing practices of livestock, 
marketing orders, and various programs; veterinary services; 
and plant protection and quarantine. The Office has oversight 
and management responsibilities for the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service; Agricultural Marketing Service; and Grain 
Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
Programs.

               Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $904,953,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     870,576,000
Committee recommendation................................     926,609,000

    The Secretary of Agriculture established the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] on April 2, 1972, under 
the authority of reorganization plan No. 2 of 1953, and other 
authorities. The major objectives of APHIS are to protect the 
animal and plant resources of the Nation from diseases and 
pests. These objectives are carried out under the major areas 
of activity, as follows:
    Pest and Disease Exclusion.--The agency conducts inspection 
and quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests. The 
agency also participates in inspection, survey, and control 
activities in foreign countries to reinforce its domestic 
activities.
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection [AQI].--The agency 
collects user fees to cover the cost of inspection and 
quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests.
    Plant and Animal Health Monitoring.--The agency conducts 
programs to assess animal and plant health and to detect 
endemic and exotic diseases and pests.
    Pest and Disease Management Programs.--The agency carries 
out programs to control and eradicate pest infestations and 
animal diseases that threaten the United States; reduce 
agricultural losses caused by predatory animals, birds, and 
rodents; provide technical assistance to other cooperators such 
as States, counties, farmer or rancher groups, and foundations; 
and ensure compliance with interstate movement and other 
disease control regulations within the jurisdiction of the 
agency.
    Animal Care.--The agency conducts regulatory activities 
that ensure the humane care and treatment of animals and horses 
as the Animal Welfare and Horse Protection Acts require. These 
activities include inspection of certain establishments that 
handle animals intended for research, exhibition, and as pets, 
and monitoring certain horse shows.
    Scientific and Technical Services.--The agency performs 
other regulatory activities, including the development of 
standards for the licensing and testing of veterinary 
biologicals to ensure their safety and effectiveness; 
diagnostic activities to support the control and eradication 
programs in other functional components; applied research to 
reduce economic damage from vertebrate animals; development of 
new pest and animal damage control methods and tools; and 
regulatory oversight of genetically engineered products.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $926,609,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service.
    The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
recommendations for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service:

                                   ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Fiscal year
                                                                 Fiscal year      2011 budget       Committee
                                                                 2010 enacted       request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PEST AND DISEASE EXCLUSION:
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (AQI).................           29,000           26,526           29,526
    Cattle Fever Ticks.......................................           13,157           13,355           13,355
    Foreign Animal Disease/Foot and Mouth Disease............            4,004            4,007            4,007
    Fruit Fly Exclusion and Detection........................           62,920           63,568           63,568
    Import/Export............................................           13,298           13,564           13,564
    Overseas Technical and Trade Operations..................           16,172           17,195           17,195
    Screwworm................................................           27,714           20,243           20,243
    Tropical Bont Tick.......................................              429              432              432
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pest and Disease Exclusion...................          166,694          158,890          161,890
                                                              ==================================================
PLANT AND ANIMAL HEALTH MONITORING:
    Animal Health Monitoring and Surveillance................          121,667          128,659          130,175
    Animal and Plant Health Reg. Enforcement.................           13,983           15,913           16,913
    Avian Influenza..........................................           60,243           47,219           47,219
    Emergency Management Systems.............................           15,794           15,933           15,933
    National Veterinary Stockpile............................            3,757            3,771            3,771
    Pest Detection...........................................           28,113           26,957           28,314
    Select Agents............................................            5,176            5,214            5,214
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Plant and Animal Health Monitoring...........          248,773          247,266          247,539
                                                              ==================================================
PEST AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT:
    Aquaculture..............................................            6,560            5,816            6,570
    Biological Control.......................................           10,467           10,149           11,399
    Brucellosis..............................................            9,707            9,154            9,804
    Chronic Wasting Disease..................................           16,875           14,208           16,929
    Contingency Funds........................................            2,058            2,085            2,085
    Cotton Pests.............................................           23,390            9,041           22,254
                                                              ==================================================
    Emerging Plant Pests:
        Asian Long-horned Beetle.............................           33,021           49,200           42,130
        Citrus Canker/Citrus Health Program..................           44,656           44,780           45,781
        Emerald Ash Borer....................................           37,205           13,160           22,000
        Glassey-winged Sharpshooter..........................           22,983           22,360           23,066
        Sudden Oak Death.....................................            5,347            5,090            5,366
        Potato Cyst Nematode.................................            8,327            6,245            8,357
        Karnal Bunt..........................................            2,151            2,160            2,160
        Light Brown Apple Moth...............................            1,008           11,010           10,010
        Sirex Woodwasp.......................................            1,500            1,505            1,505
        Varroa Mite..........................................              469  ...............              469
        Other Emerging Plant Pests...........................            2,102            2,105            4,105
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Emerging Plant Pests........................          158,769          157,615          164,949
                                                              ==================================================
    Golden Nematode..........................................              831              843              843
    Grasshopper..............................................            5,578            4,637            5,637
    Gypsy Moth...............................................            5,420            4,981            5,481
    Imported Fire Ant........................................            1,902            1,909            1,909
    Johne's Disease..........................................            6,876            3,470            6,885
    Noxious Weeds............................................            1,990            1,174            1,993
    Plum Pox.................................................            2,206            2,129            2,215
    Pseudorabies.............................................            2,510            2,560            2,560
    Scrapie..................................................           17,906           18,043           18,043
    Tuberculosis.............................................           16,764           15,601           15,849
    Wildlife Services Operations.............................           77,780           71,015           80,701
    Witchweed................................................            1,517            1,522            1,522
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pest and Disease Management..................          369,106          335,952          377,628
                                                              ==================================================
ANIMAL CARE:
    Animal Welfare...........................................           21,979           25,933           25,933
    Horse Protection.........................................              500              900              900
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Animal Care..................................           22,479           23,233           26,833
                                                              ==================================================
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES:
    Biotechnology Regulatory Services........................           13,050           18,695           18,954
    Environmental Compliance.................................            2,715            2,750            2,750
    Plant Methods Development Labs...........................            9,949           10,137           10,637
    Veterinary Biologics.....................................           17,325           17,645           20,645
    Veterinary Diagnostics...................................           26,073           29,745           30,633
    Wildlife Services Methods Development....................           18,630           16,064           18,901
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Scientific and Technical Services............           87,742           95,036          102,520
                                                              ==================================================
MANAGEMENT:
    APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure..............            4,474            4,474            4,474
    Physical/Operational Security............................            5,725            5,725            5,725
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Management...................................           10,199           10,199           10,199
                                                              ==================================================
      TOTAL, APHIS...........................................          904,953          870,576          926,609
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue use of 
contingency funding from Commodity Credit Corporation monies, 
as in past fiscal years, to cover additional emergencies as the 
Secretary determines necessary.
    Animal Disease Traceability (Formerly National Animal ID 
System).--During fiscal year 2010 the Department gathered 
public comments and released a framework for a new Animal 
Disease Traceability initiative. The initiative will focus on 
State-specific concerns, and States and tribal governments will 
guide its development. Rather than taking the lead, the agency 
role is now facilitator and collaborator. At this stage it is 
premature to identify agency resource needs and the Committee 
provides no funding specifically for the initiative. However, 
once a comprehensive plan has been developed and funding needs 
identified, the Committee may consider this for further action 
during deliberations on the fiscal year 2011 bill.
    Biotechnology Regulatory Services.--The Committee provides 
an increase of $5,767,000 for biotechnology regulatory services 
and notes that while biotechnology holds promise for increased 
agricultural productivity, it is extremely important that 
adequate regulatory safeguards are in place to assure that only 
properly approved products are allowed entry to the market to 
avoid the possibility of any introduction of products with 
unintended traits which could have potentially devastating 
effects on the food supply and the economy.
    Center for Veterinary Biologics.--The Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $3,000,000 for the 
Center for Veterinary Biologics [CVB]. The leadership of 
Veterinary Services is commended for recently holding a 
stakeholder meeting and for committing to make timely 
improvements to the center's management, transparency, and 
procedures. The Committee will closely monitor how the CVB 
implements these changes. The Deputy Administrator of 
Veterinary Services is directed to provide the Committee with 
semi-annual reports on the workload of the CVB and the number 
of days it takes for applications to complete the review 
process.
    Emerald Ash Borer.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$22,000,000 for emerald ash borer. These funds, coupled with 
the expected $17,000,000 to be carried over from fiscal year 
2010, will provide a $39,000,000 program level in fiscal year 
2011. The Committee recognizes this invasive species poses a 
significant threat to the Nation's ash trees, has the potential 
to cause substantial economic and ecological damage, and that 
further efforts are required to manage its spread and develop 
techniques and technologies for eradication. To these ends, 
$1,000,000 is included for a cooperative research agreement 
with the Agricultural Research Service to advance eradication 
efforts against this destructive infestation.
    Invasive Honey Bee Pests.--The Committee is concerned with 
the national and global pollination impact associated with the 
varroa mite and Small Hive Beetle discoveries in Hawaii, and 
provides $469,000 for the agency to work with other Federal 
agencies, State agencies, and community and industry leaders to 
suppress varroa mites and other invasive honey bee pests and 
eradicate and manage infestations where necessary.

                          COMMITTEE DIRECTIVES

    In complying with the Committee's directives, the Committee 
expects APHIS not to redirect support for programs and 
activities without prior notification to and approval by the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance 
with the reprogramming procedures specified in the act. Unless 
otherwise directed, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service shall implement appropriations by programs, projects, 
and activities as specified by the Appropriations Committees. 
Unspecified reductions necessary to carry out the provisions of 
this act are to be implemented in accordance with the 
definitions contained in the program, project, and activity 
section of this report.
    The following is a list of congressionally designated 
projects:

 ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE, CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED
                                PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Project                      Program            Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture Compliance Laboratory   Veterinary                   $69,000
 Equipment, Delaware Department of   diagnostics.
 Agriculture.
Arthropod damage control Nevada,    Grasshopper.........       1,000,000
 APHIS Nevada.
Berryman Institute, Jack Berryman   Wildlife services          1,500,000
 Institute Utah and Mississippi      methods develop-
 Agriculture and Forestry            ment.
 Experiment Station.
Bio-safety and antibiotic           Animal health                240,000
 resistance, University of Vermont.  monitoring and
                                     surveillance.
Blackbird management, APHIS         Wildlife services             94,000
 Louisiana.                          operations.
Bovine tuberculosis eradication     Tuberculosis........         248,000
 Michigan, Michigan Department of
 Agriculture.
Brucellosis eradication in the      Brucellosis.........         650,000
 Greater Yellowstone area states,
 Idaho Department of Agriculture,
 Montana Department of Livestock,
 Wyoming Livestock Board.
California county pest detection    Pest detection......         619,000
 augmentation program, California
 Department of Food and
 Agriculture.
Cogongrass control, Mississippi     Noxious weeds.......         208,000
 Department of Agriculture.
Cooperative livestock protection    Wildlife services            223,000
 program, APHIS Pennsylvania and     operations.
 Pennsylvania Department of
 Agriculture.
Cormorant control, APHIS Michigan.  Wildlife services            139,000
                                     operations.
Cormorant control, APHIS            Wildlife services            223,000
 Mississippi.                        operations.
Cormorant control, APHIS Vermont    Wildlife services            103,000
 and Vermont Fish and Wildlife       operations.
 Department.
Database of North Carolina's        Animal health                208,000
 agricultural industry for rapid     monitoring and
 response, NC Department of          surveillance.
 Agriculture.
Disease prevention, Louisiana       Veterinary                    69,000
 Department of Wildlife and          diagnostics.
 Fisheries.
Genetically modified products,      Biotechnology                259,000
 Iowa State University.              regulatory services.
Giant Salvinia control,             Plant methods                500,000
 Northwestern State University.      development.
Hawaii interline, APHIS Hawaii....  Agricultural               3,000,000
                                     quarantine
                                     inspection.
Hawaii wildlife services            Wildlife services          2,230,000
 activities, APHIS Hawaii.           operations.
Hemlock Wooly Adelgid, Tennessee,   Biological control..       1,250,000
 University of Tennessee.
Integrated predation management     Wildlife services            280,000
 activities, APHIS West Virginia.    operations.
Invasive aquatic species, Lake      Aquaculture.........          94,000
 Champlain Fish and Wildlife
 Management Cooperative, Vermont.
National Agriculture Biosecurity    Veterinary                   750,000
 Center, Kansas State Universi-      diagnostics.
 ty.
New Mexico rapid syndrome           Animal health                404,000
 validation program, New Mexico      monitoring and
 State University.                   surveillance.
Nez Perce Bio-control Center, Nez   Noxious weeds.......         176,000
 Perce Tribe.
Noxious weed management, Nevada     Noxious weeds.......         235,000
 Department of Agriculture.
Technology to combat asian long-    Emerging plant pests         500,000
 horned beetles in New York
 forests, SUNY-College of
 Environmental Science and
 Forestry.
Tri-State predator control, APHIS   Wildlife services            926,000
 Idaho, Montana, and Wyo-  ming.     operations.
Varroa mite suppression, APHIS      Emerging plant pests         469,000
 Hawaii.
Wildlife management and control,    Wildlife services            496,000
 APHIS Mississippi.                  operations.
Wildlife Services South Dakota,     Wildlife services            519,000
 South Dakota Department of Game,    operations.
 Fish, and Parks.
                                                         ---------------
Total, Animal and Plant Health      ....................      17,681,000
 Inspection Service.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $4,712,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       4,712,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,712,000

    The APHIS appropriation for ``Buildings and Facilities'' 
funds major nonrecurring construction projects in support of 
specific program activities and recurring construction, 
alterations, preventive maintenance, and repairs of existing 
APHIS facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of 
$4,712,000 for buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service. This funding is necessary to allow 
APHIS to maintain existing facilities, and perform critically 
needed repairs to and replacements of building components, such 
as heating, ventilation and air-conditioning on a prioritized 
basis at APHIS facilities. The Committee notes that due to the 
environmentally sensitive nature of many APHIS facilities, 
closure of a facility could result if APHIS is unable to 
complete the required repairs.

                     Agricultural Marketing Service

                           MARKETING SERVICES

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $91,148,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      97,255,000
Committee recommendation................................      96,955,000

    The Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS] was established by 
the Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972. AMS carries out 
programs authorized by more than 50 different statutory 
authorities, the primary ones being the Agricultural Marketing 
Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627); the U.S. Cotton Standards Act 
(7 U.S.C. 51-65); the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act (7 
U.S.C. 471-476); the Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511-
511q); the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (7 U.S.C. 
499a-499s); the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031-
1056); and section 32 (15 U.S.C. 713c).
    Programs administered by this agency include the market 
news services, payments to States for marketing activities, the 
Plant Variety Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.), the 
Federal administration of marketing agreements and orders, 
standardization, grading, classing, and shell egg surveillance 
services, transportation services, wholesale farmers and 
alternative market development, commodity purchases, Perishable 
Agricultural Commodities Act (7 U.S.C. 499a-499b), and market 
protection and promotion activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $96,955,000 
for marketing services of the Agricultural Marketing Service. 
The Committee recommendation includes increases of $891,000 for 
the Pesticide Data Program, $250,000 for Microbiological Data 
Program sampling, $3,111,000 for the National Organic Program, 
and $920,000 for the Know Your Farmer Know Your Food 
initiative.
    Dairy Price Reporting.--The Committee encourages the 
Secretary to consider the recommendations of the Dairy Industry 
Advisory Committee regarding implementation of section 1510 of 
Public Law 110-246.
    Organics.--The Committee is greatly concerned by the 
inability of the Department to take immediate remedial actions 
upon strong evidence that products certified as organic may, in 
fact, not be eligible for such designation. A recent incident 
involving a third-party certification agent that approved 
imported products to carry a USDA organic label has proved most 
troubling. A departmental audit later resulted in a suspension 
of the party's certification, but such suspension occurred 
nearly 3 years after the initial audit. Further troubling is 
the fact that the Department lacked the ability to withdraw the 
certification due to lengthy appeals and other delays while 
products of questionable content continued to appear in U.S. 
markets. The Committee finds this type of delay unacceptable 
and fears that continued problems of this nature will erode the 
integrity of the entire USDA Organics Program.
    The Committee has recommended an additional $3,111,000 for 
operations of the National Organics Program [NOP], as 
requested. In addition, the Committee directs the Secretary to 
conduct a full review of the Department's authorities for 
enforcement of the NOP to identify proper actions for prompt 
responses to protect the integrity of the program whenever and 
wherever violations occur. The Secretary is directed to provide 
a written report to the Committee by March 1, 2011, on steps 
taken to improve enforcement of the Organic Standards Act.

                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Limitation, 2010........................................     $64,583,000
Budget limitation, 2011.................................      60,947,000
Committee recommendation................................      60,947,000

    The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 
97-35) initiated a system of user fees for the cost of grading 
and classing cotton, tobacco, naval stores, and for warehouse 
examination. These activities, authorized under the U.S. Cotton 
Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51 et seq.), the Tobacco Inspection Act 
(7 U.S.C. 511 et seq.), the Naval Stores Act (7 U.S.C. 91 et 
seq.), the U.S. Warehouse Act (7 U.S.C. 241 et seq.), and other 
provisions of law are designed to facilitate commerce and to 
protect participants in the industry.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $60,947,000 on 
administrative expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service.

          FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY

                              (SECTION 32)

                    MARKETING AGREEMENTS AND ORDERS

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $20,056,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      20,283,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,283,000

    Under section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, (7 U.S.C. 
612c), an amount equal to 30 percent of customs receipts 
collected during each preceding calendar year and unused 
balances are available for encouraging the domestic consumption 
and exportation of agricultural commodities. An amount equal to 
30 percent of receipts collected on fishery products is 
transferred to the Department of Commerce. Additional transfers 
to the child nutrition programs of the Food and Nutrition 
Service have been provided in recent appropriations Acts.
    The following table reflects the status of this fund for 
fiscal years 2009-2011:

               ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD--FISCAL YEARS 2009-2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fiscal year 2009  Fiscal year 2010  Fiscal year 2011
                                                                 actual           estimate          estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30 percent of Customs Receipts)............    $7,979,334,788    $8,061,101,371    $6,605,945,807
Rescission of Current Year Funds..........................      -242,022,000  ................  ................
Less Transfers:
    Food and Nutrition Service............................    -6,455,802,000    -6,747,877,000    -5,322,714,872
    Commerce Department...................................      -108,510,788      -114,224,371       -68,230,935
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Transfers....................................    -6,564,312,788    -6,862,101,371    -5,390,945,807
                                                           =====================================================
Budget Authority..........................................     1,173,000,000     1,199,000,000     1,215,000,000
Unobligated Balance, Start of Year........................       293,529,985       375,373,561        76,000,000
Rescission of Prior Year Funds............................       -51,507,985      -133,351,561  ................
Proposed Rescission of Current Year Funds.................  ................  ................       -50,000,000
Unavailable for Obligations...............................      -343,492,000       -76,000,000      -113,000,000
Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS.......................  ................      -242,022,000  ................
Available for Obligation..................................     1,071,530,000     1,123,000,000     1,128,000,000
Less Obligations:
    Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities)....       467,880,887       465,000,000       465,000,000
    12 Percent Commodity Floor Requirement................  ................       152,200,000       120,000,000
    State Option Contract.................................  ................  ................         5,000,000
    Removal of Defective Commodities......................            28,963         2,500,000         2,500,000
    Emergency Surplus Removal.............................       319,513,092       283,100,000  ................
    Direct Payments.......................................           750,000         3,375,000  ................
    Disaster Relief.......................................  ................         5,000,000         5,000,000
    Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases.....       119,418,398        24,639,114       203,000,000
    Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program.....................       108,000,000        25,000,000       113,000,000
    Whole Grain Products Study (FSA)......................         4,000,000  ................  ................
    Accounting Adjustment.................................       -28,159,093         1,561,000  ................
    Estimated Future Needs................................  ................       118,232,886       181,226,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Commodity Procurement........................       991,432,247     1,080,608,000     1,094,726,000
                                                           =====================================================
Administrative Funds:
    Commodity Purchase Support............................        31,092,419        22,336,000        20,283,000
    Marketing Agreements and Orders.......................        17,123,773        20,056,000        12,991,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Administrative Funds.........................        48,216,192        42,392,000        33,274,000
                                                           =====================================================
      Total Obligations...................................     1,039,648,439     1,123,000,000     1,128,000,000
                                                           =====================================================
Unobligated Balance, End of Year..........................       375,373,561        76,000,000       113,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds 
of $20,283,000 for the formulation and administration of 
marketing agreements and orders.
    Section 32 Authorities.--Under the authority described in 
clause 3 of 7 U.S.C. 612c, the Secretary is able to direct 
funds from the section 32 account to increase the purchasing 
power of producers. This practice has been used on various 
occasions to provide direct assistance to producers when market 
forces or natural conditions adversely affect the financial 
condition of farmers and ranchers. The Committee notes the 
importance in the ability of the Secretary to utilize this 
authority, but believes that communication between the 
Department and the Congress should be improved when this 
practice is used. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
Secretary to provide notification to the Appropriations 
Committee in advance of any public announcement or release of 
section 32 funds under the specific authorities cited above.

                   PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $1,334,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       2,634,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,484,000

    The Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program [FSMIP] is 
authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing Act 
of 1946 and is also funded from appropriations. Payments are 
made to State marketing agencies to: identify and test market 
alternative farm commodities; determine methods of providing 
more reliable market information, and develop better commodity 
grading standards. This program has made possible many types of 
projects, such as electronic marketing and agricultural product 
diversification. Current projects are focused on the 
improvement of marketing efficiency and effectiveness, and 
seeking new outlets for existing farm produced commodities. The 
legislation grants the U.S. Department of Agriculture authority 
to establish cooperative agreements with State departments of 
agriculture or similar State agencies to improve the efficiency 
of the agricultural marketing chain. The States perform the 
work or contract it to others, and must contribute at least 
one-half of the cost of the projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,484,000 for 
payments to States and possessions for Federal-State marketing 
projects and activities.

        Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $41,964,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      44,192,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,192,000

    The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
[GIPSA] was established pursuant to the Secretary's 1994 
reorganization. Grain inspection and weighing programs are 
carried out under the U.S. Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71 et 
seq.) and other programs under the authority of the 
Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, including the inspection 
and grading of rice and grain-related products; conducting 
official weighing and grain inspection activities; and grading 
dry beans and peas, and processed grain products. Under the 
Packers and Stockyards Act (7 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), assurance of 
the financial integrity of the livestock, meat, and poultry 
markets is provided. The administration monitors competition in 
order to protect producers, consumers, and industry from 
deceptive and fraudulent practices which affect meat and 
poultry prices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,192,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers and 
Stockyards Administration. The Committee recommendation 
includes an increase of $1,800,000 for enforcement of the 
Packers and Stockyards Act.

        LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES

Limitation, 2010........................................     $42,463,000
Budget limitation, 2011.................................      45,041,000
Committee recommendation................................      50,000,000

    The Agency provides an official grain inspection and 
weighing system under the U.S. Grain Standards Act [USGSA], and 
official inspection of rice and grain-related products under 
the Agricultural Marketing Act [AMA] of 1946. The USGSA was 
amended in 1981 to require the collection of user fees to fund 
the costs associated with the operation, supervision, and 
administration of Federal grain inspection and weighing 
activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $50,000,000 on 
inspection and weighing services expenses.

             Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $813,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         836,000
Committee recommendation................................         821,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety provides 
direction and coordination in carrying out the laws enacted by 
the Congress with respect to the Department's inspection of 
meat, poultry, and processed egg products. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Food Safety 
and Inspection Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $821,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety.
    Ombudsman.--The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
consider the establishment of an ombudsman to provide FSIS 
inspectors and other personnel with an avenue to register their 
concerns and help ensure that they are able to carry out their 
responsibilities--ensuring compliance with all food safety and 
humane slaughter requirements--without undue interference. If 
deemed appropriate, the Committee recommends that this 
ombudsman be independent from FSIS, reporting directly to the 
Under Secretary for Food Safety.

                   Food Safety and Inspection Service

Appropriations, 2010....................................  $1,018,520,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................   1,036,900,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,047,200,000

    The major objectives of the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service are to assure that meat and poultry products are 
wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged, as 
required by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et 
seq.); and to provide continuous in-plant inspection to egg 
processing plants under the Egg Products Inspection Act.
    The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on 
June 17, 1981, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1000-1, issued 
pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.
    The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service provides continuous in-plant inspection of all domestic 
plants preparing meat, poultry or egg products for sale or 
distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and 
establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for export 
to the United States; and provides technical and financial 
assistance to States which maintain meat and poultry inspection 
programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,047,200,000 
for the Food Safety and Inspection Service.
    Codex Alimentarius.--Codex Alimentarius is critical for the 
protection of consumer health globally and facilitating 
international trade. Therefore, the Committee recommends 
$3,903,000 exclusively for the activities of the U.S. Codex 
office including international outreach and education.
    Humane Slaughter.--The Committee continues to include 
$3,000,000, as requested in the budget, for maintenance of the 
Humane Animal Tracking System. Further, the Committee notes 
that the budget request will maintain no less than 148 full-
time equivalent positions which have been provided solely for 
humane slaughter enforcement.
    The Committee is pleased that USDA, during fiscal year 
2010, acted upon the longstanding recommendations of this 
Committee regarding objective scoring methods to enforce the 
Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. The Committee encourages USDA 
to continue these efforts, and expand them as determined 
appropriate.
    Inspections.--The Committee recommendation does not include 
the proposed reduction of $10,300,000 for the implementation of 
section 11016 of Public Law 110-246, and expects USDA to meet 
its statutory obligation and promulgate regulations to 
implement this section. Further, USDA is directed to report on 
the progress of implementing this section within 30 days of the 
enactment of this act.
    Mobile Review Team.--The Committee directs FSIS to consider 
the hiring and training of a mobile review team of FSIS 
employees to conduct unscheduled audits, including the 
potential for undercover surveillance, focused on assessing 
compliance with humane handling rules of live animals as they 
arrive and are offloaded and handled in pens, chutes and 
stunning areas. These teams could also, if deemed appropriate, 
be responsible for reporting on or acting on other food safety 
responsibilities, as outlined by FSIS. The Committee directs 
FSIS to report back to the Committee on the feasibility of such 
a team, including whether FSIS or another USDA agency would be 
the most appropriate to carry out this effort; and the 
potential responsibilities, challenges, costs, and benefits of 
having such a team. If FSIS deems this to be a worthwhile 
effort, the Committee encourages them to begin implementation.
    State Meat Inspection.--The Committee is concerned that 
USDA has not yet promulgated regulations regarding interstate 
shipment of meat and poultry from eligible State-inspected 
plants, in accordance with Public Law 110-246. The Committee 
encourages USDA to continue to collaborate with State agencies, 
as appropriate, on the swift publication and implementation of 
these regulations.
    The following table represents the Committee's specific 
recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as 
compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget request levels:

                            FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                    Fiscal year     2011 budget      Committee
                                                                   2010 enacted       request     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food safety inspection:
    Federal.....................................................         903,067         912,248         919,248
    State.......................................................          65,654          65,118          65,118
    International...............................................          19,445          16,161          19,461
    Codex Alimentarius..........................................           3,884           3,903           3,903
    PHDCIS......................................................          26,470          39,470          39,470
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................       1,018,520       1,036,900       1,047,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
                                Services

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         920,000
Committee recommendation................................         904,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's international affairs (except for foreign 
economic development) and commodity programs. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Farm Service 
Agency (including the Commodity Credit Corporation), Risk 
Management Agency, and the Foreign Agricultural Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services.
    Food Aid Quality.--The Committee continues strong interest 
in maintaining high quality standards in food products used for 
international humanitarian assistance. The Department is 
encouraged further to develop adequate standardization of 
quality control mechanisms. In addition, the Committee expects 
that appropriate levels of funding from the Commodity Credit 
Corporation be directed to inspection of shipments in order to 
avoid breaks in food pipelines and to maintain an orderly 
conveyance of food to the world's hungry populations.
    Geospatial Data.--The Committee is aware of section 1619 of 
the Farm bill that requires geospatial data collected from 
farming operations to be portable and standardized. The 
Secretary is encouraged to work with the Nebraska Natural 
Resource Districts with their efforts in collecting geospatial 
data, as deemed appropriate.

                          Farm Service Agency

    The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established October 3, 
1994, pursuant to the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and 
Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, Public 
Law 103-354. The FSA administers a variety of activities, such 
as the commodity price support and production adjustment 
programs financed by the Commodity Credit Corporation; the 
Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]; the Emergency Conservation 
Program; the Commodity Operation Programs including the 
warehouse examination function; farm ownership, farm operating, 
emergency disaster, and other loan programs; and the Noninsured 
Crop Disaster Assistance Program [NAP], which provides crop 
loss protection for growers of many crops for which crop 
insurance is not available. In addition, FSA currently provides 
certain administrative support services to the Foreign 
Agricultural Service [FAS] and to the Risk Management Agency 
[RMA].

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Transfers from    Total, FSA,
                                                                Appropriations      program       salaries, and
                                                                                    accounts         expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010.........................................        1,253,777          316,340        1,570,117
Budget estimate, 2011........................................        1,364,673          321,405        1,686,078
Committee recommendation.....................................        1,343,350          316,378        1,659,728
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The account Salaries and Expenses, Farm Service Agency, 
funds the administrative expenses of program administration and 
other functions assigned to FSA. The funds consist of 
appropriations and transfers from the CCC export credit 
guarantees, Food for Peace loans, and agricultural credit 
insurance fund program accounts, and miscellaneous advances 
from other sources. All administrative funds used by FSA are 
consolidated into one account. The consolidation provides 
clarity and better management and control of funds, and 
facilitates accounting, fiscal, and budgetary work by 
eliminating the necessity for making individual allocations and 
allotments and maintaining and recording obligations and 
expenditures under numerous separate accounts.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,659,728,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency, including 
a direct appropriation of $1,343,350,000.
    Information Technology.--The Committee provides substantial 
funding for the information technology [IT] needs requested in 
the President's budget proposal. The Committee remains aware of 
the unstable status of the Farm Service Agency computer system 
which is responsible for the calculation and tracking of the 
agency's payments to agricultural producers, and which has 
resulted in disruption of services to U.S. farmers and 
ranchers.
    National Agriculture Imagery Program.--The Committee 
recommends that no less than the fiscal year 2010 level shall 
be allocated to purchase imagery products to meet programmatic 
requirements.

                         STATE MEDIATION GRANTS

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $4,369,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       4,369,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,369,000

    This program is authorized under title V of the 
Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 (7 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.). 
Originally designed to address agricultural credit disputes, 
the program was expanded by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform 
and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 
(Public Law 103-354) to include other agricultural issues such 
as wetland determinations, conservation compliance, rural water 
loan programs, grazing on National Forest System lands, and 
pesticides. Grants are made to States whose mediation programs 
have been certified by the FSA. Grants will be solely for 
operation and administration of the State's agricultural 
mediation program.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,369,000 for 
State Mediation Grants.

               GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................................
Committee recommendation................................       6,000,000

    This program is intended to assist in the protection of 
groundwater through State rural water associations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,000,000 for 
Grassroots Source Water Protection.

                        DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010\1\.................................        $930,000
Budget estimate, 2011\1\................................         876,000
Committee recommendation\1\.............................         876,000

\1\Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided.

    Under the program, the Department makes indemnification 
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products 
who, through no fault of their own, suffer losses because they 
are directed to remove their milk from commercial markets due 
to contamination of their products by registered pesticides. 
The program also authorizes indemnity payments to dairy farmers 
for losses resulting from the removal of cows or dairy products 
from the market due to nuclear radiation or fallout.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2011 to be $876,000, 
for indemnity payments to dairy farmers.

           AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

    The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is 
used to provide direct and guaranteed farm ownership, farm 
operating, conservation, Indian highly fractioned land, and 
emergency loans to individuals, as well as the following types 
of loans to associations: irrigation and drainage, grazing, 
Indian tribe land acquisition, and boll weevil eradication.
    FSA is also authorized to provide financial assistance to 
borrowers by guaranteeing loans made by private lenders having 
a contract of guarantee from FSA as approved by the Secretary 
of Agriculture and to establish Beginning Farmer and Rancher 
Individual Development grant accounts.
    The following programs are financed through this fund:
    Boll Weevil Eradication Loans.--Made to assist foundations 
in financing the operations of the boll weevil eradication 
programs provided to farmers.
    Credit Sales of Acquired Property.--Property is sold out of 
inventory and is made available to an eligible buyer by 
providing FSA loans.
    Emergency Loans.--Made to producers to aid recovery from 
production and physical losses due to drought, flooding, other 
natural disasters, or quarantine. The loans may be used to: 
restore or replace essential property; pay all or part of 
production costs associated with the disaster year; pay 
essential family living expenses; reorganize the farming 
operation; and refinance certain debts.
    Farm Operating Loans.--Provide short-to-intermediate term 
production or chattel credit to farmers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere, to improve their farm and home operations, 
and to develop or maintain a reasonable standard of living. The 
term of the loan varies from 1 to 7 years.
    Farm Ownership Loans.--Made to borrowers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere to restructure their debts, improve or 
purchase farms, refinance nonfarm enterprises which supplement 
but do not supplant farm income, or make additions to farms. 
Loans are made for 40 years or less.
    Indian Tribe Land Acquisition Loans.--Made to any Indian 
tribe recognized by the Secretary of the Interior or tribal 
corporation established pursuant to the Indian Reorganization 
Act (Public Law 93-638) which does not have adequate 
uncommitted funds to acquire lands or interest in lands within 
the tribe's reservation or Alaskan Indian community, as 
determined by the Secretary of the Interior, for use of the 
tribe or the corporation or the members thereof.
    Conservation Loans.--Made to farmers, ranchers, and other 
entities controlled by farmers and ranchers and primarily 
engaged in agricultural production. Direct and guaranteed loans 
may be used for conservation projects that support a USDA-
approved conservation plan. Guarantees cover 75 percent of the 
principal loan amount.
    Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.--Made to Indian 
tribal members to purchase highly fractionated lands, as 
authorized by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.
    Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development 
Grants.--Made to beginning farmers and ranchers who lack 
significant assets and have incomes below either 80 percent of 
the State's median income, or 200 percent of the State's 
poverty income level. Grants provide for matching-funds savings 
accounts to be used for specified farming-related expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a total loan level of 
$5,423,940,000 for programs within the Agricultural Credit 
Insurance Fund Program Account.
    The following table reflects the program levels for farm 
credit programs administered by the Farm Service Agency 
recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year 
2010 and the budget request levels:

                                    AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                                                                 2010 enacted     2011 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm ownership:
    Direct...................................................          650,000          475,000          650,000
    Guaranteed...............................................        1,500,000        1,500,000        1,500,000
Farm Operating:
    Direct...................................................        1,000,000          900,000        1,190,000
    Guaranteed unsubsidized..................................        1,500,000        1,500,000        1,650,000
    Guaranteed subsidized....................................          170,000          144,035          170,000
Indian Tribe Land Acquisition................................            3,940            2,000            3,940
Conservation Loans:
    Direct...................................................           75,000           75,000           75,000
    Guaranteed...............................................           75,000           75,000           75,000
Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans........................           10,000           10,000           10,000
Boll Weevil Eradication......................................          100,000           60,000          100,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Farm loans......................................        5,083,940        4,741,035        5,423,940
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       LOAN SUBSIDIES, GRANTS, AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Subsidies              Administrative expenses
                                         -------------------------------------------------------------   Total
                                            Direct   Guaranteed                              Transfer     ACIF
                                             loan       loan       Total    Appropriations    to FSA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010....................     75,778      64,830    140,608       321,093      313,173    461,701
Budget estimate, 2011...................     89,867      60,855    150,722       326,120      318,200    476,842
Committee recommendation................    119,537      67,946    187,483       321,093      313,173    508,576
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account are used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed, as well as for 
administrative expenses.
    The following table reflects the cost of programs under 
credit reform:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                 2010 enacted     2011 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Farm ownership:
        Direct...............................................           26,520           32,870           44,980
        Guaranteed...........................................            5,550            5,700            5,700
    Farm operating:
        Direct...............................................           47,400           54,540           72,100
        Guaranteed unsubsidized..............................           35,100           34,950           38,450
        Guaranteed subsidized................................           23,902           19,920           23,511
    Conservation loans:
        Direct...............................................            1,065            2,243            2,243
        Guaranteed...........................................              278              285              285
    Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans....................              793              214              214
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies..................................          140,608          150,722          187,483
                                                              ==================================================
ACIF expenses................................................          321,093          326,120          321,093
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Risk Management Agency

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $80,325,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      83,064,000
Committee recommendation................................      83,064,000

    The Risk Management Agency performs administrative 
functions relative to the Federal crop insurance program that 
is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 
1508), as amended by the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 
2000 [ARPA], Public Law 106-224, and the Food, Conservation, 
and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246).
    ARPA authorized significant changes in the crop insurance 
program. This act provides higher government subsidies for 
producer premiums to make coverage more affordable; expands 
research and development for new insurance products and under-
served areas through contracts with the private sector; and 
tightens compliance. Functional areas of risk management are: 
research and development; insurance services; and compliance, 
whose functions include policy formulation and procedures and 
regulations development.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $83,064,000 
for the Risk Management Agency.

                              CORPORATIONS

                Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund

Appropriations, 2010\1\.................................  $7,502,601,000
Budget estimate, 2011\1\................................   7,613,232,000
Committee recommendation\1\.............................   7,613,232,000

\1\Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary, to remain available 
until expended, are provided.

    The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal 
Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of 
expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss adjustment, 
delivery expenses, program-related research and development, 
startup costs for implementing this legislation such as 
studies, pilot projects, data processing improvements, public 
outreach, and related tasks and functions.
    All program costs, except for Federal salaries and 
expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to appropriation.
    Producers of insurable crops are eligible to receive a 
basic level of protection against catastrophic losses, which 
cover 50 percent of the normal yield at 55 percent of the 
expected price. The only cost to the producer is an 
administrative fee of $300 per crop per county.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary, estimated to be $7,613,232,000 for the 
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund.

                   Commodity Credit Corporation Fund

    The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned 
Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support, 
and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced 
and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including 
products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the orderly 
distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally 
incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated 
June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department 
of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, 
approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714).
    The Commodity Credit Corporation engages in buying, 
selling, lending, and other activities with respect to 
agricultural commodities, their products, food, feed, and 
fibers. Its purposes include stabilizing, supporting, and 
protecting farm income and prices; maintaining the balance and 
adequate supplies of selected commodities; and facilitating the 
orderly distribution of such commodities. In addition, the 
Corporation makes available materials and facilities required 
in connection with the storage and distribution of such 
commodities. The Corporation also disburses funds for sharing 
of costs with producers for the establishment of approved 
conservation practices on environmentally sensitive land and 
subsequent rental payments for such land for the duration of 
Conservation Reserve Program contracts.
    Corporation activities are primarily governed by the 
following statutes: the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
Act (Public Law 80-806), as amended; the Agricultural Act of 
1949 (Public Law 81-439), as amended (1949 Act); the 
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-430), as 
amended (the 1938 Act); the Food Security Act of 1985 (Public 
Law 99-198), as amended (1985 Act); and the Food, Conservation, 
and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246).
    Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of 
directors, subject to the general supervision and direction of 
the Secretary of Agriculture, who is an ex officio director and 
chairman of the board. The board consists of seven members, in 
addition to the Secretary, who are appointed by the President 
of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. 
Officers of the Corporation are designated according to their 
positions in the Department of Agriculture.
    The activities of the Corporation are carried out mainly by 
the personnel and through the facilities of the Farm Service 
Agency [FSA] and the Farm Service Agency State and county 
committees. The Foreign Agricultural Service, the General Sales 
Manager, other agencies and offices of the Department, and 
commercial agents are also used to carry out certain aspects of 
the Corporation's activities.
    Under Public Law 87-155 (15 U.S.C. 713a-11, 713a-12), 
annual appropriations are authorized for each fiscal year, 
commencing with fiscal year 1961. These appropriations are to 
reimburse the Corporation for net realized losses.

                 REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES

Appropriations, 2010\1\................................. $13,878,054,000
Budget estimate, 2011\1\................................  13,925,575,000
Committee recommendation\1\.............................  13,925,575,000

\1\Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary, estimated in fiscal year 2011 to be 
$13,925,575,000, for the payment to reimburse the Commodity 
Credit Corporation for net realized losses.

                       HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

Limitation, 2010........................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

    The Commodity Credit Corporation's [CCC] hazardous waste 
management program is intended to ensure compliance with the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) and the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). The CCC 
funds operations and maintenance costs as well as site 
investigation and cleanup expenses. Investigative and cleanup 
costs associated with the management of CCC hazardous waste are 
also paid from USDA's hazardous waste management appropriation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $5,000,000 for the 
Commodity Credit Corporation's hazardous waste management 
program.

                                TITLE II

                         CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

  Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         920,000
Committee recommendation................................         904,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
Environment provides direction and coordination in carrying out 
the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to natural 
resources and the environment. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service and the Forest Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
Environment.
    Atlantic Salmon Recovery.--The Committee supports the goals 
of the Penobscot River Restoration Project in the State of 
Maine. This project will restore nearly 1,000 miles of habitat 
in the Penobscot watershed for endangered Atlantic salmon and 
six other species of sea-run fish and 100 percent of the 
historic habitat in Maine's largest river system for four 
additional species. The Committee encourages NRCS to improve 
migratory fish habitat in this watershed, including the 
purchase of dams and the removal of impediments to passage, by 
utilizing all appropriate funding sources.
    Maine Irrigation.--The Committee commends the Department 
for its support of farmers with existing irrigation programs, 
through its Environmental Quality Incentives Program. However, 
funding for new irrigators, specifically potato farmers in 
Maine, has not been equitable in comparison to farmers in other 
areas of the country. The Committee directs the Department, 
through the Natural Resources Conservation Service and its 
Agricultural Management Assistance Program, to work to ensure 
that irrigation funding and assistance equitably addresses the 
needs of Maine potato farms that lack irrigation programs.
    Resources First Foundation.--The Natural Resources 
Conservation Service entered to a Memorandum of Understanding 
[MOU] with the Resources First Foundation in January of 2008 to 
work cooperatively on outreach efforts to private landowners, 
conservationists, and others in order to further conservation 
efforts through better accessibility and sharing of 
information. The Committee supports the intent of this MOU and 
directs NRCS to work in good faith to carry out NRCS Agreement 
No. 693A758-38.
    Rhode Island Restoration.--The Committee is aware of NRCS's 
efforts in the State of Rhode Island to restore habitat for 
anadromous fish, including herring and American shad, through 
the construction of fish passages and dam removal. NRCS is 
encouraged to continue these efforts particularly in the 
Blackstone, Woonasquatucket, Moshassuck, and Pawtuxet river 
watersheds.

                Office of Ecosystem Services and Markets

Appropriations, 2010....................................................
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      $2,021,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the 
Office of Ecosystem Services and Markets. The Committee expects 
these functions to be continued under the Office of the Chief 
Economist.

                 Natural Resources Conservation Service

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] was 
established pursuant to Public Law 103-354, the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6962). The 
NRCS works with conservation districts, watershed groups, and 
Federal and State agencies to bring about physical adjustments 
in land use that will conserve soil and water resources, 
provide for agricultural production on a sustained basis, and 
reduce flood damage and sedimentation.

                        conservation operations

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $887,629,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     923,729,000
Committee recommendation................................     928,979,000

    Conservation operations are authorized by Public Law 74-46 
(16 U.S.C. 590a-590f). Activities include:
    Conservation Technical Assistance.--Provides assistance to 
district cooperators and other land users in the planning and 
application of conservation treatments to control erosion and 
improve the quantity and quality of soil resources, improve and 
conserve water, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, conserve 
energy, improve woodland, pasture and range conditions, and 
reduce upstream flooding; all to protect and enhance the 
natural resource base.
    Inventory and monitoring provides soil, water, and related 
resource data for land conservation, use, and development; 
guidance of community development; identification of prime 
agricultural producing areas that should be protected; 
environmental quality protection; and for the issuance of 
periodic inventory reports of resource conditions.
    Resource appraisal and program development ensures that 
programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture for the 
conservation of soil, water, and related resources shall 
respond to the Nation's long-term needs.
    Plant Materials Centers.--Assembles, tests, and encourages 
increased use of plant species which show promise for use in 
the treatment of conservation problem areas.
    Snow Survey and Water Forecasting.--Provides estimates of 
annual water availability from high mountain snow packs and 
relates to summer stream flow in the Western States and Alaska. 
Information is used by agriculture, industry, and cities in 
estimating future water supplies.
    Soil Surveys.--Inventories the Nation's basic soil 
resources and determines land capabilities and conservation 
treatment needs. Soil survey publications include 
interpretations useful to cooperators, other Federal agencies, 
State, and local organizations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $928,979,000 
for Conservation Operations. The Committee recommendation 
includes increases of $13,000,000 for Strategic Watershed 
Action Teams, $35,000,000 for Common Computing Environment 
refresh, $1,500,000 for streamlining and integrating business 
model and information technology tools, $1,095,000 for Snow 
Surveys, and $500,000 for soil climate analysis network.
    Delta National Priority Area.--The Committee directs the 
agency to maintain a national priority area program under the 
guidelines of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program 
[EQIP] in the Delta of the State of Mississippi.
    National Geospatial Development Center.--The Committee 
encourages NRCS to continue activities at the National 
Geospatial Development Center in Morgantown, West Virginia.
    For fiscal year 2011, the Committee recommends funding, as 
specified below, for new and ongoing conservation activities. 
Amounts recommended by the Committee for specific conservation 
measures shall be in addition to levels otherwise made 
available to States.

    NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE--CONSERVATION OPERATIONS--
                   CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED PROJECTS
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accelerated Soil Mapping Survey (WY)....................             200
Agricultural Development and Resource Conservation (HI).           1,400
Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center (MS)..........             939
CEMSA with Iowa Soybean Association (IA)................             288
Center for Invasive Species Eradication (TX)............           1,000
Conservation Enhancements (PA)..........................             200
Conservation Internships (WI)...........................             120
Conservation Technical Assistance in New Jersey.........             236
Conservation Technical Assistance in Tennessee..........           1,000
Conservation Technology Transfer (WI)...................             516
Cover Crop Program (MD).................................           1,000
Delta Conservation Demonstration (MS)...................             376
Delta Water Study (MS)..................................             235
Farm Viability Program (VT).............................             300
Grazing Land Conservation (WI)..........................             732
Great Basin Plant Materials Center (NV).................             269
Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment              404
 Control................................................
Hungry Canyons Alliance (IA)............................             282
Illinois Conservation Initiative (IL)...................           1,126
Kentucky Soil Erosion Control...........................             724
Mississippi Conservation Initiative.....................           2,000
Native Plant Initiative (LA)............................             500
Operation Oak Program...................................             100
Phosphorous Loading in Lake Champlain (VT)..............             179
Prairie Biomass (IA)....................................             100
Quabbin to Cardigan Conservation Initiative (NH)........             282
Riparian Restoration (NM)...............................             200
Soil Survey (RI)........................................             134
Technical Assistance Grants to Kentucky Soil                         545
 Conservation Districts.................................
Upper Cedar River Watershed Coalition (IA)..............             150
Watershed Demonstration Project (IA)....................             134
Watershed Planning Staff (HI)...........................             500
West Virginia Conservation Initiative...................           1,000
                                                         ---------------
      Total, Conservation Operations....................          17,171
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               watershed and flood prevention operations

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      24,394,000

    The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public 
Law 566, 83d Cong.) (16 U.S.C. 1001-1005, 1007-1009) provides 
for cooperation between the Federal Government and the States 
and their political subdivisions in a program to prevent 
erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the watersheds or 
rivers and streams and to further the conservation, 
development, utilization, and disposal of water.
    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility for administration of activities, which include 
cooperation with local sponsors, State, and other public 
agencies in the installation of planned works of improvement to 
reduce erosion, floodwater, and sediment damage; conserve, 
develop, utilize, and dispose of water; plan and install works 
of improvement for flood prevention, including the development 
of recreational facilities and the improvement of fish and 
wildlife habitat; and loans to local organizations to help 
finance the local share of the cost of carrying out planned 
watershed and flood prevention works of improvement.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,394,000 
for Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations. The Committee 
encourages NRCS to fund the highest ranked projects identified 
in State priority lists and work to complete the final phase of 
multi-purpose structures.
    The following is a list of congressionally designated 
projects:

 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE--WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION
             OPERATIONS--CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED PROJECTS
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooper Mine Brook Watershed (CT)........................             330
Dunloup Creek (WV)......................................           1,500
Lahaina Watershed (HI)..................................           4,000
Lake County Watershed (IL)..............................             350
Lower Hamakua (HI)......................................           1,800
Missouri Watershed projects (MO)........................           2,000
North Fork of Elkhorn Creek (WV)........................             300
Pocasset River (RI).....................................           2,000
Southeast Quadrant Drainage and Flood Provention Project             350
 (AL)...................................................
Upcountry Maui (HI).....................................           2,000
Wailuku-Alenaio (HI)....................................             250
                                                         ---------------
      Total, Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations..          14,880
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $40,161,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      40,497,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,497,000

    The watershed rehabilitation program account provides for 
technical and financial assistance to carry out rehabilitation 
of structural measures, in accordance with section 14 of the 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, approved August 
4, 1954 (16 U.S.C. 1012, U.S.C. 1001, et seq.), as amended by 
section 313 of Public Law 106-472, November 9, 2000, and by 
section 2803 of Public Law 110-246.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,497,000 
for the Watershed Rehabilitation Program.
    The Committee directs that funding under this program be 
provided for rehabilitation of structures determined to be of 
high priority need in order to protect property and ensure 
public safety.

                 resource conservation and development

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $50,730,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      50,730,000

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility under provisions of section 102, title I of the 
Food and Agriculture Act of 1962 (7 U.S.C. 1010 et seq.), for 
developing overall work plans for resource conservation and 
development projects in cooperation with local sponsors; to 
help develop local programs of land conservation and 
utilization; to assist local groups and individuals in carrying 
out such plans and programs; to conduct surveys and 
investigations relating to the conditions and factors affecting 
such work on private lands; and to make loans to project 
sponsors for conservation and development purposes and to 
individual operators for establishing soil and water 
conservation practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $50,730,000 
for Resource Conservation and Development.

                               TITLE III

                       RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

    The Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354) 
abolished the Farmers Home Administration, Rural Development 
Administration, and Rural Electrification Administration and 
replaced those agencies with the Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service, (currently, the Rural Housing Service), 
Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service (currently, 
the Rural Business--Cooperative Service), and Rural Utilities 
Service and placed them under the oversight of the Under 
Secretary for Rural Economic and Community Development, 
(currently, Rural Development). These agencies deliver a 
variety of programs through a network of State, district, and 
county offices.

          Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $895,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         920,000
Committee recommendation................................         904,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development 
provides direction and coordination in carrying out the laws 
enacted by the Congress with respect to the Department's rural 
economic and community development activities. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Rural Housing 
Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and the Rural 
Utilities Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $904,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development.
    Regional Innovation Initiative.--The Committee recognizes 
the potential for rural development synergies stemming from 
regional planning and coordination. Authority is provided to 
reserve up to 5 percent of selected Rural Development programs 
for projects in areas engaged in strategic regional planning. 
The Secretary is directed to develop and utilize empirical 
performance measures to gauge program success. Fiscal year 2011 
accomplishments will impact deliberations on potential 
increases for fiscal year 2012.

                                     RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                     2010         2011 budget     recommendation
                                                                appropriation       request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation................................................          201,987          232,257          237,507
Transfer from:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account........          468,593          454,383          454,383
    Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Program                39,959           38,374           38,374
     Account.................................................
    Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account..............            4,941            5,046            5,046
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total RD salaries and expenses.........................          715,480          730,060          735,310
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
programs of the Rural Utilities Service, the Rural Housing 
Service, and the Rural Business--Cooperative Service, including 
reviewing applications, making and collecting loans and 
providing technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; and 
to assist in extending other Federal programs to people in 
rural areas.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for 
costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $735,310,000 for salaries and 
expenses of Rural Development, which includes $12,000,000 for 
the Common Computing Environment.
    The Committee rejects the proposal to reduce efforts toward 
``maintaining portfolio compliance, safety and soundness.'' In 
the face of expanding reliance on guaranteed lending, and 
recent exposure of private mortgage and financial industry 
weaknesses, the Committee directs the Secretary to ensure 
proper lender monitoring and underwriting standards are 
maintained. Now is not the time to relax Agency oversight 
responsibilities. Further, the Committee rejects the proposal 
to implement a ``direct endorsement'' model for the section 502 
guaranteed single family housing loan program. If the Secretary 
wishes to pursue this option in the future, the Secretary 
should submit a report to the Committee detailing the costs and 
benefits of direct endorsement, and articulating procedures 
that would ensure portfolio quality would be protected while 
continuing to reach targeted rural households.

                         Rural Housing Service

    The Rural Housing Service [RHS] was established under the 
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994.
    The mission of the Rural Housing Service is to improve the 
quality of life in rural America by assisting rural residents 
and communities in obtaining adequate and affordable housing 
and access to needed community facilities. The goals and 
objectives of the Service are: (1) facilitate the economic 
revitalization of rural areas by providing direct and indirect 
economic benefits to individual borrowers, families, and rural 
communities; (2) assure that benefits are communicated to all 
program eligible customers with special outreach efforts to 
target resources to underserved, impoverished, or economically 
declining rural areas; (3) lower the cost of programs while 
retaining the benefits by redesigning more effective programs 
that work in partnership with State and local governments and 
the private sector; and (4) leverage the economic benefits 
through the use of low-cost credit programs.

              RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010 (budget authority).................    $707,501,000
Budget estimate, 2011 (budget authority)................     581,714,000
Committee recommendation (budget authority).............     573,037,000

    This fund was established in 1965 (Public Law 89-117) 
pursuant to section 517 of title V of the Housing Act of 1949 
(42 U.S.C. 517(d)), as amended. This fund may be used to insure 
or guarantee rural housing loans for single-family homes, 
rental and cooperative housing, and rural housing sites. Rural 
housing loans are made to construct, improve, alter, repair, or 
replace dwellings and essential farm service buildings that are 
modest in size, design, and cost. Rental housing insured loans 
are made to individuals, corporations, associations, trusts, or 
partnerships to provide moderate-cost rental housing and 
related facilities for elderly persons in rural areas. These 
loans are repayable in terms up to 30 years. Loan programs are 
limited to rural areas, which include towns, villages, and 
other places of not more than 10,000 population, which are not 
part of an urban area. Loans may also be made in areas with a 
population in excess of 10,000, but less than 20,000, if the 
area is not included in a standard metropolitan statistical 
area and has a serious lack of mortgage credit for low- and 
moderate-income borrowers.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $573,037,000 
for the Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account [RHIF].
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508) 
established the RHIF program account. Appropriations to this 
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs 
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees 
committed in 2011, as well as for administrative expenses. The 
following table presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to 
the 2010 levels and the 2011 budget request:

                                  RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year
                                                                     2010         2011 budget       Committee
                                                                appropriation       request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan Levels:
    Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
        Direct...............................................        1,121,488        1,200,000        1,200,000
        Guaranteed...........................................       12,000,000       12,000,000       24,000,000
    Housing Repair (sec. 504)................................           34,412           34,004           34,004
    Direct rental housing (sec. 515).........................           69,512           95,236           69,512
    Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538).....................          129,090          129,133          129,133
    Site loans (sec. 524)....................................            5,045            5,052            5,052
    Credit sales of acquired property........................           11,448           11,449           11,449
    Self help land development loans (sec. 523)..............            4,970            4,966            4,966
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan levels.....................................       13,375,965       13,479,840       25,454,116
                                                              ==================================================
Loan Subsidies:
    Single-Family Housing (sec. 502):
        Direct...............................................           40,710           75,120           75,120
        Guaranteed...........................................          172,800  ...............  ...............
    Housing Repair (sec. 504)................................            4,422            6,437            6,437
    Direct rental housing (sec. 515).........................           18,935           32,123           23,446
    Guaranteed rental housing (sec. 538).....................            1,485           12,513           12,513
    Site loans (sec. 524)....................................  ...............              294              294
    Credit sales of acquired property........................              556              556              556
    Self help land development loans (sec. 523)..............  ...............              288              288
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies..................................          238,908          127,331          118,654
                                                              ==================================================
Administrative expenses......................................          468,593          454,383          454,383
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses......          707,501          581,714          573,037
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $980,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     965,635,000
Committee recommendation................................     971,593,000

    The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
U.S.C. 1490a) established a rural rental assistance program to 
be administered through the rural housing loans program. The 
objective of the program is to reduce rents paid by low-income 
families living in Rural Housing Service financed rental 
projects and farm labor housing projects. Under this program, 
low-income tenants will contribute the higher of: (1) 30 
percent of monthly adjusted income; (2) 10 percent of monthly 
income; or (3) designated housing payments from a welfare 
agency.
    Payments from the fund are made to the project owner for 
the difference between the tenant's payment and the approved 
rental rate established for the unit.
    The program is administered in tandem with Rural Housing 
Service section 515 rural rental and cooperative housing 
programs and the farm labor loan and grant programs. Priority 
is given to existing projects for units occupied by rent over-
burdened low-income families and projects experiencing 
financial difficulties beyond the control of the owner; any 
remaining authority will be used for projects receiving new 
construction commitments under sections 514, 515, or 516 for 
very low-income families with certain limitations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $971,593,000 
for the Rental Assistance Program.
    Rental Assistance.--The Committee provides funding to meet 
the needs of expiring and new rental assistance contracts for 
section 515 and 514/516 multi-family housing projects. The 
Committee includes statutory language requiring rental 
assistance to be held in 514/516 projects for a minimum period 
of time.
    Rental assistance contracts are funded for 1 year 
durations. One year contract durations enable the Department to 
provide more accurate estimates of contract cost increases and 
the number of contracts expiring and requiring renewal.

              MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $43,191,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      18,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,055,000

    The Rural Housing Voucher Program was authorized under the 
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1940r) to assist very low income 
families and individuals who reside in rental housing in rural 
areas. Housing vouchers may be provided to residents of rental 
housing projects financed by section 515 loans that have been 
prepaid after September 30, 2005. Voucher amounts reflect the 
difference between comparable market rents and tenant-paid rent 
prior to loan prepayment. Vouchers allow tenants to remain in 
existing projects or move to other rental housing.
    The Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program includes 
funding for housing vouchers, a multi-family revolving loan 
program, and a program for the preservation and revitalization 
of affordable multi-family housing projects. Rural 
Development's multi-family housing portfolio faces dual 
pressures for loan prepayments and repair/rehabilitation 
stemming from inadequate reserves resulting in deferred 
property maintenance.
    Provision of affordable rental housing can be accomplished 
more economically by revitalizing existing housing stock rather 
than funding new construction. The Multi-family Housing 
Revitalization Program includes revitalization tools for 
maintenance of existing units and vouchers to protect tenants 
in those projects that prepay. Flexibility is provided to allow 
Rural Development to utilize funding among vouchers and the two 
programs to meet the most urgent local needs for tenant 
protection and project revitalization.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,055,000 
for the Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program, including 
$16,400,000 for vouchers, $2,655,000 for revolving loan funds, 
and $25,000,000 for a housing preservation demonstration 
program.
    The Committee is aware of the large and growing demand for 
housing vouchers to protect multi-family housing residents from 
substantial rent increases if owners pre-pay their loans and 
leave the multi-family housing program. Sufficient funding is 
provided for expiring vouchers and new vouchers anticipated to 
be issued in fiscal year 2011.
    The President's budget states, ``The rural development 
vouchers program is designed to provide a maximum of 36 monthly 
payments in rent assistance to eligible tenants, subject to 
annual appropriations.'' The Secretary is directed to submit a 
report to the Committee detailing the number and amount of 
initial obligations and renewal history of all vouchers issued 
over the life of the program, including identifying the number 
that have been terminated after 36 monthly payments. The report 
shall also indicate how recipients are advised of the 36 month 
term limit.

                  MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $41,864,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      37,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      41,864,000

    The Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants Program is 
authorized by title V of the Housing Act of 1949. Grants are 
made to local organizations to promote the development of 
mutual or self-help programs under which groups of usually 6 to 
10 families build their own homes by mutually exchanging labor. 
Funds may be used to pay the cost of construction supervisors 
who work with families in the construction of their homes and 
for administrative expenses of the organizations providing the 
self-help assistance.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,864,000 
for Mutual and Self-help Housing Grants.
    The Committee is aware that in the decade prior to the 
recession, a period of high land value appreciation, self-help 
builders, and other nonprofits acquired land in order to 
provide future housing opportunities for low- and very low-
income families. This effort was intended to keep land costs 
down, a key factor in providing affordable housing.
    Now, in many communities, particularly in Western States, 
land values have plummeted. This has impacted self-help 
organizations to the degree that many are now producing at less 
than 50 percent of their capacity to provide affordable 
housing.
    The Committee believes that self-help housing is an 
essential tool to improve homeownership opportunities in rural 
America. The Committee directs the Secretary to submit a report 
articulating options to assist self-help housing organizations 
encountering falling land values. These options should include 
a shared appreciation demonstration project.

                    rural housing assistance grants

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $45,500,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      40,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      41,500,000

    The Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program consolidates 
funding for rural housing grant programs. This consolidation of 
housing grant funding provides greater flexibility to tailor 
financial assistance to applicant needs.
    Very Low-income Housing Repair Grants.--The Very Low-Income 
Housing Repair Grants Program is authorized under section 504 
of title V of the Housing Act of 1949. The rural housing repair 
grant program is carried out by making grants to very low-
income families to make necessary repairs to their homes in 
order to make such dwellings safe and sanitary, and remove 
hazards to the health of the occupants, their families, or the 
community.
    These grants may be made to cover the cost of improvements 
or additions, such as repairing roofs, providing toilet 
facilities, providing a convenient and sanitary water supply, 
supplying screens, repairing or providing structural supports 
or making similar repairs, additions, or improvements, 
including all preliminary and installation costs in obtaining 
central water and sewer service. A grant can be made in 
combination with a section 504 very low-income housing repair 
loan.
    No assistance can be extended to any one individual in the 
form of a loan, grant, or combined loans and grants in excess 
of $27,500, and grant assistance is limited to persons, or 
families headed by persons who are 62 years of age or older.
    Supervisory and Technical Assistance Grants.--Supervisory 
and technical assistance grants are made to public and private 
nonprofit organizations for packaging loan applications for 
housing assistance under sections 502, 504, 514/516, 515, and 
533 of the Housing Act of 1949. The assistance is directed to 
very low-income families in underserved areas where at least 20 
percent of the population is below the poverty level and at 
least 10 percent or more of the population resides in 
substandard housing. In fiscal year 1994 a Homebuyer Education 
Program was implemented under this authority. This program 
provides low-income individuals and families education and 
counseling on obtaining and/or maintaining occupancy of 
adequate housing and supervised credit assistance to become 
successful homeowners.
    Compensation for Construction Defects.--Compensation for 
construction defects provides funds for grants to eligible 
section 502 borrowers to correct structural defects, or to pay 
claims of owners arising from such defects on a newly 
constructed dwelling purchased with RHS financial assistance. 
Claims are not paid until provisions under the builder's 
warranty have been fully pursued. Requests for compensation for 
construction defects must be made by the owner of the property 
within 18 months after the date financial assistance was 
granted.
    Rural Housing Preservation Grants.--Rural housing 
preservation grants (section 533) of the Housing and Urban-
Rural Recovery Act of 1983 (42 U.S.C. 1490m) authorizes the 
Rural Housing Service to administer a program of home repair 
directed at low- and very low-income people.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,500,000 
for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program.
    The following table compares the grant program levels 
recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2010 levels and 
the budget request:

                                         RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2010 level      2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very low-income housing repair grants........................           31,600           31,000           31,600
Compensation for construction defects........................              500  ...............              500
Housing preservation grants..................................            9,400            9,400            9,400
Grants authorized by section 14204 of Public Law 110-246.....            4,000  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................           45,500           40,400           41,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $19,746,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      20,346,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,346,000

    The direct farm labor housing loan program is authorized 
under section 514 and the rural housing for domestic farm labor 
housing grant program is authorized under section 516 of the 
Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The loans, grants, and 
contracts are made to public and private nonprofit 
organizations for low-rent housing and related facilities for 
domestic farm labor. Grant assistance may not exceed 90 percent 
of the cost of a project. Loans and grants may be used for 
construction of new structures, site acquisition and 
development, rehabilitation of existing structures, and 
purchase of furnishings and equipment for dwellings, dining 
halls, community rooms, and infirmaries.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be for 
costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,346,000 
for the cost of Direct Farm Labor Housing Loans and Grants.
    The following table compares the loan and grant levels 
recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2010 levels and 
the budget request:

                       FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year                        Committee
                                                                     2010         2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct loan level............................................           27,319           27,288           27,288
Direct loan subsidy..........................................            9,873           10,473           10,473
Grants.......................................................            9,873            9,873            9,873
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $54,993,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      41,717,000
Committee recommendation................................      56,580,000

    Community facility loans were created by the Rural 
Development Act of 1972 (7 U.S.C. 1926 et seq.) to finance a 
variety of rural community facilities. Loans are made to 
organizations, including certain Indian tribes and corporations 
not operated for profit and public and quasi-public agencies, 
to construct, enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community 
facilities providing essential services to rural residents. 
Such facilities include those providing or supporting overall 
community development, such as fire and rescue services, 
healthcare, transportation, traffic control, and community, 
social, cultural, and recreational benefits. Loans are made for 
facilities which primarily serve rural residents of open 
country and rural towns and villages of not more than 20,000 
people. Healthcare and fire and rescue facilities are the 
priorities of the program and receive the majority of available 
funds.
    The Community Facility Grant Program authorized in the 
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-127), is used in conjunction with the existing direct 
and guaranteed loan programs for the development of community 
facilities, such as hospitals, fire stations, and community 
centers. Grants are targeted to the lowest income communities. 
Communities that have lower population and income levels 
receive a higher cost-share contribution through these grants, 
to a maximum contribution of 75 percent of the cost of 
developing the facility.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $56,580,000 
for the Rural Community Facilities Program Account.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget 
request levels:

                                   RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                           [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Fiscal year
                                                                      2010         2011 budget      Committee
                                                                  appropriation      request     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
    Community facilities direct loans..........................         294,962         295,038          295,038
    Community facilities guaranteed loans......................         206,417         206,405          206,405
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      Total loan levels........................................         501,379         501,443          501,443
Budget authority:
    Community facility direct loans............................           3,864           3,924            3,924
    Community facility guaranteed loans........................           6,626           8,153            8,153
    Community facility grants..................................          20,373          29,640           20,373
    Economic impact initiative grants..........................          13,902  ..............           13,902
    Rural community development initiative.....................           6,256  ..............            6,256
    Tribal college grants......................................           3,972  ..............            3,972
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...................................          54,993          41,717           56,580
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consideration to Applications.--Community Facilities loans 
and grants provide financial assistance to construct, enlarge, 
or otherwise improve essential community facilities for health 
care, public safety and other essential public services. The 
Committee has been made aware of and encourages the Department 
to give consideration to applications relating to essential 
community facilities for the following: Alaskan Native Green 
House Assisted Living Home (Alaska); Ashmun Bay Boat Access and 
Channel Dredging Project (Michigan); Bethel Police Station 
(Alaska); City of Belleview Municipal Complex Development 
Project (Florida); City of Helena-West Helena GIS Mapping 
System (Arkansas); Curry County Adult and Juvenile Detention 
Center Renovations and Improvements (Mew Mexico); Dowling Park 
Library (Florida); Duncan Township Hall Improvements and 
Historic Preservation (Michigan); Duncan Township Office, Fire 
Hall Construction (Michigan); Gallup Regional Judicial Complex 
(New Mexico); Germfask Township Community/Senior Center 
(Michigan); Hagerman Town Hall Renovation (New Mexico); 
Ketchikan Gateway Borough Acquisition (Alaska); Les Cheneaux 
Emergency Response Vehicle (Michigan); Meadowview Subdivision 
Road Upgrade (Alaska); Miller County Conservation District 
Facility Renovation (Arkansas); Nome Public Safety Building 
(Alaska); Old Forge Arts & Science Center (New York); Quay 
County Courthouse (New Mexico); Rural Hawaii Community 
Facilities (Hawaii); San Miguel County Courthouse/Public Works 
Facility Project (New Mexico); Santaquin Agricultural and 
Equestrian Heritage Center (Utah); Seaside School District 
Relocation (Oregon); Shiawassee Performing Arts Center 
(Michigan); South County Community & Fitness Center Renovation 
(Michigan); Togiak Old School Rehabilitation into Community 
Center (Alaska); Waianae Intergenerational Community Service 
Center, the Hawaii Slaughter-Processing Network, and the Ka 
Mahi'ai'Ihi O Wailea (the Sacred Farm of Wailea) (Hawaii); and, 
Wasilla Library Relocation (Alaska).
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

                  Rural Business--Cooperative Service

    The Rural Business--Cooperative Service [RBS] was 
established by Public Law 103-354, Federal Crop Insurance 
Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, dated October 13, 1994. Its programs were previously 
administered by the Rural Development Administration, the Rural 
Electrification Administration, and the Agricultural 
Cooperative Service.
    The mission of the Rural Business--Cooperative Service is 
to enhance the quality of life for all rural residents by 
assisting new and existing cooperatives and other businesses 
through partnership with rural communities. The goals and 
objectives are to: (1) promote a stable business environment in 
rural America through financial assistance, sound business 
planning, technical assistance, appropriate research, 
education, and information; (2) support environmentally 
sensitive economic growth that meets the needs of the entire 
community; and (3) assure that the Service benefits are 
available to all segments of the rural community, with emphasis 
on those most in need.

                     RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $97,116,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      81,526,000
Committee recommendation................................      86,689,000

    The Rural Business and Industry Loan Program was created by 
the Rural Development Act of 1972, and finances a variety of 
rural industrial development loans. Loans are made for rural 
industrialization and rural community facilities under Rural 
Development Act amendments to the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932 et seq.) authorities. Business 
and industrial loans are made to public, private, or 
cooperative organizations organized for profit, to certain 
Indian tribes, or to individuals for the purpose of improving, 
developing or financing business, industry, and employment or 
improving the economic and environmental climate in rural 
areas. Such purposes include financing business and industrial 
acquisition, construction, enlargement, repair or 
modernization, financing the purchase and development of land, 
easements, rights-of-way, buildings, payment of startup costs, 
and supplying working capital.
    Rural business enterprise grants were authorized by the 
Rural Development Act of 1972. Grants are made to public bodies 
and nonprofit organizations to facilitate development of small 
and emerging business enterprises in rural areas, including the 
acquisition and development of land; the construction of 
buildings, plants, equipment, access streets and roads, parking 
areas, and utility extensions; refinancing fees; technical 
assistance; and startup operating costs and working capital.
    Rural business opportunity grants are authorized under 
section 306(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
Development Act, as amended. Grants may be made to public 
bodies and private nonprofit community development corporations 
or entities. Grants are made to identify and analyze business 
opportunities that will use local rural economic and human 
resources: to identify, train, and provide technical assistance 
to rural entrepreneurs and managers; to establish business 
support centers; to conduct economic development planning and 
coordination, and leadership development; and to establish 
centers for training, technology, and trade that will provide 
training to rural businesses in the utilization of interactive 
communications technologies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $86,689,000 
for the Rural Business Program Account.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget 
request levels:

                                         RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                           [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Fiscal year
                                                                      2010         2011 budget      Committee
                                                                  appropriation      request     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
    Business and Industry guaranteed loans loan levels.........         993,002         941,963          993,000
Budget authority:
    Business and industry guaranteed loans.....................          52,927          40,316           42,500
    Business enterprise grants.................................          38,727          38,727           38,727
    Business opportunity grants................................           2,483           2,483            2,483
    Delta Regional Authority grants............................           2,979  ..............            2,979
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...................................          97,116          81,526           86,689
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rural Business Program Account.--The Committee recommends 
$500,000 for transportation technical assistance.
    The Committee directs that of the $4,000,000 recommended 
for grants to benefit Federally Recognized Native American 
Tribes, $250,000 shall be used to implement an American Indian 
and Alaska Native passenger transportation development and 
assistance initiative.

              RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2010 level      2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level.........................................           33,536           36,376           33,533
Direct loan subsidy..........................................            8,464           14,034           12,937
Administrative expenses......................................            4,941            5,046            5,046
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies and administrative expenses......           13,405           19,080           17,983
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rural development (intermediary relending) loan program 
was originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 
1964 (Public Law 88-452). The making of rural development loans 
by the Department of Agriculture was reauthorized by Public Law 
99-425, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1986.
    Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (small investment 
groups) who in turn will reloan the funds to rural businesses, 
community development corporations, private nonprofit 
organizations, public agencies, et cetera, for the purpose of 
improving business, industry, community facilities, and 
employment opportunities and diversification of the economy in 
rural areas.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 2011, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,983,000 
for the Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account.

            RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2010 level      2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level.........................................           33,077           33,077           33,077
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rural Economic Development Loans program was 
established by the Reconciliation Act of December 1987 (Public 
Law 100-203), which amended the Rural Electrification Act of 
1936 (Act of May 20, 1936), by establishing a new section 313. 
This section of the Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 901) 
established a cushion of credits payment program and created 
the rural economic development subaccount. The Administrator of 
RUS is authorized under the act to utilize funds in this 
program to provide zero interest loans to electric and 
telecommunications borrowers for the purpose of promoting rural 
economic development and job creation projects, including 
funding for feasibility studies, startup costs, and other 
reasonable expenses for the purpose of fostering rural economic 
development.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a loan program level of 
$33,077,000, to be funded from earnings on the Cushion of 
Credit and fees on guaranteed underwriting loans made pursuant 
to section 313A of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936.

                  RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $34,854,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      40,054,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,560,000

    Rural cooperative development grants are authorized under 
section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act, as amended. Grants are made to fund the establishment and 
operation of centers for rural cooperative development with 
their primary purpose being the improvement of economic 
conditions in rural areas. Grants may be made to nonprofit 
institutions or institutions of higher education. Grants may be 
used to pay up to 75 percent of the cost of the project and 
associated administrative costs. The applicant must contribute 
at least 25 percent from non-Federal sources, except 1994 
institutions, which only need to provide 5 percent. Grants are 
competitive and are awarded based on specific selection 
criteria.
    Cooperative research agreements are authorized by 7 U.S.C. 
2204b. The funds are used for cooperative research agreements, 
primarily with colleges and universities, on critical 
operational, organizational, and structural issues facing 
cooperatives.
    Cooperative agreements are authorized under 7 U.S.C. 2201 
to any qualified State departments of agriculture, university, 
and other State entity to conduct research that will strengthen 
and enhance the operations of agricultural marketing 
cooperatives in rural areas.
    The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas [ATTRA] 
program was first authorized by the Food Security Act of 1985. 
The program provides information and technical assistance to 
agricultural producers to adopt sustainable agricultural 
practices that are environmentally friendly and lower 
production costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,560,000 
for Rural Cooperative Development Grants.
    Of the funds recommended, $2,800,000 is for the Appropriate 
Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program through a 
cooperative agreement with the National Center for Appropriate 
Technology.
    The Committee has included language in the bill that not 
more than $3,463,000 shall be made available to cooperatives or 
associations of cooperatives whose primary focus is to provide 
assistance to small, minority producers.
    Value Added.--The Committee recommends $20,373,000 for 
value-added agricultural product market development grants.

                RURAL MICROENTERPRISE INVESTMENT PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       7,700,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,350,000

    This program, authorized by section 379E of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981 et 
seq.), provides micro-entrepreneurs with the skills necessary 
to establish new rural microenterprises, as well as support 
these types of businesses with technical and financial 
assistance. The program provides loans and grants to 
intermediaries that assist micro-entrepreneurs. The Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 makes available $4,000,000 
of mandatory funding for fiscal year 2011.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,350,000 for 
the Rural Microenterprise Investment Program.
    The following table provides the Committee's recommendation 
as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget request levels:

                                    RURAL MICROENTERPRISE INVESTMENT PROGRAM
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year                      Committee
                                                                    2010 level     2011 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level............................................          11,832          23,523          12,019
Loan subsidy....................................................           2,500           6,850           3,500
Grants..........................................................           2,500             850             850
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     BIOREFINERY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010....................................................
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     $17,300,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Biorefinery Assistance program, authorized by section 
9003 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, assists 
in the development of new and emerging technologies for the 
development of advanced biofuels. The program authorizes grants 
for development and construction of demonstration-scale 
biorefineries, and guaranteed loans for development, 
construction or retrofitting commercial-scale biorefineries.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation of 
discretionary funds for the Biorefinery Assistance Program. The 
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 provided $75,000,000 
in no year mandatory funding in fiscal year 2009, and 
$245,000,000 in fiscal year 2010. Little of this funding has 
been obligated and the bulk will be carried over and remain 
available in fiscal year 2011.

                    Rural Energy for America Program

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $39,340,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      39,340,000
Committee recommendation................................      39,340,000

    The Rural Energy for America Program is authorized under 
section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107). This program may fund energy audits, 
direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants to farmers, ranchers, 
and small rural businesses for the purchase of renewable energy 
systems and for energy efficiency improvements.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,340,000 
for the Rural Energy for America Program.
    The following table provides the Committee's recommendation 
as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget request levels:

                                        RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year                      Committee
                                                                    2010 level     2011 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level............................................         144,209          11,519          11,519
Guaranteed loan subsidy.........................................          19,670           5,340           5,340
Grants..........................................................          19,670          34,000          34,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consideration to Applications: Rural Business and Renewable 
Energy Programs.--The Committee has been made aware of and 
encourages the Department to give consideration to applications 
for rural business and renewable energy programs for the 
following: Agricultural Processing and Product Development 
Center (Alaska); Biorefinery Development Using Multiple 
Feedstocks (Louisiana); Biotechnology Asset Inventory (North 
Carolina); Blue Mountain Station Product Development Market 
Center (Washington); Coffman Cove Marine Repair and Storage 
Project (Alaska); Cooperative Biofuel Supply Chain Development 
(Minnesota); Development of Fish Disease Laboratory and Bio-
secure Fish Hatchery (Michigan); Economic Development Charette 
(Mississippi); Idaho Rural Partnership (Idaho); Integrated Bio-
refinery for Multiple Biomass Feed Stocks (New Mexico); 
Mississippi Rural Economic Development Initiative 
(Mississippi); National Rural Development Fellows 
(Mississippi); Northeast Oregon Grown Meat Processing 
Development Plan (Oregon); Revitalizing the I-95 Corridor with 
Biotechnology, South Carolina Research Authority (South 
Carolina); San Joaquin County Agricultural Center Solar Energy 
Project (California); and, WNC Regional Livestock Center (North 
Carolina).
    In addition, the Committee encourages the Department to 
consider applications for grants to rural public television 
broadcasting systems.
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

                        Rural Utilities Service

    The Rural Utilities Service [RUS] was established under the 
Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354), October 13, 
1994. RUS administers the electric and telephone programs of 
the former Rural Electrification Administration and the water 
and waste programs of the former Rural Development 
Administration.
    The mission of the RUS is to serve a leading role in 
improving the quality of life in rural America by administering 
its electric, telecommunications, and water and waste programs 
in a service oriented, forward looking, and financially 
responsible manner. All three programs have the common goal of 
modernizing and revitalizing rural communities. RUS provides 
funding and support service for utilities serving rural areas. 
The public-private partnerships established by RUS and local 
utilities assist rural communities in modernizing local 
infrastructure. RUS programs are also characterized by the 
substantial amount of private investment which is leveraged by 
the public funds invested into infrastructure and technology, 
resulting in the creation of new sources of employment.

             RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $568,730,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     534,414,000
Committee recommendation................................     582,851,000

    The water and waste disposal program is authorized by 
sections 306, 306A, 309A, 306C, 306D, 306E, and 310B of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et 
seq., as amended). This program makes loans for water and waste 
development costs. Development loans are made to associations, 
including corporations operating on a nonprofit basis, 
municipalities and similar organizations, generally designated 
as public or quasi-public agencies, that propose projects for 
the development, storage, treatment, purification, and 
distribution of domestic water or the collection, treatment, or 
disposal of waste in rural areas. Such grants may not exceed 75 
percent of the development cost of the projects and can 
supplement other funds borrowed or furnished by applicants to 
pay development costs.
    The solid waste grant program is authorized under section 
310B(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act. 
Grants are made to public bodies and private nonprofit 
organizations to provide technical assistance to local and 
regional governments for the purpose of reducing or eliminating 
pollution of water resources and for improving the planning and 
management of solid waste disposal facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $582,851,000 
for the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account.
    The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for water and waste 
disposal systems grants for Native Americans, including Native 
Alaskans, the Colonias, and residents of Hawaiian Home Lands. 
The Committee recognizes the special needs and problems for 
delivery of basic services to these populations. In addition, 
the Committee makes up to $15,000,000 available for the circuit 
rider program.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget 
request levels:

                                 RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT
                           [Loan levels and budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fiscal year 2010     2011 budget        Committee
                                                              appropriation        request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan levels:
    Water and waste disposal direct loans.................         1,022,162         1,036,294         1,022,156
    Direct loans authorized by Public Law 83-566..........  ................  ................            40,000
    Water and waste disposal guaranteed loans.............            75,000            75,000            75,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total loan levels...................................         1,097,162         1,111,294         1,137,156
Budget authority:
    Water and waste disposal direct loans.................            77,071            88,914            87,701
    Direct loans authorized by Public Law 83-566..........  ................  ................             3,432
    Water and waste disposal grants.......................           469,228           440,510           469,228
    Solid waste management grants.........................             3,441             3,500             3,500
    Water well system grants..............................               993               993               993
    Water and waste water revolving funds.................               497               497               497
    High energy cost grants...............................            17,500  ................            17,500
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority..............................           568,730           534,414           582,851
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Water and Waste Technical Assistance and Training Grants.--
The Committee expects the Secretary to continue to provide 
support for the National Drinking Water Clearinghouse through 
the water and waste technical assistance and training grant 
program.
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

   RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

    The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et 
seq.) provides the statutory authority for the electric and 
telecommunications programs.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508) 
established the program account. An appropriation to this 
account will be used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs 
associated with the direct loans obligated and loan guarantees 
committed in fiscal year 2011, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table reflects the Committee's recommendation 
for the rural electrification and telecommunications loans 
program account, the loan subsidy and administrative expenses, 
as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget request levels:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2010 level      2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5 percent....................................          100,000          100,000          100,000
        Direct FFB...........................................        6,500,000        4,000,000        6,500,000
        Guaranteed underwriting..............................          500,000  ...............          500,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................................        7,100,000        4,100,000        7,100,000
                                                              ==================================================
Telecommunications:
    Direct, 5 percent........................................          145,000          145,000          145,000
    Direct, Treasury rate....................................          250,000          250,000          250,000
    Direct, FFB..............................................          295,000          295,000          295,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...............................................          690,000          690,000          690,000
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, loan authorizations.............................        7,790,000        4,790,000        7,790,000
                                                              ==================================================
Administrative expenses......................................           39,959           38,374           38,374
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee rejects the administration's proposal to 
place further restrictions on eligible projects under the 
electric program. Rural areas face ever increasing requirements 
for electricity while facilities are typically 20 to 30 years 
old. Substantial demands exist for comprehensive emissions 
control upgrades and increased peaking capacity. Diminishing 
rural electric cooperatives' access to Rural Utilities Service 
loan programs will further disadvantage rural residents by 
raising user rates and undermining service reliability. The 
Committee expects the Secretary to continue to fund program 
authorities, and not to attempt to implement the proposed 
program restrictions through the apportionment process.
    The Committee recommendation includes a general provision 
authorizing a pilot program for the construction of not more 
than three facilities for the generation of electricity in 
rural America. The Committee is growing increasingly concerned 
that many current generation facilities in rural America are 
coming to the end of their operational capabilities while 
energy consumption is near capacity and expected to exceed 
current availability. This pilot program will help rural 
electric customers acquire an adequate supply of electricity at 
reasonable rates which will otherwise rise to unsustainable 
levels, particularly when compared to non-rural areas where 
investor owned utilities provide options not available in rural 
areas. Because it could take as long as 12 years to build an 
electric generation facility, the Committee believes that this 
issue should be dealt with during fiscal year 2011 to avoid 
rural area power shortages in the near and long term. The 
recommendation does not discriminate based on fuel input as 
long as emissions are no greater than emissions for natural gas 
facilities. While addressing the energy needs of rural America, 
the pilot project will also allow the Rural Utilities Service 
to establish program subsidy scores by giving the agency 
experience with the risks and benefits of financing 
contemporary baseload generation facilities.

         DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM

                            LOANS AND GRANTS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2010 level      2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan and grant levels:
    Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program:
        Grants...............................................           37,755           30,000           37,755
Broadband program:
    Treasury rate loans......................................          400,000          400,000          400,000
    Treasury rate loans budget authority.....................           28,960           22,320           22,320
    Grants...................................................           17,976           17,976           17,976
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total DLT and Broadband program level..................          455,731          447,976          455,731
                                                              ==================================================
      Total DLT and Broadband budget authority...............           84,691           70,296           78,051
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program 
is authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade 
Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), as amended by the 
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-127). This program provides incentives to improve the 
quality of phone services, to provide access to advanced 
telecommunications services and computer networks, and to 
improve rural opportunities.
    This program provides the facilities and equipment to link 
rural education and medical facilities with more urban centers 
and other facilities providing rural residents access to better 
health care through technology and increasing educational 
opportunities for rural students. These funds are available for 
loans and grants.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $78,051,000 
for the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program. 
The Committee recommendation includes $4,500,000 for public 
broadcasting systems grants to allow noncommercial educational 
television broadcast stations that serve rural areas to convert 
from analog to digital operations.
    The Committee is concerned about the longstanding, unmet 
health needs in the Mississippi Delta. The Committee 
recommendation includes $3,000,000 to address critical health 
care needs in the region, as authorized by section 379G of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
    The Committee continues its support for extending high 
speed broadband service to the most remote, un-served areas of 
rural America. Substantial funds have been made available in 
annual appropriations bills, and an unprecedented investment of 
$2,500,000,000 in budget authority was provided through the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-
5). All Recovery Act funds, supporting both loans and grants, 
were to be obligated by October 2010.
    The Secretary is directed to analyze and report to the 
Committees implications of the Recovery Act investments toward 
extending high speed broadband access to remote underserved and 
un-served rural areas. This report should include lessons 
learned and suggestions on improving effectiveness of the 
regular broadband program, including the need for loan/grant 
combinations in developing successful projects with regular 
program funding. The Secretary is directed to utilize 
preliminary information provided under the National Broadband 
Map initiative mandated by the Recovery Act, and submit the 
report no later than 30 days after issuance of the map.
    Broadband Grants.--In addition, of the funds recommended, 
$17,976,000 in grants shall be made available to support 
broadband transmission and local dial-up Internet services for 
rural areas.
    Consideration to Applications: Rural Utilities Service 
Programs.--The Committee has been made aware of and encourages 
the Department to give consideration to applications for: 
Batesville Water Storage Tank (Arkansas); Bayou Meto 
(Arkansas); Campbellton Wastewater Treatment and Bio-solids 
Recycling Project (Florida); Cattaraugus County Residential 
Wireless Broadband Internet Service (New York); Cedar Glades 
Park Municipal Water Supply (Arkansas); City of Barry Water 
Improvement Initiative (Illinois); City of Dundee Wastewater 
Project (Michigan); City of Lawtey Hydro-Pneumatic Potable 
Water Tank Replacement (Florida); City of Riddle Wastewater 
Plant Upgrade (Oregon); Crossroads Sewer/Water Project (New 
York); Ekwok Landfill Relocation (Alaska); Elk County Rural 
Water District #2 (Kansas); Estancia Valley Broadband 
Feasibility (New Mexico); Grand Prairie (Arkansas); Green 
Township Phase I Sanitary Sewer Improvements (Ohio); Gretna 
Wastewater System Improvements (Florida); GRWA Water System 
Improvements Lake Source (Michigan); Harrison County/Cadiz 
Village Wastewater Plant/Biodiesel Facility (Ohio); Hubbard 
Creek Impoundment Improvement (Oregon); Hubbard Creek Water 
Distribution Improvement Project (Oregon); JCJC Broadband 
Connect (Mississippi); Jemez Pueblo Drinking Water Project (New 
Mexico); Keystone Regional Water Reclamation Facility & 
Wastewater Collection System (California); Mammoth Community 
Water District Drinking and Wastewater Improvements 
(California); New Straitsville State Route 93/State Route 216 
Waterline Replacement (Ohio); Northern New Mexico Solid Waste 
Automation Project (New Mexico); Partridge Creek Diversion 
Project (Michigan); Perry City Fiber Optic Network (Utah); 
Saline Watershed Alliance Water Supply (Arkansas); Sewer System 
Improvements, City of Georgiana (Alabama); Shoshone County 
Renewable Energy Project (Idaho); Spalding Avenue Sewage Pump 
Station (Oregon); Tremonton City Fiber-Optic Network (Utah); 
Tulare County Community Water System (California); Village of 
Dunkirk Combined Sewer Elimination Project (Ohio); and, Village 
of Richmond Sanitary Sewer Elimination Project (Ohio).
    The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.

                                TITLE IV

                         DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services

Appropriations, 2010....................................        $813,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................         836,000
Committee recommendation................................         821,000

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
Consumer Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's nutrition assistance activities. The Office 
has oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and 
Nutrition Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $821,000 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
Consumer Services.
    Nutrition Services Incentive Program.--The Committee is 
aware that the Nutrition Services Incentive Program [NSIP] is 
eligible to receive bonus commodities and has received such 
commodities in the past. Commodities from USDA are a 
significant component of Federal nutrition programs for the 
elderly, including Meals on Wheels that is provided through 
NSIP and administered by the Agency on Aging. However, the 
Department has determined that the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program [TEFAP], the National School Lunch Program [NSLP], and 
the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP] will be given 
priority for bonus commodities and bonus commodities will not 
be provided to NSIP. The Department is directed to review and 
reconsider this decision and report back to the Committee 
within 120 days of the enactment of this act.

                       Food and Nutrition Service

    The Food and Nutrition Service represents an organizational 
effort to eliminate hunger and malnutrition in this country. 
Nutrition assistance programs provide access to a nutritionally 
adequate diet for families and persons with low incomes and 
encourage better eating patterns among the Nation's children. 
These programs include:
    Child Nutrition Programs.--The National School Lunch and 
School Breakfast, Summer Food Service, and Child and Adult Care 
Food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto Rico, the 
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam for use in serving 
nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending schools 
of high school grades and under, to children of preschool age 
in child care centers, and to children in other institutions in 
order to improve the health and well-being of the Nation's 
children, and broaden the markets for agricultural food 
commodities. Through the Special Milk Program, assistance is 
provided to the States for making reimbursement payments to 
eligible schools and child care institutions which institute or 
expand milk service in order to increase the consumption of 
fluid milk by children. Funds for this program are provided by 
direct appropriation and transfer from section 32.
    Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 
and Children [WIC].--This program safeguards the health of 
pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding women, infants, and 
children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk because of 
inadequate nutrition and income by providing supplemental 
foods. The delivery of supplemental foods may be done through 
health clinics, vouchers redeemable at retail food stores, or 
other approved methods which a cooperating State health agency 
may select. Funds for this program are provided by direct 
appropriation.
    Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.--This program 
seeks to improve nutritional standards of needy persons and 
families. Assistance is provided to eligible households to 
enable them to obtain a better diet by increasing their food 
purchasing capability, usually by furnishing benefits in the 
form of electronic access to funds. The program also includes 
Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico.
    The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on 
Indian Reservations, which provides nutritious agricultural 
commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian 
reservations who choose not to participate in the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program.
    The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 
110-246, provides that $246,500,000 in fiscal year 2011 from 
funds appropriated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program account be used to purchase commodities for The 
Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP].
    Commodity Assistance Program [CAP].--This program provides 
funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP], the 
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, Disaster Assistance, Pacific 
Island Assistance, and administrative expenses for TEFAP.
    CSFP provides supplemental foods to infants and children up 
to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding 
women with low incomes, and who reside in approved project 
areas. In addition, this program operates commodity 
distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons.
    TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State 
agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of 
donated commodities.
    Nutritious agricultural commodities are provided to 
residents of the Federated States of Micronesia and the 
Marshall Islands. Cash assistance is provided to distributing 
agencies to assist them in meeting administrative expenses 
incurred. It also provides funding for use in non-
presidentially declared disasters, and for FNS' administrative 
costs in connection with relief for all disasters. Funds for 
this program are provided by direct appropriation.
    Nutrition Programs Administration.--Most salaries and 
Federal operating expenses of the Food and Nutrition Service 
are funded from this account. Also included is the Center for 
Nutrition Policy and Promotion [CNPP] which oversees 
improvements in and revisions to the food guidance systems, and 
serves as the focal point for advancing and coordinating 
nutrition promotion and education policy to improve the health 
of all Americans.

                        child nutrition programs

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Section 32
                                                           Appropriation        transfers            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010...................................          9,865,930          6,989,899         16,855,829
Budget estimate, 2011..................................         18,158,393  .................         18,158,393
Committee recommendation...............................         18,161,143  .................         18,161,143
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Child Nutrition Programs, authorized by the Richard B. 
Russell National School Lunch Act (Public Law 79-396) and the 
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-642), provide 
Federal assistance to State agencies in the form of cash and 
commodities for use in preparing and serving nutritious meals 
to children while they are attending school, residing in 
service institutions, or participating in other organized 
activities away from home. The purpose of these programs is to 
help maintain the health and proper physical development of 
America's children. Milk is provided to children either free or 
at a low cost, depending on their family income level. FNS 
provides cash subsidies to States for administering the 
programs and directly administers the program in the States 
which choose not to do so. Grants are also made for nutritional 
training and surveys and for State administrative expenses. 
Under current law, most of these payments are made on the basis 
of reimbursement rates established by law and applied to 
lunches and breakfasts actually served by the States. The 
reimbursement rates are adjusted annually to reflect changes in 
the Consumer Price Index for food away from home.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $18,161,143,000 for the Child 
Nutrition Programs.
    The Committee's recommendation provides for the following 
annual rates for the child nutrition programs.

                                          TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                   Child nutrition programs                     2010 estimate     2011 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program.........................................        9,967,068       10,589,998       10,589,998
School Breakfast Program.....................................        2,920,391        3,117,863        3,117,863
Child and Adult Care Food Program............................        2,640,923        2,728,754        2,728,754
Summer Food Service Program..................................          387,264          397,226          397,226
Special Milk Program.........................................           12,673           10,597           10,597
State administrative expenses................................          193,258          208,653          208,653
Commodity procurement and computer support...................          695,401        1,049,290        1,049,290
Team Nutrition...............................................           15,016           15,046           15,046
Food safety education........................................            2,510            2,517            2,517
Coordinated review...........................................            5,751            5,833            5,833
CACFP training and technical assistance......................            3,537            3,567            3,567
Child Nutrition Program Studies and Evaluations..............            3,000           19,711           19,711
Hunger-Free Community Grants.................................            5,000            5,000            5,000
Healthier U.S. School Challenge..............................              699  ...............  ...............
School community garden pilot................................            1,000  ...............  ...............
Farm to school tactical team.................................  ...............            2,000            2,000
Payment Accuracy.............................................            2,338            2,338            2,338
Financial Management Systems Modernization...................  ...............            3,500            1,750
IT Modernization and Support.................................  ...............            2,000            1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends $15,046,000 for TEAM nutrition. 
Included in this amount is $5,500,000 for food service training 
grants to States; $3,000,000 for technical assistance 
materials; $800,000 for National Food Service Management 
Institute cooperative agreements; $1,000,000 for print and 
electronic food service resource systems; $1,500,000 to assist 
USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion in development 
and maintenance of MyPyramid and Dietary Guidelines materials 
in support of nutrition education for program participants and 
their families; and $3,246,000 for other activities including 
FNS' support of the McGovern Dole International Food for 
Education and Child Nutrition Program under section 3107 (g) of 
Public Law 107-171.
    The Committee expects FNS to utilize the National Food 
Service Management Institute to carry out the food safety 
education program.
    Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program.--Section 4304 of the 
Food, Conservation and Energy Act provided $150,000,000 for a 
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program to be made available on July 
1, 2011. Of this amount, the Committee has included a general 
provision to delay availability of $113,000,000 of these funds 
until October 1, 2011. The Committee notes that this general 
provision does not lower the funding amount provided in the 
Food, Conservation and Energy Act for the Fresh Fruit and 
Vegetable Program, but simply delays a portion of the funding 
until the beginning of fiscal year 2012. The full funding 
amount of $150,000,000 will be available for the Fresh Fruit 
and Vegetable Program for the school year beginning July 1, 
2011, as specified in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act.

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN 
                                 [WIC]

Appropriations, 2010....................................  $7,252,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................   7,603,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   7,252,000,000

    The special supplemental nutrition program for women, 
infants, and children [WIC] is authorized by section 17 of the 
Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Its purpose is to safeguard the 
health of pregnant, breast-feeding and post-partum women and 
infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk 
because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income.
    The WIC program food packages are designed to provide foods 
which studies have demonstrated are lacking in the diets of the 
WIC program target population. The authorized supplemental 
foods are iron-fortified breakfast cereal, fruit or vegetable 
juice which contains vitamin C, dry beans, peas, and peanut 
butter.
    There are three general types of delivery systems for WIC 
foods: (1) retail purchase in which participants obtain 
supplemental foods through retail stores; (2) home delivery 
systems in which food is delivered to the participant's home; 
and (3) direct distribution systems in which participants pick 
up food from a distribution outlet. The food is free of charge 
to all participants.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,252,000,000 
for the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, 
and Children [WIC]. The Committee notes that $125,000,000 in 
contingency funds will be available in fiscal year 2011.
    The Committee recommendation fully funds estimated WIC 
participation in fiscal year 2011 and makes significant program 
improvements. The Committee recommendation includes $80,000,000 
for breastfeeding support initiatives, $60,000,000 for State 
management information systems, and $14,000,000 for 
infrastructure improvements. In addition, the Committee 
recommendation maintains funding for fruit and vegetable 
vouchers for all women as well as implements fruit and 
vegetable vouchers for children up to the Institute of Medicine 
recommendation, per the budget request.

               SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Puerto Rico      TEFAP
                                              Expenses      Amount in   and American    commodity       Total
                                                             reserve        Samoa       purchases
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010......................    53,276,816     3,000,000     1,753,365       248,000    58,278,181
Budget estimate, 2011.....................    61,217,446     5,000,000     1,742,844       246,500    68,206,790
Committee recommendation..................    61,220,196     5,000,000     1,742,844       246,500    68,209,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Food Stamp Program was reauthorized through fiscal year 
2012 and renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program 
[SNAP] in the The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. 
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program attempts to 
alleviate hunger and malnutrition among low-income persons by 
increasing their food purchasing power. Eligible households 
receive SNAP benefits with which they can purchase food through 
regular retail stores.
    Other programs funded through SNAP include Nutrition 
Assistance to Puerto Rico and American Samoa, the Food 
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, the Emergency Food 
Assistance Program, and the Community Food Projects program.
    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is currently 
in operation in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, the 
Virgin Islands, and Guam. Participating households receive food 
benefits, the value of which is determined by household size 
and income. The cost of the benefits is paid by the Federal 
Government. As required by law, the Food and Nutrition Service 
annually revises household benefit allotments to reflect 
changes in the cost of the thrifty food plan.
    Administrative Costs.--All direct and indirect 
administrative costs incurred for certification of households, 
issuance of benefits, quality control, outreach, and fair 
hearing efforts are shared by the Federal Government and the 
States on a 50-50 basis.
    State Antifraud Activities.--Under the provisions of the 
Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, States are eligible to be 
reimbursed for 50 percent of the costs of their fraud 
investigations and prosecutions.
    States are required to implement an employment and training 
program for the purpose of assisting members of households 
participating in SNAP in gaining skills, training, or 
experience that will increase their ability to obtain regular 
employment. The Department of Agriculture has implemented a 
grant program to States to assist them in providing employment 
and training services.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$68,209,540,000 for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program. The Committee recommendation includes $1,750,000 for 
financial management systems modernization and $1,000,000 for 
information technology modernization and support. Of the amount 
recommended, $5,000,000,000 is made available as a contingency 
reserve. The Committee recommendation includes language that 
permits the Food and Nutrition Service to conduct studies and 
evaluations consistent with the budget request.
    Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.--The 
Committee encourages the Secretary to continue the purchase of 
bison from producer-owned and Native American owned 
cooperatives for the Food Distribution Program on Indian 
Reservations. Although funding is not provided specifically for 
bison purchase, historically these purchases have been 
important for the Native American population both economically 
and nutritionally.

                      commodity assistance program

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $247,979,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     249,619,000
Committee recommendation................................     261,619,000

    The Commodity Assistance Program includes funding for the 
Commodity Supplemental Food Program and funding to pay expenses 
associated with the storage and distribution of commodities 
through The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
    The Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP].--Authorized 
by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer Protection Act 
of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note), as amended in 1981 by Public Law 
97-98, this program provides supplemental food to infants and 
children up to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-
feeding women who have low incomes, and reside in approved 
project areas. In addition, the program operates commodity 
distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons 60 
years of age or older.
    The foods for CSFP are provided by the Department of 
Agriculture for distribution through State agencies. The 
authorized commodities include: iron-fortified infant formula, 
rice cereal, cheese, canned juice, evaporated milk and/or 
nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned meat or 
poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and peanut 
butter and dry beans. Elderly participants may receive all 
commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice 
cereal.
    The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP].--Authorized 
by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 7501 et 
seq.), as amended, the program provides nutrition assistance to 
low-income people through prepared meals served on site and 
through the distribution of commodities to low-income 
households for home consumption. The commodities are provided 
by USDA to State agencies for distribution through State-
established networks. State agencies make the commodities 
available to local organizations, such as soup kitchens, food 
pantries, food banks, and community action agencies, for their 
use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need.
    Funds are administered by FNS through grants to State 
agencies which operate commodity distribution programs. 
Allocation of the funds to States is based on a formula which 
considers the States' unemployment rate and the number of 
persons with income below the poverty level.
    The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 makes 
$246,500,000 available for the purchase of TEFAP commodities in 
fiscal year 2011. In addition to the commodities purchased 
specifically for TEFAP, commodities obtained under agriculture 
support and surplus removal programs are donated to States for 
distribution through TEFAP.
    Pacific Island and Disaster Assistance.--This program 
provides funding for assistance to the nuclear-affected islands 
in the form of commodities and administrative funds. It also 
provides funding for use in non-presidentially declared 
disasters and for FNS' administrative costs in connection with 
relief for all disasters.
    Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Farmers' Market 
Nutrition Program [FMNP] provides WIC or WIC-eligible 
participants with coupons to purchase fresh, nutritious, 
unprepared foods, such as fruits and vegetables, from farmers' 
markets. This benefits both participants and local farmers by 
increasing the awareness and use of farmers' markets by low-
income households.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $261,619,000 
for the Commodity Assistance Program. The Committee continues 
to encourage the Department to distribute Commodity Assistance 
Program funds equitably among the States, based on an 
assessment of the needs and priorities of each State and the 
State's preference to receive commodity allocations through 
each of the programs funded under this account.
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program.--The Committee 
recommends $176,788,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food 
Program.
    Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Committee is aware 
that the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program provides fresh 
fruits and vegetables to low-income mothers and children, 
benefiting not only WIC participants, but local farmers as 
well. Therefore, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the 
Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and directs the Secretary to 
obligate these funds within 45 days.
    The Emergency Food Assistance Program.--The Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 provides $246,500,000 for 
TEFAP commodities to be purchased with Supplemental Nutrition 
Assistance Program funds. The Committee recommendation includes 
$56,000,000 for TEFAP administrative funding and $6,000,000 for 
infrastructure grants. In addition, the Committee 
recommendation grants the Secretary authority to transfer up to 
an additional 10 percent from TEFAP commodities for this 
purpose.

                   nutrition programs administration

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $147,801,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     172,087,000
Committee recommendation................................     166,587,000

    The Nutrition Programs Administration appropriation 
provides for most of the Federal operating expenses of the Food 
and Nutrition Service, which includes the Child Nutrition 
Programs; Special Milk Program; Special Supplemental Nutrition 
Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]; Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program; Nutrition Assistance for Puerto 
Rico; the Commodity Assistance Program, including the Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program and the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program; and Farmers' Market Nutrition Program and Pacific 
Island and Disaster Assistance.
    The major objective of Nutrition Programs Administration is 
to efficiently and effectively carry out the nutrition 
assistance programs mandated by law. This is to be accomplished 
by the following: (1) giving clear and consistent guidance and 
supervision to State agencies and other cooperators; (2) 
assisting the States and other cooperators by providing 
program, managerial, financial, and other advice and expertise; 
(3) measuring, reviewing, and analyzing the progress being made 
toward achieving program objectives; and (4) carrying out 
regular staff support functions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $166,587,000 
for Nutrition Programs Administration. The Committee 
recommendation includes increases of $5,170,000 for improved 
program administration, and $9,000,000 to develop and promote 
dietary guidelines.

                                TITLE V

                FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                      Foreign Agricultural Service

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Transfers from
                                                                Appropriations   loan accounts        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010.........................................          180,367            6,465          186,832
Budget estimate, 2011........................................          258,780            6,525          265,305
Committee recommendation.....................................          219,780            6,525          226,305
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] was established 
March 10, 1953, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1320, supplement 
1. Public Law 83-690, approved August 28, 1954, transferred the 
agricultural attaches from the Department of State to the 
Foreign Agricultural Service.
    The mission of FAS overseas is to represent U.S. 
agricultural interests, to promote export of domestic farm 
products, improve world trade conditions, and report on 
agricultural production and trade in foreign countries. FAS 
staff are stationed at 97 offices around the world where they 
provide expertise in agricultural economics and marketing, as 
well as provide attache services.
    FAS carries out several export assistance programs to 
counter the adverse effects of unfair trade practices by 
competitors on U.S. agricultural trade. The Export Enhancement 
Program uses CCC-owned commodities as export bonuses to provide 
export enhancements to U.S. producers. The Market Access 
Program [MAP] conducts both generic and brand-identified 
promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit agricultural 
associations and private firms financed through reimbursable 
CCC payments.
    The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to 
section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
and 15 U.S.C. 714-714p. The funds allocated to the General 
Sales Manager are used for conducting the following programs: 
(1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), including 
facilities financing guarantees, (2) Food for Peace, (3) 
section 416b Overseas Donations Program, (4) Market Access 
Program, and (5) programs authorized by the Commodity Credit 
Corporation Charter Act including barter, export sales of most 
CCC-owned commodities, export payments, and other programs as 
assigned to encourage and enhance the export of U.S. 
agricultural commodities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $226,305,000 for the Foreign 
Agricultural Service, including a direct appropriation of 
$219,780,000. The Committee recommendation includes increases 
of $3,430,000 for International Cooperative Administrative 
Support Services, $4,004,000 for overseas information 
technology support, $4,500,000 for the National Export 
Initiative, $1,500,000 for the Borlaug and Cochran Fellowship 
programs, $14,600,000 for stabilization and reconstruction 
activities, and $10,000,000 for international food security.
    Borlaug Fellows Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $2,000,000 for the Borlaug International Agricultural 
Science and Technology Fellows Program. This program provides 
training for international scientists and policymakers from 
selected developing countries. The fellows work closely with 
U.S. specialists in their fields of expertise and apply that 
knowledge in their home countries. The Committee recognizes the 
importance of this program in helping developing countries 
strengthen their agricultural practices and food security.
    Cochran Fellowship Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $4,500,000 for the Cochran Fellowship Program. The 
Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to provide 
additional support for the program through the Commodity Credit 
Corporation Emerging Markets Program.
    Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.--The 
Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market 
Development Cooperator Program at no less than the fiscal year 
2010 level.
    International Food Security.--The Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for the Secretary to provide technical assistance 
in the establishment and growth of sustainable food production 
and marketing systems in developing countries. This 
appropriation should be considered to provide funding apart and 
different from funding provided for provincial reconstruction 
team activities in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    While the Committee acknowledges the importance of 
emergency food assistance, there is an equally important role 
for the United States and the Department of Agriculture to play 
in assisting developing countries achieve higher levels of 
self-sufficiency in order to overcome chronic and acute hunger. 
Agricultural systems in many parts of the world face challenges 
that stand in stark contrast to those found in this country 
where advanced technologies, a network of extension and land 
grant services, an expansive transportation network, and other 
resources provide protection to American farmers from problems 
that bring risk of total failure to crop and livestock 
operations in much of the world.
    The Secretary has available authorities under the Borlaug 
and Cochran fellowships, as well as other existing programs to 
provide meaningful leadership toward the goal of global food 
security. The Department is home to leading experts in the 
fields of crop and livestock production, conservation of land 
and water resources, market development, and other elements of 
a stable agricultural-based economy. In addition, the 
Department has working relationships with the Nation's land 
grant system and veterinary community that has fostered a vast 
pool of resources that could provide relief to many of the 
challenges facing developing countries. The Committee feels 
this expertise can provide substantial benefit to help overcome 
world hunger and help support national and international 
security and stability.
    In implementing this directive, the Secretary should give 
consideration to a range of activities including opportunities 
for individuals from developing countries to participate in 
educational and professional experiences in the United States 
and, conversely, for U.S. experts in the field of agricultural 
development to provide training and other assistance in 
developing countries. In addition, the Secretary should provide 
grants and cooperative agreements to land grant institutions, 
non-governmental organizations, and others with expertise in 
the field of agricultural development. The Secretary should 
also employ reimbursable agreements in order for USDA personnel 
to provide on-site assistance in developing countries. The 
Committee strongly feels these efforts should be focused on 
specific areas so that the actual establishment of sustainable 
systems can be a measurable outcome of this effort.
    The Committee notes the historic role of the State 
Department and the United States Agency for International 
Development (USAID) in setting the priorities of international 
assistance. The Secretary is directed to coordinate any efforts 
under this specific appropriation with the Secretary of State 
for purposes of determining the specific locations where USDA 
assistance would be most beneficial. However, the Committee 
expects USDA, in consultation with USAID, to determine the best 
approaches to food system development in those locations. In 
addition, the Secretary is directed to provide a report to the 
Committee by March 1, 2011, on the approach and status of 
implementing these activities and a final report by September 
30, 2011.
    Market Access Program.--The Committee continues the full 
mandatory funding for the Market Access Program and expects the 
Department to administer the program as authorized in 7 U.S.C. 
5623, without changing the eligibility requirements for 
participation of cooperative organizations, small businesses, 
trade associations, and other entities.

                 FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE I PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010....................................      $2,812,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................       2,846,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,846,000

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,846,000 for 
administrative expenses to continue servicing existing Food for 
Peace title I agreements.

                     FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS

Appropriations, 2010....................................  $1,690,000,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................   1,690,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,690,000,000

    The Committee recognizes the important mission of the Food 
for Peace Program to combat hunger and malnutrition; promote 
broad-based equitable and sustainable development; expand 
international trade; develop and expand export markets for U.S. 
agricultural commodities; and to foster and encourage the 
development of private enterprise and democratic participation 
in developing countries. The Committee strongly supports the 
continued efficient operation of this important program.
    Commodities Supplied in Connection With Dispositions Abroad 
(Title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721-1726).--Commodities are supplied 
without cost through foreign governments to combat malnutrition 
and to meet famine and other emergency requirements. 
Commodities are also supplied for nonemergencies through public 
and private agencies, including intergovernmental 
organizations. The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean 
freight on shipments under this title, and may also pay 
overland transportation costs to a landlocked country, as well 
as internal distribution costs in emergency situations. The 
funds appropriated for title II are made available to private 
voluntary organizations and cooperatives to assist these 
organizations in meeting administrative and related costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,690,000,000 
for Food for Peace title II grants. The Committee does not 
support the President's proposal to reduce the amount available 
for direct food assistance to cover administrative costs 
instead of providing for those costs through the Commodity 
Credit Corporation as is the current practice. Instead, the 
Committee believes it is more important to provide a higher 
level of direct humanitarian assistance to help meet the 
world's growing hunger crisis.
    The Committee notes that funds provided earlier in response 
to the earthquake that struck Haiti in 2010 were intended to 
provide reimbursement for food assistance diverted from other 
recipients in order to meet the immediate crisis in Haiti and 
were not intended to be limited only to prospective 
requirements on that island. Therefore, funds appropriated at 
that time may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the 
purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this act.

  MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION 
                             PROGRAM GRANTS

Appropriations, 2010....................................    $209,500,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................     209,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     209,500,000

    The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and 
Child Nutrition Program helps support education, child 
development, and food security for some of the world's poorest 
children. The program provides for donations of U.S. 
agricultural products, as well as financial and technical 
assistance, for school feeding and maternal and child nutrition 
projects in low-income, food-deficit countries that are 
committed to universal education. Commodities made available 
for donation through agreements with private voluntary 
organizations, cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations, 
and foreign governments may be donated for direct feeding or 
for local sale to generate proceeds to support school feeding 
and nutrition projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $209,500,000 
for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and 
Child Nutrition Program.

       COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                  (EXPORT CREDIT PROGRAMS AND GSM-102)

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Guaranteed loan  Guaranteed loan   Administrative
                                                                  levels\1\        subsidy\1\        expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010.........................................        5,500,000           11,130            6,820
Budget estimate, 2011........................................        5,500,000           18,480            6,884
Committee recommendation.....................................        5,500,000           18,480            6,884
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\No appropriation required since export credit authorizations are permanent authority.

    In 1980, the Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] instituted 
the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102) under its charter 
authority. With this program, CCC guarantees, for a fee, 
payments due U.S. exporters under deferred payment sales 
contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults due to commercial as 
well as noncommercial risks. The risk to CCC extends from the 
date of export to the end of the deferred payment period 
covered in the export sales contract and covers only that 
portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance agreement. 
Operation of this program is based on criteria which will 
assure that it is used only where it is determined that it will 
develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand 
existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The 
program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide 
financing to those areas where the institutions would be 
unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC 
guarantees. CCC also provides facilities financing guarantees.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the 
program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export guarantee 
programs are exempt from the requirement of advance 
appropriations of budget authority according to section 
504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public Law 
101-508. Appropriations to this account will be used for 
administrative expenses.

                                TITLE VI

           RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                      Food and Drug Administration

    The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is a scientific 
regulatory agency whose mission is to promote and protect the 
public health and safety of Americans. FDA's work is a blend of 
science and law. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments 
Act of 2007 [FDAAA] (Public Law 110-85) reaffirmed the 
responsibilities of the FDA: to ensure safe and effective 
products reach the market to a timely way, and to monitor 
products for continued safety after they are in use. In 
addition, FDA is entrusted with two critical functions in the 
Nation's war on terrorism: preventing willful contamination of 
all regulated products, including food, and improving the 
availability of medications to prevent or treat injuries caused 
by biological, chemical or nuclear agents.
    The FDA Foods program has the primary responsibility for 
assuring that the food supply, quality of foods, food 
ingredients and dietary supplements are safe, sanitary, 
nutritious, wholesome, and honestly labeled, and that cosmetic 
products are safe and properly labeled. The variety and 
complexity of the food supply has grown dramatically while new 
and more complex safety issues, such as emerging microbial 
pathogens, natural toxins, and technological innovations in 
production and processing, have developed. This program plays a 
major role in keeping the United States food supply among the 
safest in the world.
    The FDA Drugs programs are comprised of four separate 
areas, Human Drugs, Animal Drugs, Medical Devices and 
Biologics. FDA is responsible for the life cycle of products, 
including premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human 
and animal drugs, medical devices and biological products to 
ensure their safety and effectiveness. FDA is responsible for 
the life cycle of the product, including premarket review and 
postmarket surveillance of human, animal and biological 
products to ensure their safety and efficacy. For Human Drugs 
this includes assuring that all drug products used for the 
prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease are safe and 
effective. Additional procedures include the review of 
investigational new drug applications; evaluation of market 
applications for new and generic drugs, labeling and 
composition of prescription and over-the-counter drugs; 
monitoring the quality and safety of products manufactured in, 
or imported into, the United States; and, regulating the 
advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. The Animal 
Drugs and Feeds Program ensures only safe and beneficial 
veterinary drugs, intended for the treatment and/or prevention 
of diseases in animals and the improved production of food-
producing animals, are approved for marketing.
    The FDA Biologics program assures that blood and blood 
products, blood test kits, vaccines, and therapeutics are pure, 
potent, safe, effective, and properly labeled. The program 
inspects blood banks and blood processors, licenses and 
inspects firms collecting human source plasma, evaluates and 
licenses biologics manufacturing firms and products; lot 
releases licensed products; and monitors adverse events 
associated with vaccine immunization, blood products, and other 
biologics.
    The FDA Devices and Radiological program ensures the safety 
and effectiveness of medical devices and eliminates unnecessary 
human exposure to manmade radiation from medical, occupational, 
and consumer products. In addition, the program enforces 
quality standards under the Mammography Quality Standards Act 
(Public Law 108-365). Medical devices include thousands of 
products from thermometers and contact lenses to heart 
pacemakers, hearing aids, and MRIs. Radiological products 
include items such as microwave ovens and video display 
terminals.
    FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research in 
Jefferson, Arkansas, serves as a specialized resource, 
conducting peer-review scientific research that provides the 
basis for FDA to make sound science-based regulatory decisions 
through its premarket review and postmarket surveillance. The 
research is designed to define and understand the biological 
mechanisms of action underlying the toxicity of products and 
lead to developing methods to improve assessment of human 
exposure, susceptibility and risk of those products regulated 
by FDA.

                         salaries and expenses

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Appropriation    User fees       Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2010.........      2,344,656       922,280     3,266,936
Budget estimate, 2011........      2,503,849     1,233,480     3,737,329
Committee recommendation.....      2,503,849     1,233,480     3,737,329
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,503,849,000 
for FDA salaries and expenses. The Committee also recommends 
$667,057,000 in Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee 
collections; $61,860,000 in Medical Device User Fee and 
Modernization Act user fee collections; $19,448,000 in Animal 
Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; $5,397,000 in Animal 
Generic Drug User Fee Act user fee collections; $450,000,000 in 
Tobacco Product User Fees; $19,318,000 in Mammography Quality 
Standards Act fee collections; and $10,400,000 in export and 
certification fees, as assumed in the President's budget. The 
Committee recommendation includes bill language which prohibits 
FDA from developing, establishing, or operating any program of 
user fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701.
    The Committee recommendation does not include proposed 
language regarding generic drug review user fees, reinspection 
user fees, export certification user fees, or food inspection 
and facility registration user fees. None of these user fee 
proposals have been authorized by Congress. The Committee will 
continue to monitor any action by the Congress regarding these 
proposed user fees.
    The following table reflects the Committee's 
recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2010 and budget 
request levels:

                               FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                 2010 enacted     2011 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers and related field activities:
    Foods....................................................          782,915          856,383          856,383
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN].          236,418          261,510          261,510
        Field Activities.....................................          546,497          594,873          594,873
                                                              ==================================================
    Human Drugs..............................................          464,814          484,169          489,169
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER].......          336,588          352,132          357,132
        Field Activities.....................................          128,226          132,037          132,037
                                                              ==================================================
    Biologics................................................          206,438          215,026          215,026
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER]..          166,182          173,875          173,875
        Field Activities.....................................           40,256           41,151           41,151
                                                              ==================================================
    Animal Drugs.............................................          135,475          140,673          140,673
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM].................           82,452           86,538           86,538
        Field Activities.....................................           53,023           54,135           54,135
                                                              ==================================================
    Medical and radiological devices.........................          315,377          325,726          325,726
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Center for Devices and Radiological Health [CDRH]....          234,974          243,255          243,255
        Field Activities.....................................           80,403           82,471           82,471
                                                              ==================================================
    National Center for Toxicological Research [NCTR]........           58,745           60,975           60,975
                                                              ==================================================
Other Activities.............................................          143,712          161,659          156,659
                                                              ==================================================
Rent and related activities..................................           91,158          105,239          105,239
                                                              ==================================================
Rental payments to GSA.......................................          146,022          153,999          153,999
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority.        2,344,656        2,503,849        2,503,849
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommendation includes the following 
increases in budget authority for FDA salaries and expenses 
activities, as requested in the budget: $10,896,000 for cost-
of-living adjustments; $83,000,000 for food safety investments; 
$43,323,000 for investments relating to safer drugs, biologics, 
and medical devices; and $20,000,000 for regulatory science.
    Of the increases provided, $83,000,000 will be used for 
food safety investments. This includes funding for FDA to 
develop guidances and regulations to serve as a foundation for 
prevention-oriented food safety. FDA will also begin work on a 
modern import safety system, which will include standards for 
evaluating food safety systems in foreign countries, third-
party certification, and an importer registry. This funding 
will also allow FDA to conduct additional audits of regulatory 
and public health partners, including foreign regulatory 
bodies. FDA will add State liaisons to facilitate timely 
communication, and will develop a national work plan for 
inspecting food manufacturing and distribution facilities. FDA 
will expand its capacity to identify products at highest risk 
for contamination, to better target and prioritize food safety 
efforts. Finally, FDA will hire nearly 100 new food safety 
inspectors, increase laboratory capacity, and undertake pilot 
programs using track and trace technology.
    Of the increases provided, $43,323,000 will be used for 
activities related to drug, device, and biologics safety. This 
includes funding to increase foreign and domestic inspections 
of the most critical and high-risk facilities and allow FDA to 
work more closely with regulatory authorities in foreign 
countries. FDA will also launch an electronic drug registration 
and listing system that will permit efficient screening of drug 
imports at the border, start to build a National Medical Device 
Registry to link unique identifiers for medical devices, and 
expand postmarket surveillance systems so the agency can better 
assess the safety of medical products. Further, FDA will more 
closely monitor the blood and human tissue supply and will 
improve the safety of vaccines through the development of 
biological markers to evaluate the safety of vaccine 
components.
    Of the increases provided, $20,000,000 will be used to 
advance regulatory science to help FDA build its scientific 
infrastructure, develop standards for new and emerging 
technologies, modernize standards for evaluating products, and 
accelerate the development of essential medical therapies. 
During recent decades, there have been revolutionary 
developments in biomedical sciences, and FDA's scientific 
expertise and infrastructure have not kept pace with these 
advances. These funds will address that gap. These funds will 
be used by FDA to strengthen its scientific leadership, 
including creating an Office of Science and Innovation. FDA 
will also increase and improve its scientific workforce, build 
core scientific capacity and expertise in revolutionary new 
fields such an nanotechnology, recruit additional scientists in 
areas where FDA expertise is lacking, address science issues 
for creating a National Medical Device Registry, and promote 
scientific collaboration and exchange. Finally, FDA plans to 
update and review standards and provide regulatory pathways for 
new technologies, including biosimilars.
    The Committee expects FDA to continue all projects, 
activities, and programs as included in the fiscal year 2011 
budget request, unless otherwise specified.
    Antibiotics in Shrimp.--The Committee is concerned about 
the contamination of farm-raised shrimp imports with banned 
antibiotics. The Food and Drug Administration currently 
inspects less than 2 percent of imported shrimp. The Committee 
strongly encourages FDA to develop, in cooperation with State 
testing programs, a program for increasing the inspection of 
imported shrimp for banned antibiotics.
    Antibiotic Development.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned about unresolved scientific issues regarding clinical 
development in the antibacterial drug arena, which has been 
identified as a serious impediment to new antibacterial 
development. In its report last year, the Committee directed 
FDA to issue clinical trial guidance for several serious 
indications. The Committee directs FDA to report to by December 
3, 2010, on its progress, including the status of FDA's work 
toward a final guidance on community-acquired bacterial 
pneumonia as well as how FDA plans to address guidance for 
multi-drug and pan-resistant organisms.
    The Committee last year also encouraged FDA to identify 
ways to promote the development and/or appropriate use of 
priority antibacterial drugs for humans for which current 
market incentives are inadequate, by working with other 
governmental entities and interested parties to begin this 
work. The Committee directs FDA to address these issues in its 
December 2010 report, as well.
    Antimicrobial Resistance.--Antimicrobial resistance, and 
the resulting failure of antimicrobial therapies in humans, is 
a mounting public health concern. To address this problem, the 
Committee recommends that FDA conduct, and make public, an 
overall review of the use of antibacterial drugs in food-
producing animals and antimicrobial resistance. In addition, 
the Committee recommends that FDA examine the antibacterial 
drugs currently approved for use in food-producing animals and 
identify mechanisms for assuring that such products are aligned 
with current safety standards. FDA should conduct post market 
safety reviews to assure that current uses of animal drug 
products are used in a manner consistent with the standards 
currently used in premarket safety evaluations. The Committee 
directs the FDA to report on the progress of this effort within 
1 year of the enactment of this act.
    Budget Justification.--The Committee directs the agency to 
submit the fiscal year 2012 budget request in a format that 
follows the same account structure as the fiscal year 2011 
budget request unless otherwise approved by the Committee.
    Critical Path and Modernizing Drug Safety.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $22,450,000 for the critical path 
initiative, including not less than $6,000,000 for critical 
path partnerships as authorized by section 566 of the Federal 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). The Committee expects 
that this funding will be used to further FDA's work on 
critical path opportunities and to promote collaborations with 
other Government agencies, academia, patient groups, and other 
interested parties such as the Critical Path Institute and the 
National Institute for Pharmaceutical Technology and Education. 
The Committee is also interested in Critical Path activities 
that advance safety testing, patient reported outcomes and 
accelerating therapies for serious diseases. Wherever possible, 
external awards should be competitive.
    Worldwide, almost 2 million people die from tuberculosis 
[TB] and more than 9 million people develop active disease 
every year. The rise of drug resistant TB can result in a 
global, untreatable epidemic. The Committee believes that more 
effective combinations of treatment are needed. Of the 
$6,000,000 provided for critical path partnerships, not less 
than $2,000,000 shall be used to support a research partnership 
to advance the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of TB. The 
Committee directs FDA to report on critical path spending semi-
annually.
    Demonstration Grants for Improving Pediatric Device 
Availability.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 
for Demonstration Grants for Improving Pediatric Device 
Availability, as authorized by the Food and Drug Amendments Act 
of 2007.
    E-Pedigree.--The Committee believes that a full electronic 
track and trace system for prescription drugs is critical to 
improve the security of the drug supply chain from counterfeit 
or other substandard products, and to protect consumers. A full 
electronic track and trace system would include the 
serialization, authentication, and recording the distribution 
history (also known as the pedigree) documenting all parties 
involved in the prior sale, purchase or trade of the 
prescription drug beginning with the manufacturer. The 
Committee directs FDA to provide a report to the Committee by 
March 1, 2011, that describes the status of developing 
standards for track and trace and authentication; the status of 
FDA's consideration of technologies for track and trace and 
authentication; efforts to harmonize, to the extent practical, 
with international standards and efforts; updates of 
international efforts for serialization, track and trace, and 
authentication; and all other activities planned or undertaken 
with the funding provided in fiscal year 2010 and 2011 for 
policy development related to the importation of prescription 
drugs.
    Food Labeling.--The Committee is pleased that FDA 
recognizes that importance of accurate food labeling in helping 
consumers follow a healthy diet, and is working to ensure that 
nutritional claims by food manufacturers are accurate. The 
Committee recommendation includes an increase of $1,400,000, as 
requested, for FDA to use data from well-designed studies to 
support a modernized food label to encourage Americans to eat 
healthier diets and potentially reduce the prevalence of 
obesity and its associated health care costs in the United 
States. In undertaking this effort, the Committee encourages 
FDA to consider concerns addressed to the Committee regarding 
false or misleading structure/function claims, ingredient lists 
that are difficult to read or may not contain a declaration of 
the percentage of key ingredients, exaggerated representations 
regarding whole grain content, and a lack of information 
regarding caffeine and sugar.
    Generic Drugs.--The Committee recommendation includes no 
less than $96,966,000 for the generic drugs program at FDA, of 
which $55,545,000 is for the Office of Generic Drugs. Total 
funding for the Office of Generic Drugs is an increase of 
$4,000,000 above the fiscal year 2010 level, and $2,000,000 
above the budget request.
    The President's budget proposal acknowledges that generic 
drugs now account for 70 percent of all prescriptions dispensed 
in the United States, an increase of 20 percent in 4 years. 
Further, annual generic drug application submissions have 
nearly tripled since 2001. Although the Committee has provided 
substantial funding increases for generic drug review, and 
remains firmly committed to supporting these activities, the 
demand continues to outpace staffing. The administration's 
proposals for user fees for generic drug applications have not 
yet been authorized by the Congress, but could provide a 
significant increase in funding levels for this important 
program. The Committee encourages FDA to continue to work with 
the generic drug industry and the Congress on this issue.
    H1N1 Emergency Use Authorizations.--In response to the 2009 
H1N1 influenza pandemic, the FDA issued several Emergency Use 
Authorizations (EUAs). The Committee directs FDA to submit a 
report to Congress by March 1, 2011, regarding the use of EUA 
authorities over the past 24 months, the number of EUA 
declarations issued and whether they remain in effect, and 
FDA's assessment of whether the EUA authority is sufficient, 
including an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of 
using EUAs.
    Mammography.--The Committee is aware that the Mammography 
Quality Standards Act [MQSA] has resulted in improved quality 
of mammography to make mammograms a more reliable tool to 
detect breast cancers. Appropriated funds pay for inspections 
in Government entities and in facilities where at least 50 
percent of mammograms performed are funded by the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention's National Breast and Cervical 
Cancer Early Detection Program, as well as other important 
activities. The Committee recommends no less than $6,918,000 in 
appropriated funds, as well as $19,318,000 in user fee 
collections, for activities related to MQSA.
    Nanotechnology.--The Committee supports the budget increase 
of $7,300,000 to expand upon current research in 
nanotechnology. The Committee is pleased that FDA has 
established a Nanotechnology Core Facility at the National 
Center for Toxicological Research, and encourages FDA to design 
this center to support nanotechnology toxicity studies, develop 
analytical tools to quantify nanomaterials in complex matrices, 
and develop procedures for characterizing nanomaterials in FDA 
regulated products.
    Orphan Product Development Grants.--The Committee is 
interested in making every tool available to FDA to get new 
products to those who suffer from rare diseases, and the 
Committee has been encouraged by the success of the orphan 
product grant program. FDA has approved 44 products that 
received development support from orphan products grants. 
However, because the cost of clinical trials continues to 
increase far faster than the rate of inflation, FDA's funds are 
covering less and less of the true cost of conducting clinical 
trials. Therefore, the Committee recommendation includes 
$16,035,000 for orphan product development grants within the 
budget for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. This 
represents an increase of $2,000,000 above the budget request 
and is the first substantial increase in funding for these 
grants since fiscal year 2005.
    Office of Women's Health.--The Committee believes that it 
is imperative for FDA to pay sufficient attention to gender-
based research, ensuring that products approved by the FDA are 
safe and effective for women as well as men. The Committee 
recommendation includes $6,040,000 for the Office of Women's 
Health. The Committee encourages FDA to ensure that the Office 
of Women's Health is sufficiently funded to carry out its 
activities, and to enhance its funding if necessary.
    Rare Diseases.--The Committee recommendation includes an 
increase of $1,000,000 for the office of the Associate Director 
for Rare Diseases in the Center for Drug Evaluation and 
Research [CDER]. The Associate Director coordinates the 
development of policies and procedures for the review and 
approval of treatments for rare diseases throughout CDER, 
ensures appropriate training of staff, establishes consistent 
processes for providing advice to sponsors, and oversees the 
development of products for rare diseases across multiple 
scientific disciplines. In conjunction with the Office of 
Orphan Products Development, the Associate Director supports 
collaboration among scientists and clinicians throughout FDA, 
promoting scientific and regulatory innovations to help 
facilitate timely development and approval of new treatments 
for patients with rare diseases. The Committee expects the 
Associate Director to use these funds to hire additional staff 
with specific expertise in facilitating the development of 
drugs to treat rare diseases.
    Seafood Economic Integrity.--The Committee recognizes the 
importance of seafood to a healthy diet, but is concerned that 
FDA does not focus sufficient attention on economic integrity 
issues, particularly with respect to mislabeling of species, 
weights, country of origin, and treatment. The Committee 
encourages FDA to work with States to more aggressively combat 
fraud in parts of the seafood industry.
    Seafood Safety.--The Committee is supportive of the current 
MOU between NOAA and FDA and encourages both agencies, the 
Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of HHS to continue to 
work together to strengthen cooperation on seafood safety, 
seafood labeling, and seafood fraud. The agreements should 
focus on coordination of testing seafood imports, inspection of 
imported seafood at both domestic and international facilities, 
data standardization and collection, joint training and 
outreach for testing facilities, and information sharing. The 
Committee encourages an increase in the use of NOAA laboratory 
testing and the commissioning of NOAA officers by the Secretary 
of HHS as needed in order to increase capacity for seafood 
inspection and testing. In addition, the Secretaries are 
encouraged to share information with the Federal Trade 
Commission as appropriate on consumer protection issues with 
respect to fraud in seafood marketing and labeling.
    Standards of Identity.--The Committee recognizes that honey 
is produced in the United States, traded internationally,and 
consumed as both a packaged food and as a food ingredient. 
However, there have been instances where manufacturers have 
been marketing products illegally as ``honey'' or ``pure honey" 
that contain other ingredients. FDA has been in receipt of a 
citizen petition regarding a proposed standard of identity for 
honey for a significant and unacceptable length of time, and is 
directed to respond to this citizen petition within 6 months, 
and provide monthly status reports to the Committee on this 
effort until a response has been provided. Further, FDA is 
directed to work to find ways to protect consumers from 
misbranded honey and honey-derived products that are currently 
entering the U.S. market.
    Traceability.--The Committee directs FDA to initiate one or 
more traceability projects on food products and/or ingredients 
known to be linked to foodborne disease outbreaks, or that have 
significant potential to cause serious adverse health 
consequences. When designing traceability projects, FDA should 
consider the challenges identified during previous outbreaks or 
build on previous efforts to improve product tracing along the 
supply chain. To prevent duplication of efforts and to more 
rapidly implement these pilot projects, the Committee 
encourages FDA to consider pilot projects already under way, 
either within the United States or the European Union, when 
implementing this directive. The Committee directs FDA to begin 
implementation of this project within 1 year, and to report 
back to the Committee upon the conclusion of the projects.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2010....................................     $12,433,000
Budget estimate, 2011..........................      12,433,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,433,000

    FDA maintains offices and staff in 49 States and in the 
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, including field 
laboratories and specialized facilities, as well as the 
National Center for Toxicological Research complex. Repairs, 
modifications, improvements, and construction to FDA 
headquarters and field facilities must be made to preserve the 
properties, ensure employee safety, meet changing program 
requirements, and permit the agency to keep its laboratory 
methods up to date.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,433,000 
for FDA buildings and facilities. This funding shall be used to 
upgrade FDA facilities and laboratories which are currently 
below public safety standards and incapable of performing 
agency requirements.

                           INDEPENDENT AGENCY

                       Farm Credit Administration

                 limitation on administrative expenses

Limitation, 2010........................................     $54,500,000
Budget estimate, 2011...................................      59,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      59,400,000

    The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent 
agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible 
for the examination and regulation of the banks, associations, 
and other institutions of the Farm Credit System.
    Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the 
planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System 
institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA 
also establishes standards, enforces rules and regulations, and 
approves certain actions of the institutions.
    The administration and the institutions under its 
jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the 
Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181, effective December 
10, 1971. Public Law 99-205, effective December 23, 1985, 
restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory authorities and 
enforcement powers.
    The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to 
make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to 
farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural residences, 
and associations and other entities upon which farming 
operations are dependent, and to modernize existing farm credit 
law to meet current and future rural credit needs.
    The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the 
formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 
[FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and rural 
housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, under 
section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, is 
assigned the responsibility of regulating this entity and 
assuring its safe and sound operation.
    Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by 
assessments collected from the Farm Credit System institutions 
and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural Mortgage 
Corporation.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $59,400,000 on 
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
[FCA].

                               TITLE VII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommends the following provisions:
    Section 701. This section makes funds available for the 
purchase, replacement, and hire of passenger motor vehicles.
    Section 702. This section gives the Secretary of 
Agriculture authority to transfer unobligated balances to the 
Working Capital Fund.
    Section 703. This section limits the funding provided in 
the bill to 1 year, unless otherwise specified.
    Section 704. This section limits negotiated indirect costs 
on cooperative agreements between the Department of Agriculture 
and nonprofit organizations to 10 percent.
    Section 705. This section makes appropriations to the 
Department of Agriculture for the cost of direct guaranteed 
loans available until expended to disburse obligations for 
certain Rural Development programs.
    Section 706. This section makes funds available for the 
expenses and activities of certain advisory committees, panels, 
commissions, and task forces at the Department of Agriculture.
    Section 707. This section prohibits the use of funds to 
establish an inspection panel at the Department of Agriculture.
    Section 708. This section requires Department of 
Agriculture agencies to provide reimbursement to other 
Department of Agriculture agencies for employees detailed for 
longer than 30 days.
    Section 709. This section prohibits the Department of 
Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services 
from transmitting questions or responses as a result of the 
appropriations hearing process to non-Department employees.
    Section 710. This section prohibits the purchase of new 
information technology equipment and equipment in excess of 
$25,000 without the prior approval of the Chief Information 
Officer.
    Section 711. This section prohibits the reprogramming of 
funds for programs, projects, or activities in excess of 
$500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less without the prior 
notification of the Committee on Appropriations.
    Section 712. This section prohibits the use of funds for 
user fee proposals that fail to provide sufficient budget 
impact information.
    Section 713. This section places conditions on the closing 
or relocation of Rural Development State Offices.
    Section 714. This section prohibits the closing of the Food 
and Drug Administration's St. Louis, Missouri laboratory.
    Section 715. This section limits the amount of funding 
available to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for the 
release of commodities under the Bill Emerson Humanitarian 
Trust.
    Section 716. This section provides funding for the National 
Center for Natural Products Research to construct and/or 
renovate facilities to enhance the research conducted on 
botanicals and dietary supplements at the National Center in 
conjunction with FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied 
Nutrition. This research aids FDA's regulatory mission in 
ensuring the safety and effectiveness of dietary supplements by 
identifying, isolating, and analyzing specific components of 
botanicals and dietary supplements.
    Section 717. This section makes funds for certain 
conservation programs available until expended to disburse 
certain obligations made in the current fiscal year.
    Section 718. This section prohibits funds to carry out 
certain sections of Public Law 110-246.
    Section 719. This section makes certain former Rural 
Utilities Service borrowers eligible for the Rural Economic 
Development loan and grant program.
    Section 720. This section provides funding to continue 
development of a sterile fruit fly facility.
    Section 721. This section makes selected communities 
eligible for certain Rural Development programs, pending 
receipt of the 2010 Census.
    Section 722. This section provides funding for section 6402 
of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, to 
support development and expansion of the specialty cheese 
industry.
    Section 723. This section authorizes certain watershed 
projects.
    Section 724. This section modifies matching requirements 
for certain research grants.
    Section 725. This section provides funds for Rural 
Development and the Farm Service Agency information technology 
expenses.
    Section 726. This section provides funding for the 
Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers Program and the Durum 
Wheat Quality Program as authorized in the Food, Conservation, 
and Energy Act of 2008.
    Section 727. This section provides funding to carry out a 
pilot program for hardwood trees.
    Section 728. This section includes language regarding 
reconstituted infant formula.
    Section 729. This section includes language regarding 
pandemic emergencies.
    Section 730. This section includes language regarding 
school equipment.
    Section 731. This section includes language regarding the 
Commodity Credit Corporation.
    Section 732. This section includes language for the 
establishment of a fee under section 502(h)(8) of the Housing 
Act of 1949.
    Section 733. This section includes language for the 
establishment of a fee under the business and industry loan 
program.
    Section 734. This section includes language regarding the 
disbursement of obligations under the Rural Electrification Act 
of 1936.
    Section 735. This section rescinds funds for Agricultural 
Research Service Buildings and Facilities that are complete or 
have not received any appropriated funding in any of the 
previous 3 fiscal years.
    Section 736. This section provides for the rescission of 
funds.
    Section 737. This section includes language regarding 
acquisition workforce capacity.
    Section 738. This section includes language regarding the 
Rural Innovation Initiative.
    Section 739. This section includes language regarding the 
conveyance of land.
    Section 740. This section includes language regarding 
baseload generation.
    Section 741. This section includes language regarding rare 
and neglected diseases.

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2011, for purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177) or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-119), the following 
information provides the definition of the term ``program, 
project, and activity'' for departments and agencies under the 
jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. The 
term ``program, project, and activity'' shall include the most 
specific level of budget items identified in the Agriculture, 
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011, and the accompanying Senate 
Report.
    If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2011 pursuant to 
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 or Public Law 100-119 to 
all items specified in the explanatory notes submitted to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in support 
of the fiscal year 2011 budget estimates, as amended, for such 
departments and agencies, as modified by congressional action, 
and in addition:
    For the Agricultural Research Service the definition shall 
include specific research locations as identified in the 
explanatory notes and lines of research specifically identified 
in the reports of the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees.
    For the Natural Resources Conservation Service the 
definition shall include individual flood prevention projects 
as identified in the explanatory notes and individual 
operational watershed projects as summarized in the notes.
    For the Farm Service Agency the definition shall include 
individual, regional, State, district, and county offices.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.
    The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal 
year 2011:
    Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004:
      WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program
      State Administrative Expenses
      Summer Food Service Program
      WIC Infrastructure, MIS, Special Nutrition Education
      Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for WIC
      School Meals Program--Commodity Funding
    State Mediation Grants

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 15, 2010, 
the Committee ordered reported en bloc an original bill (S. 
3606) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, 
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other 
purposes; an original bill making appropriations for the 
Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2011 and for other purposes; and an original bill 
making appropriations military construction, the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, with each 
subject to amendment and subject to the Committee Spending 
Guidance, and authorized the chairman of the committee or the 
chairman of the subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate-
reported bill as a committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to the House companion measure, by a recorded vote 
of 17-12, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Inouye                     Mr. Cochran
Mr. Leahy                           Mr. Bond
Mr. Harkin                          Mr. McConnell
Ms. Mikulski                        Mr. Shelby
Mr. Kohl                            Mr. Gregg
Mrs. Murray                         Mr. Bennett
Mr. Dorgan                          Mrs. Hutchison
Mrs. Feinstein                      Mr. Brownback
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Alexander
Mr. Johnson                         Ms. Collins
Ms. Landrieu                        Mr. Voinovich
Mr. Reed                            Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson
Mr. Pryor
Mr. Tester
Mr. Specter

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italics; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

                TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

      Chapter 8A--Slum Clearance, Urban Renewal, and Farm Housing

                    Subchapter I--General Provisions

Sec. 1472. Loans for housing and buildings on adequate farms

(a) Terms of loan

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

(h) Doug Bereuter section 502 single family housing loan 
        guarantee program

        (1) Short title

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

        (8) Guarantee fee

            With respect to a guaranteed loan under this 
        subsection, the Secretary may collect from the lender 
        at the time of issuance of the guarantee a fee equal to 
        not more than [1] 3.5 percent of the principal 
        obligation of the loan. In addition, the Secretary may 
        collect from the lender an annual fee not to exceed 0.5 
        percent of the outstanding principal balance of the 
        loan for the life of the loan.
                                ------                                

   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
     RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001, PUBLIC LAW 106-387

                          APPENDIX--H.R. 5426

                     TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    [Sec. 739. Hereafter, notwithstanding section 502(h)(7) of 
the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472(h)(7)), the fee 
collected by the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to a 
guaranteed loan under such section 502(h) at the time of the 
issuance of such guarantee may be in an amount equal to not 
more than 2 percent of the principal obligation of the loan.]
                                ------                                

                FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT, 2008

                        TITLE XIV--MISCELLANEOUS

                      CHAPTER 2--OTHER PROVISIONS

               Subtitle C--Other Miscellaneous Provisions

SEC. 14222. DOMESTIC FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

    (a) Definition of Section 32.-- * * *
    (b) Transfer to Food and Nutrition Service.--
            (1) In general.--Amounts made available for a 
        fiscal year to carry out section 32 in excess of the 
        maximum amount calculated under paragraph (2) shall be 
        transferred to the Secretary, acting through the 
        Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service, to be 
        used to carry out the Richard B. Russell National 
        School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) except 
        section 21, and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 
        U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), except sections 17 and 21.

                        BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL

  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays
                                                            ----------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  of   Committee    Amount  of
                                                              guidance\1\      bill       guidance       bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee spending
 guidance to its subcommittees for 2011: Subcommittee on
 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
 Administration, and Related Agencies:
    Mandatory..............................................            NA      109,217           NA   \2\101,226
    Discretionary..........................................        22,838       22,838           NA    \2\24,480
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2011...................................................  ............  ...........  ...........   \3\104,776
    2012...................................................  ............  ...........  ...........        4,393
    2013...................................................  ............  ...........  ...........        1,863
    2014...................................................  ............  ...........  ...........          298
    2015 and future years..................................  ............  ...........  ...........          209
Financial assistance to State and local governments for                NA       33,914           NA       35,728
 2011......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\There is no section 302(a) allocation to the Committee for fiscal year 2011.
\2\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\3\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

         DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS

    The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the 
purse. The Committee believes strongly that Congress should 
make the decisions on how to allocate the people's money.
    As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate, the term ``congressional directed spending item'' means 
a provision or report language included primarily at the 
request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a 
specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit 
authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, 
loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure 
with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality 
or congressional district, other than through a statutory or 
administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process.
    For each item, a Member is required to provide a 
certification that neither the Member nor the Senator's 
immediate family has a pecuniary interest in such 
congressionally directed spending item. Such certifications are 
available to the public on the website of the Senate Committee 
on Appropriations (www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm).
    Following is a list of congressionally directed spending 
items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this 
report, along with the name of each Senator who submitted a 
request to the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so 
identified. Neither the Committee recommendation nor this 
report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in rule XLIV.

                                                                             PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Agency                              Account                                                 Project                                    Amount                Requester(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Institute of Food and   SRG....................................  Global Change/UVB Radiation.........................................      $1,750,000  The President
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and   SRG....................................  Minor Use Animal Drugs..............................................        $429,000  The President
 Agriculture.
Rural Development..............  Rural coop grants......................  Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas, National Center for      $2,800,000  Baucus, Feinstein, Harkin,
                                                                           Appropriate Technology, Butte, Montana.                                               Johnson, Lincoln, Pryor,
                                                                                                                                                                 Specter, The President, and
                                                                                                                                                                 Tester
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                             CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Agency                             Account                                             Project                                   Funding                    Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, MD......................      $3,000,000  Mikulski
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Agricultural Research Center, Pullman, WA.........................      $5,000,000  Cantwell and Murray
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Agricultural Research Center, Logan, UT...........................      $6,000,000  Bennett and Hatch
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Animal Bioscience Facility, Bozeman, MT...........................      $3,000,000  Baucus and Tester
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Appalachian Fruit Laboratory, Kearneysville, WV...................      $1,500,000  Rockefeller
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  ARS Biotechnology Lab, Lorman, MS.................................      $2,000,000  Cochran
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  ARS Research and Development Center, Auburn, AL...................      $6,000,000  Shelby
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  ARS Waste Management Research Facility, Bowling Green, KY.........      $5,000,000  McConnell
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Dairy Forage Agricultural Research Center, Prairie du Sac, WI.....      $1,000,000  Kohl
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  National Cold Water Marine Aquaculture Center, Orono, ME..........      $1,500,000  Collins and Snowe
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, Hilo, HI..............      $5,000,000  Akaka and Inouye
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Sugarcane Research Laboratory, Houma, LA..........................      $1,000,000  Landrieu and Vitter
Agricultural Research Service......  Building and facilities..........  Systems Biology Research Facility, Lincoln, NE....................      $4,000,000  Nelson, Ben
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Aquaculture Fisheries Center, ARS, Stuttgart, AR..................        $519,000  Lincoln and Pryor
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Biomass Crop Production, ARS, Brookings, SD.......................      $1,250,000  Johnson and Thune
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Bioremediation Research, ARS, Beltsville, MD......................        $111,000  Merkley and Wyden
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Biotechnology Research and Development Center, ARS, Washington, DC      $3,500,000  Durbin
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Computer Vision Engineer, ARS, Kearneysville, WV..................        $400,000  Rockefeller
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Dairy Forage Research Center, ARS, Marshfield, WI.................      $2,500,000  Kohl
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Dale Bumpers Small Farms Research Center, ARS, Booneville, AR.....      $1,805,000  Lincoln and Pryor
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Diet Nutrition and Obesity Research, ARS, New Orleans, LA.........        $623,000  Landrieu
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Endophyte Research, ARS, Booneville, AR...........................        $994,000  Lincoln, Merkley, Pryor, and Wyden
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Forage Crop Stress Tolerance and Virus Disease Management, ARS,           $200,000  Cantwell
                                                                         Prosser, WA.
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Formosan Subterranean Termites Research, ARS, New Orleans, LA.....      $3,490,000  Landrieu
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Human Nutrition Research, Boston, MA; Houston, TX; Kannapolic, NC.      $1,650,000  Burr, Hagan, Hutchison, and Kerry
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  National Center for Agricultural Law, ARS, Beltsville, MD.........        $654,000  Harkin, Lincoln, and Pryor
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, ARS, Mandan, ND........        $543,000  Conrad and Dorgan
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Northwest Center for Small Fruits Research, ARS, Corvallis, OR....        $275,000  Crapo, Merkley, Risch, and Wyden
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Phytoestrogen Research, ARS, New Orleans, LA......................      $1,750,000  Landrieu
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Poultry Diseases, Beltsville, MD..................................        $408,000  Mikulski
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Sorghum Research, ARS, Little Rock, AR............................        $135,000  Lincoln and Pryor
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Technology Transfer, ARS, Washington, DC..........................        $250,000  Cochran
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Water Management Research Laboratory, ARS, Brawley, CA............        $340,000  Boxer and Feinstein
Agricultural Research Service......  Salaries and expenses............  Water Use Reduction, ARS, Dawson, GA..............................      $1,200,000  Chambliss and Isakson
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Agriculture Compliance Laboratory Equipment, Delaware Department           $69,000  Carper and Kaufman
 Service.                                                                of Agriculture.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Arthropod damage control Nevada, APHIS NV.........................      $1,000,000  Reid
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Berryman Institute, Jack Berryman Institute Utah and Mississippi        $1,500,000  Bennett, Cochran, and Wicker
 Service.                                                                Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Bio-safety and antibiotic resistance, University of Vermont.......        $240,000  Leahy
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Blackbird management, APHIS LA....................................         $94,000  Landrieu
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Bovine tuberculosis eradication Michigan, Michigan Department of          $248,000  Levin and Stabenow
 Service.                                                                Agriculture.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Brucellosis eradication in the Greater Yellowstone area states,           $650,000  Barrasso, Baucus, Crapo, Enzi,
 Service.                                                                Idaho Department of Agriculture, Montana Department of Livestock,                   Risch, and Tester
                                                                         Wyoming Livestock Board.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  California county pest detection augmentation program, California         $619,000  Boxer and Feinstein
 Service.                                                                Department of Food and Agriculture.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Cogongrass control, Mississippi Department of Agriculture.........        $208,000  Cochran
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Cooperative livestock protection program, APHIS Pennsylvania and          $223,000  Specter
 Service.                                                                Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Cormorant control, APHIS MI.......................................        $139,000  Levin and Stabenow
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Cormorant control, APHIS MS.......................................        $223,000  Cochran
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Cormorant control, APHIS Vermont and Vermont Fish and Wildlife            $103,000  Leahy
 Service.                                                                Department.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Database of North Carolina's agricultural industry for rapid              $208,000  Burr and Hagan
 Service.                                                                response, North Carolina Depart of Agriculture.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Disease prevention, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries         $69,000  Landrieu
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Genetically modified products, Iowa State University..............        $259,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Giant Salvinia control, Northwestern State University.............        $500,000  Landrieu
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Hawaii interline, APHIS HI........................................      $3,000,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Hawaii wildlife services activities, APHIS HI.....................      $2,230,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Hemlock Woolly Adelgid, Tennessee, University of Tennessee........      $1,250,000  Alexander
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Integrated predation management activities, APHIS WV..............        $280,000  Rockefeller
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Invasive aquatic species, Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife                 $94,000  Leahy
 Service.                                                                Management Cooperative, Vermont.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  National Agriculture Biosecurity Center, Kansas State University..        $750,000  Brownback and Roberts
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  New Mexico rapid syndrome validation program, New Mexico State            $404,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Service.                                                                University.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Nez Perce Bio-control Center, Nez Perce Tribe.....................        $176,000  Crapo and Risch
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Noxious weed management, Nevada Department of Agriculture.........        $235,000  Reid
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Technology to combat asian long-horned beetles in New York                $500,000  Gillibrand and Schumer
 Service.                                                                forests, SUNY-College of Environmental Science and Forestry.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Tri-State predator control, APHIS Idaho, MT and WY................        $926,000  Barrasso, Baucus, Crapo, Enzi, and
 Service.                                                                                                                                                    Risch
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Varroa mite suppression, APHIS HI.................................        $469,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Wildlife management and control, APHIS MS.........................        $496,000  Cochran
 Service.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection   Salaries and expenses............  Wildlife Services South Dakota, South Dakota Department of Game,          $519,000  Johnson
 Service.                                                                Fish, and Parks.
General Provision..................  .................................  Agricultural pest facility, APHIS HI..............................      $2,600,000  Akaka and Inouye
General Provision..................  .................................  Market Development, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Foods, and           $1,000,000  Leahy
                                                                         Markets.
General Provision..................  .................................  Market Development, Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade,         $2,000,000  Kohl
                                                                         and Consumer Protection.
General Provision..................  .................................  Phase II construction, National Center for Natural Products             $8,000,000  Cochran and Wicker
                                                                         Research, Oxford, MS.
General Provision..................  .................................  Speciality Markets, Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade,           $350,000  Kohl
                                                                         and Consumer Protection.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Childhood Farm Safety, Urbandale, IA..............................         $75,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Conservation Technology Transfer, University of Wisconsin                 $376,000  Kohl
 Agriculture.                                                            Extension.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Dairy Education, Iowa State University............................        $175,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  E-commerce, Mississippi State University..........................        $231,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Efficient irrigation, New Mexico State University, Texas AgriLife         $475,000  Bingaman, Cornyn, and Hutchison
 Agriculture.                                                            Research, College Station, TX.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Extension Specialist, Mississippi State University................        $173,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Food Production Education, Vermont Community Foundation,                  $116,000  Sanders
 Agriculture.                                                            Middlebury, VT.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Health Education Leadership, University of Kentucky Research              $300,000  McConnell
 Agriculture.                                                            Foundation.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Institute for Sustainable Agriculture, University of Wisconsin-           $400,000  Kohl
 Agriculture.                                                            Madison.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Invasive Phragmites Control and Outreach, Ducks Unlimited.........        $147,000  Levin and Stabenow
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Iowa Vitality Center, Iowa State University.......................        $250,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Maine Cattle Health Assurance Program, Maine Department of                $700,000  Collins
 Agriculture.                                                            Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  National Center for Farm Safety, Northeast Iowa Community College.        $150,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Northeast Energy and Environmental Dairy System, PA...............        $305,000  Specter
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Nutrition Enhancement, University of Wisconsin Extension and              $950,000  Kohl
 Agriculture.                                                            Wisconsin Department of Public Institutions.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Ohio-Israel Agriculture Initiative, The Negev Foundation, OH......        $700,000  Brown, Sherrod and Voinovich
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Pilot Technology Transfer, Mississippi State University, Oklahoma         $209,000  Cochran, Inhofe, and Wicker
 Agriculture.                                                            State University.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Potato Integrated Pest Management--Late Blight, University of             $450,000  Collins and Snowe
 Agriculture.                                                            Maine.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Range Improvement, New Mexico State University....................        $200,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Urban Horticulture, University of Wisconsin Extension and Growing         $376,000  Kohl
 Agriculture.                                                            Power.
National Institute of Food and       Extension........................  Urban Horticulture and Marketing, Chicago Botanic Garden, Glencoe,        $175,000  Durbin
 Agriculture.                                                             IL.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Ag-based Industrial Lubricants, University of Northern Iowa.......        $405,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Agriculture Development in the American Pacific, University of Ha-        $400,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Agriculture.                                                             waii.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Agriculture Technology Innovation, Maryland Technology Development        $150,000  Cardin
 Agriculture.                                                            Corporation, MD.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Agriculture Waste Utilization, West Virginia State University.....        $500,000  Rockefeller
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Applied Agriculture and Environment Research, California State            $350,000  Boxer and Feinstein
 Agriculture.                                                            University.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Biofuels Research, Vermont Technical College......................        $100,000  Sanders
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Biotechnology Research, Alcorn State University, MS...............        $480,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Center for Dairy and Beef Excellence, Pennsylvania Department of          $340,000  Specter
 Agriculture.                                                            Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Clemson University Veterinary Institute, SC.......................      $1,000,000  Graham
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Converting Agricultural Waste to Energy, Kansas Livestock Founda-       $2,000,000  Brownback
 Agriculture.                                                            tion.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Cotton Research, Texas Tech University............................        $200,000  Cornyn and Hutchison
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Council for Agriculture Science and Technology, Ames, IA..........        $110,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Development of Biobased Chemicals and Materials from Agriculture          $125,000  Levin and Stabenow
 Agriculture.                                                            Raw Materials, Michigan Biotechnology Institute.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Ethnobotanicals, Frostburg State University, MD...................        $500,000  Cardin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Farmland Preservation, The Ohio State University..................        $152,000  Brown, Sherrod
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Florida Biomass to Biofuels Conversion Program, University of             $285,000  Nelson, Bill
 Agriculture.                                                            Central Florida.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  International Center for Food Technology Development to Expand            $450,000  Lugar
 Agriculture.                                                            Markets, Purdue University.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Kansas Advanced Biofueld Development, Kansas Alliance for               $2,000,000  Brownback
 Agriculture.                                                            Biorefining and Bioenergy.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Kansas Center for Advanced Plant Design, Kansas Wheat Commis-           $2,000,000  Brownback
 Agriculture.                                                            sion.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Midwest Agribusiness Trade and Information Center MATRIC, Iowa             $95,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.                                                            State University.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Mississippi Valley State University...............................      $1,002,000  Cochran
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  NE Center for Invasive Plants, University of Connecticut, the             $295,000  Collins and Snowe
 Agriculture.                                                            University of Vermont, and the University of Maine.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Polymer Research, Pittsburg State University, KS..................      $2,350,000  Brownback
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Rural Systems, Jackson State University, MS.......................        $215,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Shrimp Aquaculture, University of Southern Mississippi............        $300,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development Law Center, Vermont         $343,000  Leahy
 Agriculture.                                                            Law School.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia, University of Toledo, OH............        $500,000  Brown, Sherrod and Voinovich
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       RE/FA............................  Water Pollutants, Marshall University, WV.........................        $500,000  Rockefeller
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Advanced Genetic Technologies, University of Kentucky Research            $650,000  McConnell
 Agriculture.                                                            Foundation.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Advancing Biofuel Production, Baylor University, TX...............        $300,000  Hutchison
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Aegilops Cylindrica (Jointed Goatgrass/Biomass), Washington State         $200,000  Cantwell and Murray
 Agriculture.                                                            University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Agricultural Diversification, University of Hawaii................        $153,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Agricultural Science, The Ohio State University...................        $450,000  Brown, Sherrod and Voinovich
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Air quality, Kansas State University; Texas AgriLife Research,            $300,000  Cornyn and Roberts
 Agriculture.                                                            College Station, TX.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Animal Science Food Safety Consortium, University of Arkansas           $1,000,000  Grassley, Harkin, Lincoln, Pryor,
 Agriculture.                                                            Division of Agriculture, Iowa State University, Kansas State                        and Roberts
                                                                         University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Aquaculture, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center.......        $150,000  Landrieu and Vitter
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Aquaculture, Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment             $337,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.                                                            Station.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Avian Bioscience, University of Delaware..........................        $150,000  Carper and Kaufman
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Barley for Rural Development, Montana State University, University        $500,000  Baucus, Crapo, Risch, and Tester
 Agriculture.                                                            of Idaho.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Biodesign and Bioprocessing, Virginia Tech University.............        $211,000  Warner and Webb
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Bio Energy Production and Carbon Sequestration, University of             $500,000  Alexander
 Agriculture.                                                            Tennessee.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Biomass-based Energy Research, Oklahoma State University,                 $839,000  Cochran, Inhofe, and Wicker
 Agriculture.                                                            Mississippi State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Bioresource Land Use Planning Project, University of Kentucky.....        $671,000  McConnell
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Cataloging Genes Associated with Drought and Disease Resistance,          $168,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Agriculture.                                                            New Mexico State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Center for Food, Nutrition, and Obesity, West Virginia University.        $550,000  Rockefeller
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Center for One Medicine, IL.......................................        $500,000  Burris and Durbin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Center for Multi-Functional Prairie Agriculture, SD...............        $700,000  Johnson and Thune
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Center for Rural Studies, University of Vermont College of                $350,000  Leahy
 Agriculture.                                                            Agriculture and Life Sciences.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Childhood Obesity and Nutrition, University of Vermont College of         $250,000  Leahy
 Agriculture.                                                            Agriculture and Life Sciences.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Cool season legume research, North Dakota State University,               $350,000  Cantwell, Conrad, Dorgan, and Murray
 Agriculture.                                                            University of Idaho, Washington State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Cotton Insect Management and Fiber Quality, University of Georgia.        $346,000  Chambliss and Isakson
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Cranberry/Blueberry, University of Massachusetts..................        $152,000  Kerry
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Cranberry/Blueberry Disease & Breeding, Rutgers, The State                $522,000  Lautenberg and Menendez
 Agriculture.                                                            University of New Jersey.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Crop Diversification and Biofuel Research and Education ,                 $525,000  McConnell
 Agriculture.                                                            University of Kentucky.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Dairy and Meat Goat Research, Prairie View A&M University.........        $200,000  Hutchison
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Dairy Farm Profitability, Pennsylvania State University...........        $372,000  Casey and Specter
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Delta Revitalization Project, Mississippi State University........        $176,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Drought Mitigation, University of Nebraska........................        $600,000  Nelson, Ben
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Efficient irrigation, New Mexico State University, Texas AgriLife         $575,000  Bingaman, Cornyn, Hutchison, and
 Agriculture.                                                            Extension Service and Texas AgriLife Research, College Station,                     Udall, Tom
                                                                         TX.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Emerald Ash Borer, The Ohio State University......................        $522,000  Brown, Sherrod
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Environmentally Safe Products, University of Vermont College of           $250,000  Leahy
 Agriculture.                                                            Agriculture and Life Sciences.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Floriculture, University of Hawaii................................        $300,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute....................      $1,213,000  Bond, Harkin, and Reid
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Food & Fuel Initiative, Iowa State University.....................        $298,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Forages for Advancing Livestock Production, University of Kentucky        $473,000  McConnell
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Fresh Produce Food Safety, University of California...............        $750,000  Boxer and Feinstein
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Genetically Enhanced Plants for Micro-nutrients and Genomics for          $797,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.                                                            Southern Crop Stress and Disease, Mississippi State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Grain Sorghum, Kansas State University............................      $1,250,000  Brownback and Roberts
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Grass Seed Cropping Systems for Sustainable Agriculture, Oregon           $142,000  Cantwell, Merkley, Murray, and Wyden
 Agriculture.                                                            State University, Washington State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Human Nutrition, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton             $526,000  Landrieu
 Agriculture.                                                            Rouge, LA.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Illinois Plant Breeding Center, University of Illinois, Urbana-           $617,000  Durbin
 Agriculture.                                                            Champaign, IL.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Inland Marine Aquaculture, Virginia Tech University...............        $380,000  Warner and Webb
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Infectious Disease Research, Colorado State University............        $617,000  Bennet and Udall, Mark
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Institute for Food Science and Engineering, University of Arkansas        $500,000  Lincoln and Pryor
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Integrated Economic, Environmental and Technical Analysis of              $188,000  Lugar
 Agriculture.                                                            Sustainable Biomass Energy Systems, Purdue University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Leopold Center Hypoxia Project, Iowa State University.............        $100,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Livestock & Dairy Policy, Cornell University, NY..................        $180,000  Gillibrand and Schumer
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Maple Research, University of Vermont College of Agriculture and          $165,000  Leahy
 Agriculture.                                                            Life Sciences.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Midwest Center for Bioenergy Grasses, Purdue University...........        $188,000  Lugar
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Midwest Poultry Consortium, Iowa State University.................        $250,000  Franken, Harkin and Klobuchar
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Milk Safety, Pennsylvania State University........................        $780,000  Casey and Specter
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  National Beef Cattle Genetic Evaluation Consortium, Colorado State        $655,000  Bennet and Chambliss
 Agriculture.                                                            University, Cornell University, University of Georgia.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  National Center for Agricultural and Rural Sustainability,                $175,000  Lincoln and Pryor
 Agriculture.                                                            University of Arkansas.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  National Center for Soybean Technology, University of Missouri-           $690,000  Bond
 Agriculture.                                                            Columbia.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Native Grassland and Sustainability, Kansas State University......      $1,000,000  Brownback
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Nematode Resistance Genetic Engineering, New Mexico State Universi-       $199,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Agriculture.                                                              ty.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Nevada Arid Rangelands Initiative, University of Nevada Reno......        $500,000  Reid
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  New Century Farm, Iowa State University...........................        $350,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  New Satellite and Computer-Based Technology for Agriculture,              $654,000  Cochran and Wicker
 Agriculture.                                                            Mississippi State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Organic Cropping, Oregon State University.........................        $142,000  Merkley and Wyden
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Organic Cropping, Washington State University.....................        $264,000  Cantwell and Murray
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Pierce's Disease and Invasive Pest Research, University of              $2,000,000  Boxer and Feinstein
 Agriculture.                                                            California.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Policy Analyses for a National Secure & Sustainable Food, Fiber,          $200,000  Hutchison
 Agriculture.                                                            Forestry and Energy Program, Texas AgriLife Research, College
                                                                         Station, TX.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Preharvest Food Safety, Kansas State University...................        $500,000  Brownback and Roberts
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Protein Utilization, Iowa State University........................        $500,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Rangeland Ecosystems Dynamics, University of Idaho................        $300,000  Crapo and Risch
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Renewable Energy and Products, North Dakota State University......      $1,000,000  Conrad and Dorgan
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Rural Policies Research Institute.................................        $755,000  Harkin
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Russian Wheat Aphid, Colorado State University....................        $237,000  Bennet and Udall, Mark
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Small Fruit Research, Oregon State University, University of              $285,000  Cantwell, Crapo, Merkley, Murray,
 Agriculture.                                                            Idaho, Washington State University.                                                 Risch, and Wyden
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Soil-Borne Disease Prevention in Irrigated Agriculture, New Mexico        $178,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Agriculture.                                                            State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Southern Great Plains Dairy Consortium, New Mexico State                  $350,000  Bingaman and Udall, Tom
 Agriculture.                                                            University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Soybean Cyst Nematode, University of Missouri.....................        $556,000  Bond
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Sustainable Engineered Materials from Renewable Resources,                $237,000  Warner and Webb
 Agriculture.                                                            Virginia Tech.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Sustainable Food and Bio-Energy Systems, Montana State University.        $305,000  Tester
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Sustainable Production and Processing Research for Lowbush                $200,000  Collins and Snowe
 Agriculture.                                                            Specialty Crops, University of Maine.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Sustainable Wheat Production and Food Security, South Dakota State        $600,000  Johnson and Thune
 Agriculture.                                                            University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Tillage, Silviculture, Waste Management, Louisiana State                  $180,000  Landrieu
 Agriculture.                                                            University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Tropical and Subtropical Research/T STAR, University of Hawaii....        $800,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Virtual Plant Database Enhancement Project, Missouri Botanical            $588,000  Bond
 Agriculture.                                                            Garden.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Virus-free Wine Grape Cultivars, Wine Grape Foundation Block,             $247,000  Cantwell and Murray
 Agriculture.                                                            Washington State University.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Viticulture Consortium, University of California..................      $1,000,000  Boxer
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Water Conservation, Kansas State University.......................        $600,000  Brownback and Roberts
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Wetland Plants, Louisiana State University........................        $200,000  Landrieu and Vitter
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Wheat Genetic Research, Kansas State University...................      $1,250,000  Brownback and Roberts
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Wildlife/Livestock Disease Research Partnership, WY...............        $300,000  Barrasso
 Agriculture.
National Institute of Food and       SRG..............................  Wood Utilization (AK, ID, LA, ME, MI, MN, MS, NC, OR, WV).........      $4,841,000  Burr, Cochran, Collins, Crapo,
 Agriculture.                                                                                                                                                Franken, Klobuchar, Landrieu,
                                                                                                                                                             Levin, Merkley, Murkowski, Risch,
                                                                                                                                                             Rockefeller, Snowe, Stabenow,
                                                                                                                                                             Wicker, and Wyden
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Accelerated Soil Mapping Survey, NRCS Wyoming.....................        $200,000  Barrasso
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Agricultural Development and Resource Conservation, Hawaii RC&D         $1,400,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.                                                                Councils.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center, MS.....................        $939,000  Cochran
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Center for Invasive Species Eradication, Texas AgriLife Research,       $1,000,000  Hutchison
 Service.                                                                College Station, TX.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Certified Environmental Management Systems for Agriculture, Iowa          $288,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Service.                                                                Soybean Association.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Conservation Enhancements, Lancaster County Conservation                  $200,000  Specter
 Service.                                                                Districts, PA.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Conservation Internships, Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation           $120,000  Kohl
 Service.                                                                Association.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Conservation Technical Assistance, NRCS NJ........................        $236,000  Lautenberg and Menendez
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Conservation Technical Assistance, NRCS TN........................      $1,000,000  Alexander
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Conservation Technology Transfer, University of Wisconsin.........        $516,000  Kohl
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Cover Crop Program, MD............................................      $1,000,000  Cardin and Mikulski
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Delta Conservation Demonstration, Washington County, MS...........        $376,000  Cochran
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Delta Water Study, NRCS Mississippi...............................        $235,000  Cochran
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Farm Viability Program, Vermont Housing and Conservation Board....        $300,000  Leahy
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Grazing Land Conservation Initiative, NRCS WI.....................        $732,000  Kohl
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Great Basin Plant Materials Center, NV............................        $269,000  Reid
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control,          $404,000  Brown, Sherrod, Durbin, Levin,
 Service.                                                                Great Lakes Commission.                                                             Schumer, Stabenow, and Voinovich
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Hungry Canyons Alliance, IA.......................................        $282,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Illinois Conservation Initiative, Illinois Department of Natural        $1,126,000  Durbin
 Service.                                                                Resources.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Kentucky Soil Erosion Control, NRCS KY............................        $724,000  Bunning and McConnell
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Mississippi Conservation Initiative, NRCS MS......................      $2,000,000  Cochran
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Native Plant Initiative, McNeese State University, LA.............        $500,000  Landrieu
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Operation Oak Program, National Wild Turkey Federation............        $100,000  Chambliss, Cochran, and Graham
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Phosophorous Loading in Lake Champlain, Poultney Conservation             $179,000  Leahy
 Service.                                                                District, VT.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Prairie Biomass, Central College, IA..............................        $100,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Quabbin to Cardigan Conservation Initiative, Society for the              $282,000  Shaheen
 Service.                                                                Protection of New Hampshire Forests.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Riparian Restoration, New Mexico Association of Soil and Water            $200,000  Bingaman
 Service.                                                                Conservation Districts.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Soil Surveys, NRCS RI.............................................        $134,000  Reed
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Technical Assistance Grants to Kentucky Soil Conservation                 $545,000  Bunning and McConnell
 Service.                                                                Districts, Kentucky Division of Conservation.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Upper Cedar River Watershed Coalition, Trees Forever..............        $150,000  Grassley and Harkin
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Watershed Demonstration Project, Iowa Soybean Association.........        $134,000  Harkin
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  Watershed Planning Staff, NRCS Pacific Island Area................        $500,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Conservation Operations..........  West Virginia Conservation Initiative, NRCS WV....................      $1,000,000  Rockefeller
 Service.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Copper Mine Brook Watershed, Bristol, CT..........................        $330,000  Dodd and Lieberman
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Dunloup Creek Watershed Project, NRCS WV..........................      $1,500,000  Rockefeller
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Lahaina Watershed, NRCS HI........................................      $4,000,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Lake County Watershed, IL.........................................        $350,000  Durbin
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Lower Hamakua Ditch Watershed, NRCS HI............................      $1,800,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Missouri Watershed Projects, NRCS MO..............................      $2,000,000  Bond
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         North Fork of the Elkhorn Creek, NRCS WV..........................        $300,000  Rockefeller
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Pocasset River, NRCS RI...........................................      $2,000,000  Reed and Whitehouse
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Southeast Quadrant Drainage and Flood Prevention Project, Foley,          $350,000  Sessions
 Service.                             Operations.                        AL.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Upcountry Maui Watershed, NRCS HI.................................      $2,000,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.                             Operations.
Natural Resources Conservation       Watershed/Flood Prevention         Wailuku-Alenaio, NRCS HI..........................................        $250,000  Akaka and Inouye
 Service.                             Operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2011
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                            compared with (+ or -)
                             Item                                     2010         Budget estimate      Committee    -----------------------------------
                                                                  appropriation                      recommendation         2010
                                                                                                                        appropriation    Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

             Production, Processing, and Marketing

Office of the Secretary.......................................            5,285             5,936             5,338               +53              -598
Office of Tribal Relations....................................            1,000             1,025             1,010               +10               -15
Healthy Food Financing Initiative.............................  ................           35,000            15,000           +15,000           -20,000

Executive Operations:
    Office of Chief Economist.................................           13,032            13,175            13,100               +68               -75
    National Appeals Division.................................           15,254            15,424            15,424              +170   ................
    Office of Budget and Program Analysis.....................            9,436             9,547             9,547              +111   ................
    Office of Homeland Security...............................            1,859             1,876             1,876               +17   ................
    Office of Advocacy and Outreach...........................            1,700             7,009             1,709                +9            -5,300
    Office of the Chief Information Officer...................           61,579            63,719            63,719            +2,140   ................
    Office of the Chief Financial Officer.....................            6,566             6,632             6,632               +66   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Executive Operations.............................          109,426           117,382           112,007            +2,581            -5,375

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights............              895               907               907               +12   ................
Office of Civil Rights........................................           23,922            24,133            24,133              +211   ................
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration..........              806               828               814                +8               -14
Agriculture buildings and facilities and rental payments......         (293,093)         (277,937)         (269,191)         (-23,902)          (-8,746)
    Payments to GSA...........................................          184,812           178,470           178,470            -6,342   ................
    Department of Homeland Security...........................           13,500            13,800            13,800              +300   ................
    Building operations and maintenance.......................           94,781            85,667            76,921           -17,860            -8,746
Hazardous materials management................................            5,125             5,139             5,139               +14   ................
Departmental Administration...................................           41,319            30,706            28,706           -12,613            -2,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations.            3,968             4,081             4,008               +40               -73
Office of Communications......................................            9,722             9,839             9,839              +117   ................
Office of the Inspector General...............................           88,725            90,300            89,744            +1,019              -556
Office of the General Counsel.................................           43,551            45,654            44,104              +553            -1,550
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and                  895               920               904                +9               -16
 Economics....................................................

Economic Research Service.....................................           82,478            87,171            83,671            +1,193            -3,500
National Agricultural Statistics Service......................          161,830           164,721           163,721            +1,891            -1,000
    Census of Agriculture.....................................          (37,908)          (33,494)          (33,494)          (-4,414)  ................

Agricultural Research Service:
    Salaries and expenses.....................................        1,179,639         1,199,669         1,216,825           +37,186           +17,156
    Buildings and facilities..................................           70,873   ................           44,000           -26,873           +44,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural Research Service....................        1,250,512         1,199,669         1,260,825           +10,313           +61,156

National Institute of Food and Agriculture:
    Research and education activities.........................          788,243           838,729           780,720            -7,523           -58,009
    Native American Institutions Endowment Fund...............          (11,880)          (11,880)          (11,880)  ................  ................
    Extension activities......................................          494,923           479,203           491,231            -3,692           +12,028
    Integrated activities.....................................           60,022            24,874            38,577           -21,445           +13,703
    Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities     ................          (10,000)          (10,000)         (+10,000)  ................
     Endowment Fund...........................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Institute of Food and Agriculture.......        1,343,188         1,342,806         1,310,528           -32,660           -32,278

Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory                  895               920               904                +9               -16
 Programs.....................................................

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
    Salaries and expenses.....................................          904,953           870,576           926,609           +21,656           +56,033
    Buildings and facilities..................................            4,712             4,712             4,712   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.......          909,665           875,288           931,321           +21,656           +56,033

Agricultural Marketing Service:
    Marketing Services........................................           91,148            97,255            96,955            +5,807              -300
    (Limitation on administrative expenses, from fees                   (64,583)          (60,947)          (60,947)          (-3,636)  ................
     collected)...............................................
    Funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply
     (Section 32):
        Permanent, Section 32.................................        1,300,000         1,200,000         1,200,000          -100,000   ................
        Marketing agreements and orders (transfer from section           20,056            20,283            20,283              +227   ................
         32)..................................................
        Commodity purchases support system....................          (10,000)  ................  ................         (-10,000)  ................
    Payments to States and Possessions........................            1,334             2,634             2,484            +1,150              -150
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, Agricultural Marketing Service program.........        1,487,121         1,381,119         1,380,669          -106,452              -450

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration:
    Salaries and expenses.....................................           41,964            44,192            44,192            +2,228   ................
    Limitation on inspection and weighing services............          (42,463)          (45,041)          (50,000)          (+7,537)          (+4,959)

Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety.................              813               836               821                +8               -15

Food Safety and Inspection Service............................        1,018,520         1,036,900         1,047,200           +28,680           +10,300
    Lab accreditation fees....................................           (1,000)           (1,000)           (1,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Production, Processing, and Marketing............        6,850,135         6,722,462         6,773,749           -76,386           +51,287
                                                               =========================================================================================
                   Farm Assistance Programs

Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign                          895               920               904                +9               -16
 Agricultural Services........................................

Farm Service Agency:
    Salaries and expenses.....................................        1,253,777         1,364,673         1,343,350           +89,573           -21,323
    (Transfer from Food for Peace (Public Law 480)............           (2,812)           (2,846)           (2,846)             (+34)  ................
    (Transfer from export loans)..............................             (355)             (359)             (359)              (+4)  ................
    (Transfer from ACIF)......................................         (313,173)         (318,200)         (313,173)  ................          (-5,027)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, transfers from program accounts...............         (316,340)         (321,405)         (316,378)             (+38)          (-5,027)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses............................       (1,570,117)       (1,686,078)       (1,659,728)         (+89,611)         (-26,350)

    State mediation grants....................................            4,369             4,369             4,369   ................  ................
    Grassroot source water protection program.................            5,000   ................            6,000            +1,000            +6,000
    Dairy indemnity program...................................              930               876               876               -54   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Farm Service Agency...........................        1,264,076         1,369,918         1,354,595           +90,519           -15,323

    Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund [ACIF] Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Farm ownership loans:
                Direct........................................         (650,000)         (475,000)         (650,000)  ................        (+175,000)
                Guaranteed....................................       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal....................................       (2,150,000)       (1,975,000)       (2,150,000)  ................        (+175,000)

            Farm operating loans:
                Direct........................................       (1,000,000)         (900,000)       (1,190,000)        (+190,000)        (+290,000)
                Unsubsidized guaranteed.......................       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,650,000)        (+150,000)        (+150,000)
                Subsidized guaranteed.........................         (170,000)         (144,035)         (170,000)  ................         (+25,965)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal....................................       (2,670,000)       (2,544,035)       (3,010,000)        (+340,000)        (+465,965)

            Indian tribe land acquisition loans...............           (3,940)           (2,000)           (3,940)  ................          (+1,940)
            Conservation loans:
                Direct........................................          (75,000)          (75,000)          (75,000)  ................  ................
                Guaranteed....................................          (75,000)          (75,000)          (75,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal....................................         (150,000)         (150,000)         (150,000)  ................  ................

            Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.............          (10,000)          (10,000)          (10,000)  ................  ................
            Boll weevil eradication loans.....................         (100,000)          (60,000)         (100,000)  ................         (+40,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorizations......................       (5,083,940)       (4,741,035)       (5,423,940)        (+340,000)        (+682,905)

        Loan subsidies:
            Farm ownership loans:
                Direct........................................           26,520            32,870            44,980           +18,460           +12,110
                Guaranteed....................................            5,550             5,700             5,700              +150   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal....................................           32,070            38,570            50,680           +18,610           +12,110

            Farm operating loans:
                Direct........................................           47,400            54,540            72,100           +24,700           +17,560
                Unsubsidized guaranteed.......................           35,100            34,950            38,450            +3,350            +3,500
                Subsidized guaranteed.........................           23,902            19,920            23,511              -391            +3,591
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Subtotal....................................          106,402           109,410           134,061           +27,659           +24,651

            Indian tribe land acquisition.....................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
            Conservation loans................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                Direct........................................            1,065             2,243             2,243            +1,178   ................
                Guaranteed....................................              278               285               285                +7   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal....................................            1,343             2,528             2,528            +1,185   ................

            Indian Highly Fractionated Land Loans.............              793               214               214              -579   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies...........................          140,608           150,722           187,483           +46,875           +36,761

        ACIF administrative expenses:
            Salaries and expense (transfer to FSA)............          313,173           318,200           313,173   ................           -5,027
            Administrative expenses...........................            7,920             7,920             7,920   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, ACIF expenses............................          321,093           326,120           321,093   ................           -5,027
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund.......          461,701           476,842           508,576           +46,875           +31,734
                  (Loan authorization)........................       (5,083,940)       (4,741,035)       (5,423,940)        (+340,000)        (+682,905)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Farm Service Agency......................        1,725,777         1,846,760         1,863,171          +137,394           +16,411

Risk Management Agency, Administrative and operating expenses.           80,325            83,064            83,064            +2,739   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Farm Assistance Programs.........................        1,806,997         1,930,744         1,947,139          +140,142           +16,395
                                                               =========================================================================================
                         Corporations

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation:
    Federal crop insurance corporation fund...................        6,455,278         7,613,232         7,613,232        +1,157,954   ................
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund:
    Reimbursement for net realized losses.....................       15,079,163        13,925,575        13,925,575        -1,153,588   ................
    Hazardous waste management (limitation on expenses).......           (5,000)           (5,000)           (5,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Corporations.....................................       21,534,441        21,538,807        21,538,807            +4,366   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title I, Agricultural Programs...................       30,191,573        30,192,013        30,259,695           +68,122           +67,682
          (By transfer).......................................         (316,340)         (321,405)         (316,378)             (+38)          (-5,027)
          (Loan authorization)................................       (5,083,940)       (4,741,035)       (5,423,940)        (+340,000)        (+682,905)
          (Limitation on administrative expenses).............         (112,046)         (110,988)         (115,947)          (+3,901)          (+4,959)
                                                               =========================================================================================
               TITLE II-- CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and                     895               920               904                +9                16
 Environment..................................................
Office of Ecosystem Services Management.......................  ................            2,021   ................  ................           -2,021

Natural Resources Conservation Service:
    Conservation operations...................................          887,629           923,729           928,979           +41,350            +5,250
    Watershed and flood prevention operations.................           30,000   ................           24,394            -5,606           +24,394
    Watershed rehabilitation program..........................           40,161            40,497            40,497              +336   ................
    Resource conservation and development.....................           50,730   ................           50,730   ................          +50,730
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Natural Resources Conservation Service...........        1,008,520           964,226         1,044,600           +36,080           +80,374
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title II, Conservation Programs..................        1,009,415           967,167         1,045,504           +36,089           +78,337
                                                               =========================================================================================
             TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development...........              895               920               904                +9               -16

Rural Development:
    Rural development expenses:
        Salaries and expenses.................................          201,987           232,257           237,507           +35,520            +5,250
        (Transfer from RHIF)..................................         (468,593)         (454,383)         (454,383)         (-14,210)  ................
        (Transfer from RDLFP).................................           (4,941)           (5,046)           (5,046)            (+105)  ................
        (Transfer from RETLP).................................          (39,959)          (38,374)          (38,374)          (-1,585)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Transfers from program accounts...........         (513,493)         (497,803)         (497,803)         (-15,690)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural development expenses...................         (715,480)         (730,060)         (735,310)         (+19,830)          (+5,250)

Rural Housing Service:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Single family direct (Sec. 502)...................       (1,121,488)       (1,200,000)       (1,200,000)         (+78,512)  ................
                Unsubsidized guaranteed.......................      (12,000,000)      (12,000,000)      (24,000,000)     (+12,000,000)     (+12,000,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Single family.....................      (13,121,488)      (13,200,000)      (25,200,000)     (+12,078,512)     (+12,000,000)

            Housing repair (Sec. 504).........................          (34,412)          (34,004)          (34,004)            (-408)  ................
            Rental housing (Sec. 515).........................          (69,512)          (95,236)          (69,512)  ................         (-25,724)
            Site loans (Sec. 524).............................           (5,045)           (5,052)           (5,052)              (+7)  ................
            Multifamily housing guarantees (Sec. 538).........         (129,130)         (129,133)         (129,133)              (+3)  ................
            Multifamily housing credit sales..................           (1,448)           (1,449)           (1,449)              (+1)  ................
            Single family housing credit sales................          (10,000)          (10,000)          (10,000)  ................  ................
            Self-help housing land develop (Sec. 523).........           (4,970)           (4,966)           (4,966)              (-4)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorizations......................      (13,376,005)      (13,479,840)      (25,454,116)     (+12,078,111)     (+11,974,276)

        Loan subsidies:
            Single family direct (Sec. 502)...................           40,710            75,120            75,120           +34,410   ................
                Unsubsidized guaranteed.......................          172,800   ................  ................         -172,800   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Single family.....................          213,510            75,120            75,120          -138,390   ................

            Housing repair (Sec. 504).........................            4,422             6,437             6,437            +2,015   ................
            Rental housing (Sec. 515).........................           18,935            32,123            23,446            +4,511            -8,677
            Multifamily housing guarantees (Sec. 538).........            1,485            12,513            12,513           +11,028   ................
            Site development loans (Sec. 524).................  ................              294               294              +294   ................
            Multifamily housing credit sales..................              556               556               556   ................  ................
            Self-help land dev housing loans (Sec. 523).......  ................              288               288              +288   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies...........................          238,908           127,331           118,654          -120,254            -8,677

        RHIF administrative expenses (transfer to RD).........          468,593           454,383           454,383           -14,210   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Housing Insurance Fund program.........          707,501           581,714           573,037          -134,464            -8,677
              (Loan authorization)............................      (13,376,005)      (13,479,840)      (25,454,116)     (+12,078,111)     (+11,974,276)
                                                               =========================================================================================
    Rental assistance program:
        Rental assistance (Sec. 521)..........................          968,612           959,635           959,635            -8,977   ................
        Eligible households (Sec. 502(c)(5)(D))...............            5,958   ................            5,958   ................           +5,958
        New construction (Sec. 515)...........................            2,030             3,000             3,000              +970   ................
        New construction (Farm Labor Housing).................            3,400             3,000             3,000              -400   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rental assistance program....................          980,000           965,635           971,593            -8,407            +5,958

    Rural housing voucher program.............................           16,400            18,000            16,400   ................           -1,600
    Multifamily housing revitalization program................           25,000   ................           25,000   ................          +25,000
    Multifamily housing preservation revolving loans..........            1,791   ................            2,655              +864            +2,655
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Multifamily housing revitalization...............           43,191            18,000            44,055              +864           +26,055

    Mutual and self-help housing grants.......................           41,864            37,000            41,864   ................           +4,864
    Rural housing assistance grants...........................           45,500            40,400            41,500            -4,000            +1,100

    Farm labor program account:
        (Loan authorization)..................................          (27,319)          (27,288)          (27,288)             (-31)  ................
        Loan subsidy..........................................            9,873            10,473            10,473              +600   ................
        Grants................................................            9,873             9,873             9,873   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Farm Labor Program Account...................           19,746            20,346            20,346              +600   ................

    Rural community facilities program account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Community facility:
                Direct........................................         (294,962)         (295,038)         (295,038)             (+76)  ................
                Guaranteed....................................         (206,417)         (206,405)         (206,405)             (-12)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan authorizations..................         (501,379)         (501,443)         (501,443)             (+64)  ................

        Loan subsidies and grants:
            Community facility:
                Direct........................................            3,864             3,924             3,924               +60   ................
                Guaranteed....................................            6,626             8,153             8,153            +1,527   ................
                Grants........................................           20,373            29,640            20,373   ................           -9,267
            Rural community development initiative............            6,256   ................            6,256   ................           +6,256
            Economic impact initiative grants.................           13,902   ................           13,902   ................          +13,902
            Tribal college grants.............................            3,972   ................            3,972   ................           +3,972
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, RCFP Loan subsidies and grants...........           54,993            41,717            56,580            +1,587           +14,863
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, grants and payments...................          162,103           139,463           160,290            -1,813           +20,827
                                                               =========================================================================================
              Total, Rural Housing Service....................        1,892,795         1,704,812         1,748,975          -143,820           +44,163
                  (Loan authorization)........................      (13,904,703)      (14,008,571)      (25,982,847)     (+12,078,144)     (+11,974,276)

Rural Business-Cooperative Service:
    Rural Business Program Account:
        (Guaranteed business and industry loans)..............         (993,002)         (941,963)         (993,000)              (-2)         (+51,037)
        Loan subsidies and grants:
            Guaranteed business and industry subsidy..........           52,927            40,316            42,500           -10,427            +2,184
            Grants:
                Rural business enterprise.....................           38,727            38,727            38,727   ................  ................
                Rural business opportunity....................            2,483             2,483             2,483   ................  ................
                Delta regional authority......................            2,979   ................            2,979   ................           +2,979
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, RBP loan subsidies and grants........           97,116            81,526            86,689           -10,427            +5,163

    Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)..................................          (33,536)          (36,376)          (33,533)              (-3)          (-2,843)
        Loan subsidy..........................................            8,464            14,034            12,937            +4,473            -1,097
        Administrative expenses (transfer to RD)..............            4,941             5,046             5,046              +105   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Development Loan Fund..................           13,405            19,080            17,983            +4,578            -1,097

    Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)..................................          (33,077)          (33,077)          (33,077)  ................  ................
        Limit cushion of credit interest spending.............          (44,463)         (103,000)         (103,000)         (+58,537)  ................
            (Rescission)......................................          -44,463          -103,000          -103,000           -58,537   ................

    Rural cooperative development grants:
        Cooperative development...............................            7,924            13,424             8,924            +1,000            -4,500
        Appropriate technology transfer for rural areas.......            2,800             2,800             2,800   ................  ................
        Cooperative research agreement........................              300   ................  ................             -300   ................
        Value-added agricultural product market development...           20,367            20,367            20,373                +6                +6
        Grants to assist minority producers...................            3,463             3,463             3,463   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Cooperative development grants.........           34,854            40,054            35,560              +706            -4,494

    Rural Microenterprise Investment Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)..................................          (11,832)          (23,523)          (12,019)            (+187)         (-11,504)
        Loan subsidy..........................................            2,500             6,850             3,500            +1,000            -3,350
        Grants................................................            2,500               850               850            -1,650   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Microenterprise Investment.............            5,000             7,700             4,350              -650            -3,350
    Renewable energy program (Rural Energy for America):
        (Loan authorization)..................................         (144,209)          (11,519)          (11,519)        (-132,690)  ................
        Loan subsidy..........................................           19,670             5,340             5,340           -14,330   ................
        Grants................................................           19,670            34,000            34,000           +14,330   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Renewable energy program.....................           39,340            39,340            39,340   ................  ................

    Biorefinery Assistance Program:
        (Loan authorization)..................................  ................          (49,856)  ................  ................         (-49,856)
        Loan subsidy..........................................  ................           17,300   ................  ................          -17,300
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Biorefinery Assistance Program...............  ................           17,300   ................  ................          -17,300
                                                               =========================================================================================
          Total, Rural Business Cooperative Service...........          145,252           102,000            80,922           -64,330           -21,078
              (Loan authorization)............................       (1,215,656)       (1,096,314)       (1,083,148)        (-132,508)         (-13,166)
                                                               =========================================================================================
Rural Utilities Service:
    Rural water and waste disposal program account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Direct............................................       (1,022,162)       (1,036,294)       (1,022,156)              (-6)         (-14,138)
            Public Law 83-566 loans...........................  ................  ................          (40,000)         (+40,000)         (+40,000)
            Guaranteed........................................          (75,000)          (75,000)          (75,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorization.......................        1,097,162         1,111,294         1,137,156           +39,994           +25,862

        Loan subsidies and grants:
            Direct subsidy....................................           77,071            88,914            87,701           +10,630            -1,213
            Public Law 83-566 loans...........................  ................  ................            3,432            +3,432            +3,432
            Water and waste grants............................          469,228           440,510           469,228   ................          +28,718
            Solid waste management grants.....................            3,441             3,500             3,500               +59   ................
            Water and waste financing revolving fund..........              497               497               497   ................  ................
            Water well system grants..........................              993               993               993   ................  ................
            High-energy cost grants...........................           17,500   ................           17,500   ................          +17,500
            Rural water and waste disposal....................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Water loan subsidies and grants..........          568,730           534,414           582,851           +14,121           +48,437

    Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program
     Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Electric:
                Direct, 5 percent.............................         (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)  ................  ................
                Direct, FFB...................................       (6,500,000)       (4,000,000)       (6,500,000)  ................      (+2,500,000)
                Guaranteed underwriting.......................         (500,000)  ................         (500,000)  ................        (+500,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Electric..........................       (7,100,000)       (4,100,000)       (7,100,000)  ................      (+3,000,000)

            Telecommunications:
                Direct, 5 percent.............................         (145,000)         (145,000)         (145,000)  ................  ................
                Direct, Treasury rate.........................         (250,000)         (250,000)         (250,000)  ................  ................
                Direct, FFB...................................         (295,000)         (295,000)         (295,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Telecommunications................         (690,000)         (690,000)         (690,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan authorizations..................       (7,790,000)       (4,790,000)       (7,790,000)  ................      (+3,000,000)

        RETLP administrative expenses (transfer to RD)........           39,959            38,374            38,374            -1,585   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications            39,959            38,374            38,374            -1,585   ................
           Loans Program Account..............................
              (Loan authorization)............................       (7,790,000)       (4,790,000)       (7,790,000)  ................      (+3,000,000)
                                                               =========================================================================================
    Distance learning, telemedicine, and broadband program:
        Loan authorizations:
            Broadband telecommunications......................         (400,000)         (400,000)         (400,000)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorizations......................         (400,000)         (400,000)         (400,000)  ................  ................

        Loan subsidies and grants:
            Distance learning and telemedicine:
                Grants........................................           37,755            30,000            37,755   ................           +7,755
            Broadband telecommunications:
                Direct........................................           28,960            22,320            22,320            -6,640   ................
                Grants........................................           17,976            17,976            17,976   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan subsidies and grants............           84,691            70,296            78,051            -6,640            +7,755
                                                               =========================================================================================
                  Total, Rural Utilities Service..............          693,380           643,084           699,276            +5,896           +56,192
                      (Loan authorization)....................       (9,287,162)       (6,301,294)       (9,327,156)         (+39,994)      (+3,025,862)
                                                               =========================================================================================
                  Total, Title III, Rural Development Programs        2,934,309         2,683,073         2,767,584          -166,725           +84,511
                      (By transfer)...........................         (513,493)         (497,803)         (497,803)         (-15,690)  ................
                      (Loan authorization)....................      (24,407,521)      (21,406,179)      (36,393,151)     (+11,985,630)     (+14,986,972)
                                                               =========================================================================================
               TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer              813               836               821                +8               -15
 Services.....................................................

Food and Nutrition Service:
    Child nutrition programs..................................        9,859,930        18,153,393        18,156,143        +8,296,213            +2,750
        Competitive grants....................................            5,000             5,000             5,000   ................  ................
        Nutrition education...................................            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
        Transfer from section 32..............................        6,989,899   ................  ................       -6,989,899   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Child nutrition programs.....................       16,855,829        18,158,393        18,161,143        +1,305,314            +2,750

    Special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants,        7,252,000         7,478,000         7,252,000   ................         -226,000
     and children [WIC].......................................
        Reserve [WIC].........................................  ................          125,000   ................  ................         -125,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, WIC program..................................        7,252,000         7,603,000         7,252,000   ................         -351,000

    Supplemental nutrition assistance program:
        (Food stamp program)..................................       58,278,181        68,206,790        68,209,540        +9,931,359            +2,750

    Commodity assistance program:
        Commodity supplemental food program...................          171,409           176,788           176,788            +5,379   ................
        Farmers market nutrition program......................           20,000            20,000            20,000   ................  ................
        Emergency food assistance program.....................           49,500            50,000            56,000            +6,500            +6,000
        Emergency food program infrastructure grants..........            6,000   ................            6,000   ................           +6,000
        Pacific island and disaster assistance................            1,070             1,081             1,081               +11   ................
        IT modernization and support..........................  ................            1,750             1,750            +1,750   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Commodity assistance program.................          247,979           249,619           261,619           +13,640           +12,000

    Nutrition programs administration.........................          147,801           172,087           166,587           +18,786            -5,500
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and Nutrition Service.......................       82,781,790        94,389,889        94,050,889       +11,269,099          -339,000
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title IV, Domestic Food Programs.................       82,782,603        94,390,725        94,051,710       +11,269,107          -339,015
                                                               =========================================================================================
       TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                 Foreign Agricultural Service

Salaries and expenses.........................................          180,367           258,780           219,780           +39,413           -39,000
    (Transfer from export loans)..............................           (6,465)           (6,525)           (6,525)             (+60)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses............................          186,832           265,305           226,305           +39,473           -39,000

Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress
 Program Account, Administrative Expenses:
    Farm Service Agency, Salaries and expenses:
        (transfer to FSA).....................................            2,812             2,846             2,846               +34   ................

Food for Peace Title II Grants:
    Expenses..................................................        1,690,000         1,690,000         1,690,000   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food for Peace (Public Law 480)..................        1,692,812         1,692,846         1,692,846               +34   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program Account
 (administrative expenses):
    Salaries and expenses (Export Loans):
        General Sales Manager (transfer to FAS)...............            6,465             6,525             6,525               +60   ................
        Farm Service Agency S&E (transfer to FSA).............              355               359               359                +4   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, CCC Export Loans Program Account.............            6,820             6,884             6,884               +64   ................

McGovern-Dole international food for education and child                209,500           209,500           209,500   ................  ................
 nutrition program grants.....................................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title V, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs.        2,089,499         2,168,010         2,129,010           +39,511           -39,000
          (By transfer).......................................           (6,465)           (6,525)           (6,525)             (+60)  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
  TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

            DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                 Food and Drug Administration

Salaries and expenses, direct appropriation...................        2,344,656         2,503,849         2,503,849          +159,193   ................
    Prescription drug user fees...............................         (578,162)         (667,057)         (667,057)         (+88,895)  ................
    Medical device user fees..................................          (57,014)          (61,860)          (61,860)          (+4,846)  ................
    Animal drug user fees.....................................          (17,280)          (19,448)          (19,448)          (+2,168)  ................
    Generic animal drug user fees.............................           (5,106)           (5,397)           (5,397)            (+291)  ................
    Tobacco product user fees.................................         (235,000)         (450,000)         (450,000)        (+215,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal (including user fees)..........................       (3,237,218)       (3,707,611)       (3,707,611)        (+470,393)  ................

    Mammography user fees.....................................          (19,318)  ................  ................         (-19,318)  ................
    Export certification user fees............................          (10,400)  ................  ................         (-10,400)  ................

    FDA New User Fees (Leg proposals):
        Generic drug review user fees.........................  ................          (38,015)  ................  ................         (-38,015)
        Reinspection fees.....................................  ................          (27,296)  ................  ................         (-27,296)
        Food and Feed Export Certification user fees..........  ................           (4,385)  ................  ................          (-4,385)
        Food Facility Registration and Inspection fees........  ................         (220,200)  ................  ................        (-220,200)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, FDA New User fees.........................  ................         (289,896)  ................  ................        (-289,896)

Buildings and facilities......................................           12,433            12,433            12,433   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, FDA (w/user fees, including proposals)...........       (3,279,369)       (4,009,940)       (3,720,044)        (+440,675)        (-289,896)
      Total, FDA (w/enacted user fees only)...................       (3,279,369)       (3,720,044)       (3,720,044)        (+440,675)  ................
      Total, FDA (excluding user fees)........................        2,357,089         2,516,282         2,516,282          +159,193   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
                      INDEPENDENT AGENCY

Farm Credit Administration (limitation on administrative                (54,500)          (59,400)          (59,400)          (+4,900)  ................
 expenses)....................................................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title VI, Related Agencies and Food and Drug             2,357,089         2,516,282         2,516,282          +159,193   ................
       Administration.........................................
                                                               =========================================================================================

                 TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Rural Community Out Migration (Sec. 716)......................              499   ................  ................             -499   ................
National Center for Natural Products Research (Sec. 718)......            3,497   ................            8,000            +4,503            +8,000
Limit Wetlands reserve........................................  ................         -142,000           -75,000           -75,000           +67,000
Limit Conservation stewardship................................  ................           -2,000   ................  ................           +2,000
Limit Grasslands reserve......................................  ................          -14,000           -14,000           -14,000   ................
Limit Farmland protection.....................................  ................          -15,000           -15,000           -15,000   ................
Limit Agriculture management assistance (Sec. 1524)...........  ................           -5,000            -5,000            -5,000   ................
Limit Environmental Quality Incentives program (Sec. 721).....         -270,000          -380,000          -270,000   ................         +110,000
Limit Dam Rehab (Sec. 721)....................................         -165,000          -165,000          -165,000   ................  ................
Limit Wildlife habitat incentives.............................  ................          -12,000   ................  ................          +12,000
Limit fruit and vegetable program (Sec. 721)..................          -76,000   ................         -113,000           -37,000          -113,000
Section 32 (rescission) (Sec. 721)............................          -52,470           -50,000           -50,000            +2,470   ................
Hawaii APHIS facility (Sec. 723)..............................            2,600   ................            2,600   ................           +2,600
Food Aid Products (Sec. 724)..................................            4,000   ................  ................           -4,000   ................
Hunger Fellowships (Sec. 727).................................            3,000   ................  ................           -3,000   ................
Market development (WI, VT) (Sec. 728)........................            3,000   ................            3,000   ................           +3,000
Specialty market (Sec. 728)...................................              350   ................              350   ................             +350
Carbon Inventory and Accounting System (Sec. 728).............            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
International Food Protection Training Institute (Sec. 728)...            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
Foodborne Illness Health Registry (Sec. 728)..................              200   ................  ................             -200   ................
At-risk supper program (Sec. 730).............................            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
Methamphetamine inhibitor grant program (Sec. 735)............            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
Kansas Farm Bureau Foundation (Sec. 738)......................              250   ................  ................             -250   ................
Hardwood Trees (Sec. 739).....................................              800   ................              800   ................             +800
Geographic Disadvantaged (Sec. 741)...........................            2,600   ................            2,600   ................           +2,600
Durum Wheat (Sec. 741)........................................            3,000   ................            3,000   ................           +3,000
Product Access (Sec. 745).....................................            1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
Rural Utilities Service baseload generation...................  ................  ................           15,000           +15,000           +15,000
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment and                -11,000   ................  ................          +11,000   ................
 Training (rescission) (Sec. 742).............................
Dairy (Sec. 748)..............................................          350,000   ................  ................         -350,000   ................
H1N1 program (Sec. 746).......................................            2,000   ................  ................           -2,000   ................
Child Nutrition Reauthorization (Sec. 749) (outlays)..........  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and facilities         ................          -75,500           -10,066           -10,066           +65,434
 (rescission).................................................
Rural Business program (rescission)...........................  ................          -20,070           -20,070           -20,070   ................
Departmental Administration acquisition workforce.............  ................            6,500             1,000            +1,000            -5,500
Broadband loan balances (rescission)..........................  ................          -15,000           -15,000           -15,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Title VII, General provisions....................         -193,674          -889,070          -715,786          -522,112          +173,284

                     OTHER APPROPRIATIONS

        DIVISION B--OTHER MATTERS (PUBLIC LAW 111-118)

                   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                  Food and Nutrition Service

Supplemental nutrition assistance program (Sec. 1001)                   400,000   ................  ................         -400,000   ................
 (emergency)..................................................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Public Law 111-118 (emergency)...................          400,000   ................  ................         -400,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Other appropriations.............................          400,000   ................  ................         -400,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Grand total.............................................      121,570,814       132,028,200       132,053,999       +10,483,185           +25,799
              Appropriations..................................     (121,278,747)     (132,291,770)     (132,252,135)     (+10,973,388)         (-39,635)
              Emergency Appropriations........................         (400,000)  ................  ................        (-400,000)  ................
              Rescissions.....................................        (-107,933)        (-263,570)        (-198,136)         (-90,203)         (+65,434)
          (By transfer).......................................         (836,298)         (825,733)         (820,706)         (-15,592)          (-5,027)
          (Loan authorization)................................      (29,491,461)      (26,147,214)      (41,817,091)     (+12,325,630)     (+15,669,877)
          (Limitation on administrative expenses).............         (166,546)         (170,388)         (175,347)          (+8,801)          (+4,959)

                        RECAPITULATION

Title I--Agricultural programs................................       30,191,573        30,192,013        30,259,695           +68,122           +67,682
    Mandatory.................................................      (22,855,427)      (22,759,966)      (22,759,966)         (-95,461)  ................
    Discretionary.............................................       (7,336,146)       (7,432,047)       (7,499,729)        (+163,583)         (+67,682)
Title II--Conservation programs (discretionary)...............        1,009,415           967,167         1,045,504           +36,089           +78,337
Title III--Rural development programs (discretionary).........        2,934,309         2,683,073         2,767,584          -166,725           +84,511
Title IV--Domestic food programs..............................       82,782,603        94,390,725        94,051,710       +11,269,107          -339,015
    Mandatory.................................................      (75,128,010)      (86,360,183)      (86,365,683)     (+11,237,673)          (+5,500)
    Discretionary.............................................       (7,654,593)       (8,030,542)       (7,686,027)         (+31,434)        (-344,515)
Title V--Foreign assistance and related programs                      2,089,499         2,168,010         2,129,010           +39,511           -39,000
 (discretionary)..............................................
Title VI--Related agencies and Food and Drug Administration           2,357,089         2,516,282         2,516,282          +159,193   ................
 (discretionary)..............................................
Title VII--General provisions (discretionary).................         -193,674          -889,070          -715,786          -522,112          +173,284
Other appropriations (discretionary)..........................          400,000   ................  ................         -400,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................      121,570,814       132,028,200       132,053,999       +10,483,185           +25,799
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


```